"What distinguishes Christianity from other religions? Of course, by Jesus Christ.
But not only. There is another important difference: the cemetery. The emergence of Christianity
connected not only with the appearance of belief in Christ, but also the emergence of the phenomenon
new, previously unknown people & for the first time put the cemetery in the center of their
settlements and started to bury the dead. "
Deruzhinsky Vadim (Vadim Rostov)
analytical newspaper "secret research"
Riddle triumph of the new faith
I think all of us who claim to be Christians, we know the circumstances surrounding the emergence of the Faith. At the very least, should know them. Those who did not know them, briefly outline these historical events.
Christianity came as the modernization of Judaism, which was the main ideology of the search of the Promised Land and the New Israel, as clearly set out in the Bible. Up to about 150, Christians were required to obey the commandments of the Torah (to comply fully with the Jewish tradition, including circumcision), and the Christians were only Jews. The spread of Christianity among neevereev like Judaism, was completely unacceptable, unthinkable. The Jewish world was split into two parts: half of the Jews remained Jews, half became Christians, and the proportion of Jews who converted to Christianity in this half-century, historians explain between 40 and 60% of all Jews.
While Christianity is a something very different from what it is today. In the scope of this article does not include a discussion of whether there was a law of the European church distort the fundamental point after centuries of Christianity, of emasculating him, to the best of all Jewish. I think that it was wrong, because for the past 2,000 years, Jesus did not give the European churches of new information, and once all the faith and is based on the events of those years, we have no right to distort and re-interpreted.
We have a few people now paying attention to the fact that the names of the apostles of Christ — the names of the Greco-Roman, invented a few hundred years after the events in Europe. I can not believe that this was blasphemy against Christianity, when the founder of the Faith instead of Hebrew names were given the names of the Greco-Roman and strangers. It came from the banal nationalism. Christ knew his apostles out under their names, but he did not know any of the apostles named Greco-Roman (and African, Chinese, Tatar), because they do not preach among the Gentiles. Therefore, getting the Christ in the Christian church today, he would not have understood, of whom it is in the speeches of the priests, and who is depicted on icons.
You can bring a lot of that is a distortion of faith on the part of Europeans, often we do not even realize that the same distortion would seem and the apostles, and Christ offensive to their nationality and homeland. Only briefly, I note the fact remains the fact that the first half century of the Faith, all Christians were Jews, observe the Torah and circumcision, and Christianity itself was a task to replace Judaism in the Jewish community.
I am sure that sooner or later there would be, as the later Judaism was still fundamentally reformed — that is, the reasons for reform were objectively and Christianity is just in their context and appeared.
And here clearly proved daunting figure Shaul ha Tarsus (St. Paul), who gave realized Christianity as Reform Judaism among Jews, and on the other hand, has created a huge Christian world among non-Jews.
Since half a century Jews persecuted Jewish Christians from Jerusalem and Palestine, the majority of Jewish settlements in Europe, Africa and Central Asia consisted of Jewish Christian communities. Local pagans to them too often unfriendly attitude, and she begs the idea of "ohristianit" native peoples of what was to promote the prosperity of communities. It is actively discussed in the "new Jews." According to Dr. Sh.Shavit (The History of Jewish People. Jerusalem, 1996, p. 19), "The issue has been a difficult and serious, and Paul probably many hesitated before making a decision. But, in the end, he came to the following result: a Christian is anyone who believes in Jesus and his teachings — regardless of whether a Jew or not. And to keep the commandments of the Torah, Paul considered optional. "
In Christianity, there was a deep divide, many communities did not accept ideas, allegedly degrading "divine and chosen" origin of the Jewish people, and at the same time insulting Yeshua (Jesus). Actually Shaul ha-Tarsi created a new faith, a little similar to the old one, and that's his genius. He rejected the "exclusivity" of the Jewish nation, seeing no prospects in the stifling narrowness isolation.
During this second birth of Christianity, at least 22 of the Gospel of different authors (all, of course, the Jews.) In the New Testament includes only four, where there is no direct and harsh statements of Christ that is not a non-Jew has the right to become a follower of his faith. At the same time the New Testament consists of 14 (!) Messages Shaul ha Tarsus (Paul), where he was for the most part, explains non-Jews, that they may join the faith, which is considered Jewish, and the Jews — that they are circumcised (God's chosen) can be on a par with the uncircumcised Christians.
Shaul ha-Tarsi in the 14, in fact, analytical articles, successfully or unsuccessfully somewhere argues his new position in their interpretation of Christianity. But all is not encroaching on the main thing — it does not require new non-Jewish Christians to be circumcised, as circumcision take issue holy sign of Jewish chosenness as a "senior people", and by the way, everywhere in their lyrics and puts them above other nations, and undoubtedly ahead of them. This is not surprising if you know who the Apostle Paul referred to him during his life an ardent defender of Israel. Finally, the Jews themselves, even Christians were strongly opposed to the non-Jews could be circumcised: even in the family of Christian nations in this matter could be no question of equality, since then lost the "essence" of the people of Israel. Impossibility of circumcision — it was one of the conditions of propagation of the Faith among non-Jews. Note, this condition clearly puts the native Christian believers in the position of "second class", as they take the Jews and the Old Testament, and then make it clear that it applies to those who are circumcised (who gave part of the flesh to God). Obviously it turned out that the new believers had the Bible, but could not be for her to fully involved.
Everywhere in the Bible (in the Gospels to their version of the Ecumenical Councils in Europe in V-VII centuries, and in the letters of St. Paul), it was not the Lord God, and the God Yahweh — God of the Israelites. The name "Yahweh" was changed to the name of "God" as "Yahweh" — the god of the circumcision, but "the Lord" — something in common. To some this may seem the norm, but it surprises me is incredibly daring attitude to sacred texts, distorting their meaning.
Not only that, today, Christianity leaves aside the question of the Creator, and often (including on television) the highest ranking Orthodox Church in Ukraine and Russia say that Jesus Christ — not only our God and Creator. This is contrary to what is said in the Bible that Christ — the Son of the Creator, but corresponds well with our local representation, where the question of the Creator is better not to touch, as it is spoken of in the Old Testament — as Yahweh, the God of the Israelites. Creator, according to the Old Testament (and the Torah), demanded that the believers in Him to give part of the flesh (circumcision), and it turns out that if we do not cut off yourself, do not believe in the Creator and in the Old Testament, are alien to him. Therefore rather clumsy attempt to replace Jesus place of the Creator. However, it is another matter. But, in my opinion, this is not only bad and sad, but most comes from the uncertainty clearly defined Shaul ha-Tarsus, in his concept of "the Creator — God of the people of Israel," and "Jesus -" conductor "knowledge of God non-Jews ".
It is easy to see that this concept was originally chauvinist. Of course, everyone is free to believe in his own, but if we speak of sacred texts, we have the desire to read and believe their original version, not distorted. And the original version we create a big problem. Finish the excursion to the fundamentals of the Faith in that for a person who thinks faith is needed in its finished form, which does not cause problems. And then so many questions that all of this is seen running. Theology has long lagged behind the real life and, unfortunately, have not understood that the man in the XXI. — Is not a man of the Middle Ages.
Shaul ha-Tarsi taking a number of trips to the regions of the Roman Empire, which promotes his teachings. So Europe is becoming a Christian.
It all — history. I think any ordinary Christian is not just think of these historical facts, as they are in some way put mark on the perception of the Faith. But this does not mean that the story need to hide or distort. Faith, by definition, has a history, and that's just the best of its knowledge and assumes greater approximation to the roots — and the essence of the Faith. In addition, the way for the modern man to the Faith goes through his knowledge and in his ability to think and draw conclusions. If the church will continue to ignore this reality — is a direct path to oblivion, or at least to a cooling of the Faith.
But there is much more difficult to consider what is the reason he Triumph of Faith, in a short time became the religion of millions?
It's just us, the mother's milk will soak Christian values, all seems self-evident. But as introduced to Faith Gentiles? Than it attracts them?
This question is all the more important that today, in the bosom of Christianity are not units if new people, the small number. But then Christians began very quickly millions.
I think the point here is that the "engine" of Christianity was not so much the concept of Christ's sacrifice, a concept difficult to understand the ignorant masses and acceptable only for the spiritual development of man as stated. Otherwise, and is the cause of Christianity.
This — Other — did not show itself in the medium of Jewish Christians, since they applied only to the ideas of Jesus and because of the new fate of Israel and the people of Israel (this was the "engine"). That's why I told about reform Shaul ha-Tarsi that he introduced this new OTHERWISE to Christianity.
Since this is new, invented by Paul (or creatively born in promoting ideas from the indigenous population), we conclude that, if you believe in the new religion, then you will be resurrected in the near future — as soon as Jesus comes back. And who would believe — will not be resurrected. Pagan religions are not given this perspective, it was new to the Gentiles. And just the story of Jesus Christ showed that it is real. Once he is risen, He is able to resurrect his flock. Stunning news is that you can escape death and return to the earth in the flesh, and it was the main and most powerful "engine" of Christianity.
Important detail: the settlements of Jewish Christians, opponents of reform Shaul ha-Tarsi and older, there is no cemetery in the center of the settlements. And all "native" European Christians they are: that is, it is the teaching of the Apostle Paul makes people not to bury relatives outside the settlements (as is customary in all societies of Humanity), and relate them to the center of the settlement — with the confidence that they are today or tomorrow all rise.
Here I was, by the way, it is surprising following. Perhaps I did not see anything in the Bible, but there is no specific guidance in the Bible to Christians to bury their dead without fail in the middle of towns and villages, where they were and because it will be easier to revive who returned to Jesus.
But at the same time in all — I emphasize — in all Christian (but not Christian-Jewish) settlements are always up to the XVII century the dead were buried in the center of the settlement. For archaeologists, this is — first and foremost a sign that these settlements are Christian.
Do not rule out, but apparently, this is the case, we may see very different texts of the Bible, than what they were before the dawn of Christian Faith.
Sanitation against Christianity
Archaeology shows that here the city to Christianity in the IV., Here it is, after Christianity in the century. What's the difference? One thing: the middle of the city's Cathedral was built, and around it — the city cemetery. Previously, the cemetery away from the city include, but are now buried in the center of the city.
Archaeologists say the ones in the city, who are not yet Christians, watching in horror as Christians being dragged to the center of the city, blue and green bodies, frightening people. There they buried them. Savagery. But that's the whole point of Christianity.
This unsanitary practice banned throughout Europe, only the Enlightenment, when the city cemetery and cohabitation has become dangerous and intolerable.
Philip Ares in his famous book "The Man in the face of death» (Philippe Aries "L'homme devant la mort") provides impressive picture of the eradication of the Christian tradition, there was never found in any other religion in the world. Already by the XIV century. in all major cities of France were buried in the city center in the tens or even hundreds of times greater than all the living population of the city. Power to haunt this problem by inventing measures for disposal of dead. Created mass graves, where 10 square meters up to 1500 placed corpses — piles.
Residents of nearby neighborhoods threw the city government complaints. Everything in the house soaked corpse smell — furniture, clothes, even food. Windows do not open — a touch trupyatinoy. Children out of the house not to release — an infection around. This putrid smell accompanied people even outside the city, where they were checking out — so they soaked them. Commission showed that the areas adjacent to the city center, where the cemeteries are prone to various diseases, and there rarely lived to old age. What's worse — there always appeared terrible epidemic spans the entire country.
Travellers coming to Europe from the Arab countries, with horror saw all this and were surprised at how wild the faith of Christians, forcing them to live with the dead. On the part of all of this for the new man, I think, looked awful.
According to Ares, in the XVIII century. public opinion in this regard headway. In 1737, the Paris Parliament proposed doctors examine city cemetery — the first official move in Christianity in this area. By the Church with the idea ban Christian burial at the church made in 1745, Abbot S. Poret ("Letters to the burial in the church"). Here is his ideal: clean, well-ventilated church where incense is felt only and not anything else, and where the "do not risk breaking your neck because of unevenness in the floor," constantly shifts the gravediggers. The author calls to make the cemetery outside the city, in order to ensure healthy air in cities and purity.
Pore abbot was not the first to suggest the church authorities to arrange new cemeteries outside the city (following the tradition of the Muslims and the Jews). But the first time he said that the resurrection of the dead, the promise of Jesus, do not you literally, among the piles of coffins with the dead gathered in the city center. Like waiting at any moment of his departure traveler surrounded by suitcases.
In the 60-ies. against the new cemetery in Paris, strongly supported the Prince de Conde — and was supported by the Attorney General ("The walls are soaked with the stench and harmful juices that is, perhaps, unknown cause of disease and deaths of residents"). This view was supported by the Parliament in 1763, when the authorities were literally inundated with countless petitions from the public and doctors. Revolutionary resolution instructing Parliament to close all existing cemetery in Paris and create outside of eight large cemeteries, where each parish would have a common grave for all its inhabitants.
April 20, 1773 in Soulier, in the nave of the church of St.. Saturninus, dug a pit for a woman who died of a putrid fever. Thus laid bare the coffin, buried another 3 March, and when the woman was lowered into the grave, the coffin opened, and the old body gone a stench that no one could no longer stay in the church. Soon, out of 120 children of both sexes, who are preparing for First Communion, 114 dangerously ill, and the priest, vicar, gravediggers and more than 70 people. Of these, 18 died, including the priest and the vicar. This and other similar cases further incited public opinion to the idea of the transfer of cemeteries outside the city.
The famous French physician Felix Vic d'Azir in "An Essay on the ground and the dangers of burial" (1778) states that at the time of the first outbreak are struck houses, located next door to the cemetery. As he says, the corpse of a patient fully keeps the disease and its contagious effect. Air cemeteries spoils everything: not only the health of people living nearby, but even products and things in their closets. Thus, in the houses located around the cemetery of St. Innosan, says the doctor, steel, silver, gold braid — it quickly loses its gloss and dull.
Doctors are not alone in sounding the alarm. Minutes of police commissioners of the time abound complaints of local people. In a petition to Parliament tenants quarter, adjacent to the cemetery of Saint-Merri, complain that "all that is necessary for life" spoils at their home in a few days. These complaints continued until such time as the City began to move out of the city the old cemetery, carrying tens of thousands of dead, cleanse the earth of putrid infection. It has long been this huge cemetery in the center of Paris is not, and even Parisians are unlikely to know that once on the ground of their homes located fraternal community with tens of thousands of graves of the dead.
As it turned out, the problem of urban cemeteries were long overdue. That is why the experience of Paris quickly spread all over Europe. Within a few years, Russia has issued a decree banning the burial within the city and need to line up the new cemetery just outside the city limits.
By that time, much has been forgotten, that this odious ban contradicts Christianity.
Poltergeist and vampirism against Christianity
Talking about the failure of Christians from their tradition to bury the dead in the center of a town or village, I can not get over the fact that such a close co-existence with the dead, known only from a Christian country, has always been associated with mass terrible unexplained events that in that era called "the afterlife magic "(see, for example, the famous essay by Charles Ferdinand de Scherz« Magia Posthuma »).
None other people in the world, except for European Christians, never had such an experience in the monitoring of post-mortem events. I note that today, when we bury their dead outside the city, and the cemetery, and death itself is deeply alienated from our lives, we have the experience is not. It is because the European Middle Ages and it seems very rich after-magic, it was the only corner of the world where the living lived in close proximity to the dead.
The most shocking events of the 'otherworldly magic "were poltergeist and vampirism in their various manifestations. Epidemic itself vampirism swept Central, Southern and Eastern Europe, three centuries ago (with the return to the fold of the European Turkish Balkan countries), just in many ways determined by the fact that the Christians buried their dead near their houses, and not out of the settlement, as Muslims. It was then that many of the villages where stormed vampirism, coupled extreme poltergeist (phenomenon, obviously, one of nature) is completely withdrawn from their homes and threw home, fields and going to a new place. They — that is clear — go away from the cemetery. Once they again break new cemetery in the center of the settlement of the church — as a phenomenon renewed. Logic dictates that it is easier not to change their place of residence, and change the location of the cemetery — to make it as far away from the settlement.
Immortality as the engine of Christianity
So why Christians buried their dead in the city center?
Here — the whole point.
Christians dragged their dead in the city center, because they knew what they are today or tomorrow will be resurrected. Jesus Christ (following the release of Saul ha-Tarsi) he said: 'I'll be back today or tomorrow, and, just as He is risen, will raise all the dead. Because Christians do not carry dead somewhere out of town, and carried them into the city center to the temple — they knew that today or tomorrow they will rise from the dead, and together with his relatives. This belief was so strong that all Christian cemeteries were placed in the center of the city — waiting for a day with their families.
These differ in archeology and all the Christian city of the non-Christian.
Those were our cities to the XVIII century., When the cemeteries in town centers have accumulated a lot of incredibly dead. Christ did not come back, no one has recovered, and the limits of urbanization had been long exhausted. Cemetery was moved outside the cities, there were and continue to bury. Which meant that people no longer believe in the promise of Christ. That they do not believe, though it slyly disbelief enveloped in the formula "no longer taken literally." How else to understand the words of Jesus, spoken quite literally? If he is then expressed his followers to "allegory", then why not consider that, and everything that has been said by Jesus (as retold by his biographer) — are also metaphors, imagery, beautiful language, and in a word — the populist hype? It's not a question of what Jesus said and what he did not say that for him invented.
And it was the promise of resurrection and immortality and is the engine for the spread of Christianity, which we mentioned above. What else could so captivate the ignorant masses more than the promise of life after death? And, not as some kind soul knows where, but as a return to life and rejuvenated person — among their relatives and friends. This — not some other world, which describes us later Christianity, and quite mundane world. Much more understandable to everyone. And it is — agree — totally different faith than the Christianity that we know today.
Those who carried the corpses of relatives in the city center, knew that there also will be taken to their children and themselves, that they are there and will be resurrected. Jesus gave all of immortality, and proof of the strength of this promise was His resurrection. He is able to do with him, he promised to all.
Imagine for a moment the situation of the time. We say, we live in Greece in the third century. And then start to come numerous reports that many of our neighboring nations literally crazy — crazy. They do not bury their dead, and drag them to the center of the city, where they are stored, ostensibly because they are about to have, from day to day to life. This innovation was even more wild for those people who, by their traditions cremate the dead (as did the Germans and Slavs). Here, it was not just about the burial, but about how to keep the bodies in the city center. We fear and mistrust are interested in those who came from the neighbors: why this necrophilia? Why is the dead rise? We are told that Jesus Christ was a prophet, who himself was raised and promised to return and resurrect all who are willing to believe in him. Here's how easy it is — we are surprised. Well, since all embraced this insanity, this, perhaps, is the sense. Let us and we'll try to put our dead in the center of a town or village — it's easy. What can and will …
The rule was simple: those who believe in Christ, and that he rose again. This sifting today seems inhumane and illogical (and what a difference Christ?). But it is the basis for the power and profits of the church. She is one benefit of this condition.
All the talk in the newly converted Christian communities were only about how great will happen when Christ comes and will give us our dead. Here is a holiday for you! And by no longer scared to die — it's like to fall asleep, and wake up tomorrow in the middle of his beloved city, surrounded by friends and family. And right at the table, to celebrate.
That's what Christianity is winning the hearts of pagan Europe. That is why at the time Christians showed miracles of courage on executions (which was not ever later in conflicts with other faiths), laughing at the executioners: they know that they are immortal, they are in a day, a month or a year to return to life on Earth . Rise from the dead. His executioners they said, here you've got executed, and we very soon immediately — unharmed. And deal with you. We did not destroy it, we are immortal.
From the point of view of the executioners that seemed, frankly, complete idiocy. With Christianity fought as the ideology that destroys the way of life and carrier chaos and anarchy. But the more struggling with Christianity, the more successful it spread.
In the pantheon of Christian saints who died in the first century, there are no writers or thinkers of ideas, there are only people who are famous for themselves egged executioners find themselves refined tortures and executions. This — banal fanatics frightening executioner that, behold, I — like Christ — will rise and come back in a week, directing your fear.
They never returned. In the first centuries of Christianity — and in new areas of Christianity — believed it. But the older people became Christian, so that faith becomes smaller. And more bodies in the city center. All the corpses piled up, piled up and piled up in anticipation of the resurrection, decay into dust, were removed, replaced with new, mixed and lost, it is absolutely unknown, — how much can you? Then there was a burst of unsatisfied hopes — the Crusades, the brutality and blood. Christ's promise to resurrect the bodies began to forget the extent that, as inevitable and unstoppable corpses were turned into ashes.
And today, on this main essence of Christianity Christians really do not know. Know some archaeologists and historians. Church keeps silent here: why show the collapse of hopes for generations?
Today the Church says and if somehow this whole saga with collecting corpses in the center of cities and villages and the subsequent refusal of the Church is from this practice, it is only to the effect that, say, the early Christians did not quite understand the idea of the right of Christ. But, excuse me, precisely because such an understanding, and just happened so widespread Christianity! It is through this understanding of Christianity promises to ourselves and to become Christians!
On the other hand, even if the early Christians supposedly misunderstood Christianity, what we have reason to believe that we understand it correctly? We — away from the era of Christ for 2000 years?