THE PAPACY

THE PAPACY
September 5, 2010 By Stephen Ellis

My column last week entitled “A Man Named Jesus” brought a lot of e-mail. Most of it complementing what I had written, one letter came calling me a “fool” and containing implied threats if I continued to write lies about the church.

For the record, I do not lie! Last week’s article was based on research. If you don’t like what I’ve written, do your own research on the history of the Roman Empire and you will find that what I write is completely accurate. I’m not telling anyone not to believe in Jesus. Who or what you believe is both personal and important to you and I have no intention of disturbing your beliefs. All I do is present the facts as written by non-religious historians.

I use the term “non-religious historians” because much of history has been written and rewritten by religious historians. Clearly, religious historians have completely altered documented history to justify and support their church and religious beliefs. This is said without fear of contradiction, because the published history of one church will be astonishingly unlike the published history of a different church when discussing the same time periods and locations.

Without doubt, the most prolific re-writers of history emanated from what is called the “Papacy”.

The Papacy is and has been the cornerstone of Christian religious doctrine and history for almost two thousand years. Most often, we refer to the Papacy as the Catholic Church or the Vatican.

The foundation of the Papacy was the man called Peter the Fisherman or Saint Peter. The Papacy re-wrote the history of Rome to accommodate their burgeoning power during the middle ages. As mentioned in last week’s column, Peter was one of the most popular religious leaders in the land of Zion (renamed Palestina-Jordana by the Roman Emperor Hadrian). His true name was Simon Peter and he and his brothers were fishermen in the Sea of Galilee around the time of Jesus’ alleged crucifixion.

Non-religious historians (whose books survived the rampant book-burning by the Papacy) do not explain how it is that Peter abandoned fishing and became a religious leader, but his followers believed him to be a Prophet of the forthcoming Messiah (according to the “Governance of Judea-Palestina-Jordana” written by the then Roman Governor of that territory, Pontius Pilate). Peter’s followers (then called Christians based on the Greek words “Jesus Christos” meaning “holy savior”) were probably the strongest band of Christians given power in Rome following the 326 AD Conference in Nicaea. By early 400 AD, Peter’s followers became the leaders of the newly powerful Christians in Rome and established their own holy conclave inside the City of Rome. The City of Rome was “the” most important place in the Roman Empire, and the Papacy, feeding on the power granted them by Constantine, sectioned-off a prime part of Rome and called it the Holy See. In 1929, much of the area known as the Holy See was incorporated as an independent state within the city of Rome called the Vatican.

On or about 350-400 AD, the Papacy began to re-write the history of Christianity making their leader, Peter, the most important of the Messiah’s prophets. They created a history and lineage of Popes dating back to the time of Jesus’ alleged crucifixion and named Peter as their first Pope. They further designated Peter as the first Bishop of Rome, and gave him Sainthood by saying that the evil Emperor, Nero, had him crucified with his head hanging down in 67 AD on a cross such as the one upon which Jesus had allegedly been crucified.

Not one single word of this is supported by the non-religious histories written at that time.

There are numerous contradictions contained in Catholic history, not the least of which was that Rome had no Christian Bishops until after the Nicaea Conference in 326 AD. Rome was completely Pagan and had many Gods. Each God was worshiped for a different purpose: i.e for love, for war, for speed, the Sun God, etc. The Romans built a temple to their Gods called the Pantheon (the term “Pantheon” is from the Greek meaning “To All Gods”). The Pantheon contained graven images of a multitude of Gods to be worshipped for different reasons…but nothing even remotely resembling a Christian God. Rome, which did not recognize Christianity until after the 326 AD Conference at Nicaea, did not have any Christian Bishop during the lifetime of Peter. So, in its basic foundation, Papacy history fails to meet even a minimal standard of truthfulness.

In the 7th century AD, the Papacy took over the Pantheon and made it into a Catholic Church.

I’m not saying that Catholicism is “bad or “wrong”. Only that their history is grossly inaccurate.

Have an opinion you’d like to share? Write me at stebrel@aol.com and visit my website at yourparanormalcenter.com. Stephen Ellis