• «We want them to be destroyed, but we can`t do without their books," said Polydor. And this is one of the assumptions, that unravels the whole puzzle of Paul.
• All Catholics say: Paul is to be a Jew and also is to be a Catholic . All Protestants say: he must be a Protestant. But a fateful moment in the proof is, that the Jews have no relationship to Saul-Paul.
• The day, when the Church ceases to be a fraction against the Jews, it will be the last day of the church.
• An absurd theory, that the Jews were the first in everything, is imposed on us again and again
Note, that Johnson also performed the analysis of the Council of Trent decisions, but we'll talk about it later.
In fact, Johnson`s conclusions are shocking for Christians and for the traditionalist historians. Moreover, the author gives us a very different chronology of the history of the Christian Church, he still talks about constructing “sacred” texts in order to rule over the Christian world.
According to Johnson, benedictine monks made a Creed and the Gospel, invented the actors: the church founders, Christian scholars, apostles with their Epistles and Acts, to whom monks attributed their thoughts.
Accordingly, it turns out, that at the time of the Reformation small group of “healers” undertook the transformation of the Church in Europe and began the expansion of Latin modification of Christianity.
Note, that not only Johnson, but other Western scholars wrote about faking Christian books. For example, Barthélemy Germon, a French Jesuit of Orleans (1663 - 1712) believed, that the ancient manuscripts with the texts of St. Augustine, even the Gospel manuscripts were forged in the Benedictine monastery Corby until the XIII century. Many of the writings of Augustine, Origen, Jerome, Isidore of Seville, Bernard, etc. – are forged.
According Germont even Holy Scripture books were subjected to changes. Luke (Gospel by Luke) and a several epistles of the Apostle Paul.[15]
Germont considers famous heretics:Arius, the Ebionites ("poor") and Albigensesto be forgerers, but in fact, as we shall see later, the Jesuit is cunning: it is Latins, who purposefully corrected doctrinal books of Arians and Albigenses (Cathars).
The Latin Church did not create new sacred books,but in accordance with the tasks assigned by global governance, - it did "corrections" and added relevant sections to texts, that radically changed the essence of the Christian faith.
So we see, that Paul's epistles were created before the Gospels and were the basis formulating all the key moments for changing the Gospels. Paul is attributed to the doctrine of the divinity of all power, doctrine of Jews superiority over all and their God's chosen character, the redemption by Christ of all the sins, the genealogy of Christ from David, and so on. According to Johnson it had never been earlier.
Indeed, if we analyse Old Russian literature, for example, the apocrypha "Vision of the Apostle Paul[16]" we see a very different Paul. Paul appears as "favorite of God," who was personally known and loved by "Son of God" - Christ[17]. Nothing reports us about Jews in this apocrypha, and even more, nothing sais, that Paul was a Jewish Saul. It condemns those"who increases interest (rate of interest), seeks wealth and do not want to have an assistant in God."
Primary Chronicle (TheTale of Past Years)also mentions Apostle Paul, Paul speaks there as a "teacher of the Slavs ... we, Rus`, origin from the same Slavs; and therefore Paul is teacher for us, Rus`, because he taught Slavic people"
There are no phrases from the Synodal Bible like: “Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ…”(Ephesians 6:5) in books collected by I. Sreznevsky[18], who collected ancient Slavic Christian books. Ephesians begins immediately with verse 12: "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Ephesians 6:12)".This means, that Paul called to oppose power, which became satanic, which creates hopeless darkness for the people.
Thus, Johnson's conclusions are supported by ancient Russian sources also.
But if we address to the Synodal Bible, which was adopted by the Russian Orthodox Church as a holy book, we will see, that the text of all the canonical books is exactly the same as text of the Vulgate - the holy book of the Roman Catholic Church, but before the XVII century, it was not the same.
Who, how and when managed to replace the Russian sacred books with the Roman Catholic, we'll discover further.
2. Time of the Black Madonna
On the state of pre-Christian Rus`
Historians, both domestic and foreign, have the opinion, that Rus` was a wild, illiterate and barbaric before the baptism, but only after baptism, through Christianity, Russia has become a cultural, obtained written language, barbarity disappeared and so on.
Read the Catholic Encyclopedia:
"At 988, prince Vladimir of Kiev adopted Christianity in its Byzantine form. This event placed Rus` to the European orbit, established foundation in state for development of law, culture and art. "
Orthodox Encyclopedia “Drevo” (Tree) has closely opinion also:
"Baptism created revolution in the life of Rus` - it was a gap, a national self-renunciation, a turn to the side of good. Baptism let Russians to leave the category of"barbarians"and allowed to join the already established circle of links and influences."
The Great Soviet Encyclopedia keeps up with them:
"The adoption of Christianity had also led to changes in the culture of ancient society and to its enrichment. Art and architecture, as well as writings and written literature reached a high development in the Byzantine – spread in Rus`."
Such opinion on the influence of Christianity on the culture of Rus` is not new, it was began to spread even by representatives of the "skeptical school" of Russian historiography (founded by M. Kachenovsky) at the XIX century.
Brockhaus and Efron Dictionary in its article "Skeptical school" writes, that according to Karamzin:
"... At the IX and X century there was the Russian state, whose territory was larger almost all European countries; the state was at the most flourishing condition: it had a rich cities and capitals, the administrative staff, monetary system, civil laws, fleets, properly arranged permanent troops, large trade; It was familiar with lush luxury, mechanical arts, fine arts, eloquence, architecture and so on".
But representatives of the skeptical school did not like this version of Karamzin. They claimed, that russes was a rough and wild nation, engaged in looting and robbery, but Russian sources used by Karamzin, are unreliable, we can trust only view of foreigners[19].
Can we trust the foreign sources, writing about Russia?
We think, we can not[20]. Foreigners, especially Western, always blackened Russia.
If we watch and read Western propaganda, "in its light" we can see, that even modern Russia is a wild, aggressive and uneducated country - the same as it was 1000 years ago. So skeptics did not believe Karamzin for nothing, and relied on the memories of foreigners, which had been likely falsified.