the enemy within

Although admitting that there would be no western civilization had not the Greeks started the spread of the katholikos ethos of universal or global principles, Poppy believes that it is now being applied by enemies within our society to bring about our downfall.

“By far the greatest Greek influence has been Christianity – or the Catholic Church,” says Poppy. “When the apostles turned the exclusive Jewish sect of Jesus into a ‘katholikos’ or universal faith, they found ready adherents in Greece to spread the word to Rome via colonization, where it was eventually adopted by Constantine as the state religion of the empire, overruling all others.”

“Without colonization there is no spread of ideas,” says Poppy. “The katholikos ethos cannot work without massive movements of people from one area to another.’

“Trade and war spreads ideas but it takes colonization – the permanent settlement of new people – for the katholikos ethos to take root and create change.”

“That’s how western civilization spread from the old world to the new world,” says Poppy. “Had the Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, French and English just looted the new world without setting up colonies and moving their own people in, the Americas, southern Africa, Australia and New Zealand would still be in indigenous hands – speaking their old languages, worshipping their old gods and looking and behaving essentially as they had for millennia.”

"When I talk about our downfall - the end of western civilization – I do so in terms of the katholikos ethos applied by our enemies," says Poppy. "Who they are, I dare not say. But, it’s pretty obvious to me that they are within our governing bodies and they want to obliterate our language, our religion and our very essence by massive immigration of people who are unlike us in every conceivable way - but believe they worship the one true god in the one true way.”

“While I can appreciate that being obliterated or overwhelmed is a fate that befalls just about all indigenous populations,” says Poppy, “it is normally achieved by brute conquest and colonization of a weaker nation by a stronger one, and not by enemies within our government."

Read more by Poppy on this issue:

engineered demographics

the fate of indigenous populations

demographic engineering

religiously motivated wars

the curse of the katholikos ethos

katholikos is Greek for global

racism and the religious balance

how the west became christian, not jewish

Accepted by all religions is the fact that the first humans created had no religion, and as such any godly plans for humanity were meant for a unified family, not just limited to a chosen few.

Abraham's revolutionary notion of monotheism, a belief in one God, meant that God was not just a God of the Israelites but of all people. God revealed to Abrahamthat his people were to be messengers chosen to bring universal moral instructions to all humanity, not just the Jews.

The Torah was the revelation and the Mitzvot are the divine commandments defining a godly life, and God chose the landless and powerless Jewsas messengers because humans would be free to accept or reject the message on its merits. It was a message delivered without political and economic coercion.

In return for fulfilling their divine mission, God would make the Jews a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.

However, most Talmudic Rabbis do not interpret 'a kingdom of priests' as having universal implications. They believe that the covenant given by God not only provided the core religious content of the message the Jewish people were to convey to humanity but also a separate and distinctcontent designed to force Jews to maintain a separate culture. Being chosen to convey the message implied, to them, a superior position.

By superiority, the Talmudic Rabbis meant that Jews as a separate people were to be a 'light' unto the other nations. In offering the message, they cannot mandate its acceptance. Those who accepted the message choose to become chosen.

The Talmudic Rabbis saw the Jewish mission to convey the message of God, not to convert everyone to Judaism. They did not call for the annihiliation of gentile or non-Jewish religions. They saw salvation as dependent on moral behavior not on accepting Judaism, and accepted that the righteous of all faiths have an equal chance to be saved.

In this sense, the Talmudic Rabbis maintained a separate 'superiority'. They were into delivering the message to all but most certaininly do not believe in wholescale conversions.

However, in the early days of Judaism missionary activity was necessary for the growth of this revolutionary notion of monotheism to take place. In his journey from Haran to Canaan Abraham made many converts. In Deuteronomy 32:10, Abraham is described as so successful a missionary that God became known as King of the earth as well as King of heaven.

However, the word 'convert' is used loosely when referring to Abraham's missionary zeal. The formal notion of religious conversion did not emerge until much later in history. Abraham invited non-Israelites to join the Israelites, as did Isaac and Jacob.

By the time of Moses, the Torah was being expounded in seventy languages, andit provides numerous injunctions to the Jewish people to welcome strangers. It is believed, too, that God exiled Jews from their homeland for only one reason, to increase the number of converts!

Conversions came about through synagogues inviting guests and visitors -- there were thousands of houses of instruction in all towns serving as learning centers for gentiles; Jews were exhorted to personally approach potential converts; gentiles living among Jewish people were invited to assimilate; abandoned gentile children were adopted; and many gentiles converted to Judaism through marriage with a Jew.

The Jewish mission of conversion was also codifed in laws. It is not clear when these legal rules developed, but they most certainly existed after the destruction of the Second Temple when there was a need for clear religious rules to maintain the Jewish identity. So, from 400- 500 AD the existence of these laws indicates that converts were allowed, welcomed and had specific rites to undergo in their conversion.

As expected, conversions were increased during important periods of Jewish history. The Jews grew from 150,000 in 586 BC to more than eight million by the first century of the common era and, in the case of the conversion of the Idumaeans and the Ituraeans, force was uncharacteriscally used.

So widespread was Jewish missionary activty that Greek, Roman, and Christian authors wrote disparagingly about it. In Rome, for example, Tacitus, a rhetorical historian, Cicero, a lawyer, and Juvenal, a satirist, are bitter and serious about denouncing Jewish proselytizing activities, and Horace makes fun of them.

The most famous Christian comment came from Matthew 23:15 in which competition for converts became nasty: "Alas for you scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over sea and land to make a single proselyte and anyone who becomes one you make twice as fit for hell as you are."

By the onset of the Christian era, 10% of the Roman Empire was Jewish and had the Romans and Jews not fought -- the Romans destroying the Temple in 70 AD, crushing the Bar Kochba rebellion in 135 AD and ultimately expelling the Jews from Jerusalem -- the Jews would have succeeded in winning more converts than the Christians and historywould have followed a different path.

While Jewish conversion efforts continued, the stateless and powerless Jews were restricted by Roman, and later Christian and Muslim laws regarding proselytism. In 131 AD, Hadrian prohibited circumcision and public instruction in the Jewish religion. In 198 and 199 the Emperor Severus passed laws forbiddinggentiles from embracing Judaism, and in 335 Constantine re-enacted Hadrian's law, forbidding Jews to circumcise non-Jewish slaves.

Cumulatively, these restrictions not only reversed the general Jewish attitude toward welcoming converts but also produced deep psychological change in the Jewish psyche. By the time of Constantine, many Jews would have embraced Christianity and those that remained faithful to Judaism became insular and messiahanic -- waiting for a messiahto raise them from a miserable existence made more miserable by the triumphant Christians accusing the Jews of Deicide -- killing Jesus -- and setting them up for mockery and persecution.

Christians took over the Jewish mission to welcome converts and transformed its meaning. Salvation was no longer dependent on moral behavior but on accepting Christ.The faiths of others were belittled, eternal rewards were promised for converting andeternal damnation was threated for refusing to convert. Bribery, threats, and ultimately violence and murder were used to expand the Christian faith. However, Christians did make it easier for pagans to convert by relaxing the Jewish need for male circumcision and the obligation to obey Jewish law.

Persecution and fear led, over time, to the transformation of the Jewish understanding of its mission. Spreading God's word came to be seen as against Jewish law.

(This article first appeared as god's chosen people, the jews and is reprinted with permission.)

Act Like a Roman!

The story of Diocletian -- Roman Emperor from 285 to his abdication in 303 -- is particularly relevant for our present times.

In a period of Roman history marked by regicide, military usurpers and lack of respect for the position of emperor -- as well as an incredible growth in the new Jewish cult of Christianity among the rabble -- one man, Diocletian, stood out as the last hope for saving the traditions upon which the Roman Empire was built. By imposing upon everyone the duty to observe Roman traditions -- to be a Roman first and foremost -- Diocletian tried to turn the tide, succeeded, and then he was betrayed and his social experiment was undone by yet another usurping general (Constantine).

Like his predecessor Emperor Carus, Diocletian was a peasant from the Danube area who was more 'Roman' than the Romans themselves. He was the proud commander of the Imperial Bodyguard when Carus died mysteriously in a campaign against the Persians.

Carus's sons, Numerian and Carinus succeeded him, but suspected of murdering their father Diocletian met Carinus in battle in Serbia, defeated him and become emperor himself -- not from burning ambition, far from it, but from a heartfelt desire to restore order to the Empire.

Diocletian appointed Maximian as co-emperor, but the threats from all parts of the empire were such that in 293 he appointed Galerius (married to his daughter) to rule the east, and Constantius (married to Maximian's daughter) to rule the west.

In 293 the Persian throne had been seized by a new king who drove the Romans out of Armenia. In 298 Galerius defeated the Persians and wanted to advance further, but Diocletian checked him and negotiated a stronger Roman position with the Persians which gave Rome full control of Armenia and northern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq).

By the late 290s, with peace restored to the Empire, Diocletian paid attention to administrative affairs - particularly the murder of emperors by soldiers. He proclaimed that emperors were ordained by the gods to rule, and introduced an elaborate ceremonial intended to mark the emperor as being superior to normal human beings, requiring prostration before the emperor by commoners and kneeling and kissing the hem of the robe by higher ranks (a ceremony later taken up by the Roman Pope). He also created rules for imperial appearances whereby emperors were not allowed to act like normal human beings.

He then reformed the structure of provincial government, by increasing the number of provinces by dividing them into smaller units, and then each province into twelve dioceses. He also stripped the governors of command over the armies and initiated a capitation system of taxation, requiring regular censuses (which later led to extensive legislation prohibiting peasants from leaving the land under which they had been entered into the census).

Then he attempted a policy of SOCIAL UNIFORMITY by which everyone was duty bound to observe Roman traditions. This is the period that Christians call their Great Persecution, but in was also the period that Romans called their last ditched attempt to remain 'Roman' in the face of multicultural practices that were destroying their culture. Rome itself was overcrowded with immigrants, especially from Africa and Greece, who brought with them customs and religions that were alien to the Roman way of life.

Diocletian outlawed marriage with close female relatives (a Roman custom that had not been applied previously to non-Romans); and banned the Manichaean religion (founded in 240 by Mani, a resident of Persian controlled Mesopotamia, inspired by Gnosticism and Zoroastrianism, by which believers gained salvation through him - very similar to Christianity).

Starting with his own household, Diocletion threatened to dismiss anyone who refused to act like a Roman, and in 303, faced with defiant refusal to comply by the Christian rabble, he was forced to prohibit Christian religious assemblies, demolish churches, burn liturgical books and arrest church leaders who refused to act like a Roman.

In 303, having achieved his goals, Diocletian abdicated - persuading Maximian to do likewise - and gave power to Constantius in the west and Galerius in the east who appointed their own co-rulers.

Galerius appointed his nephew Maximinus as his co-ruler in the east, and Constantius appointed the able general Severus as his co-ruler in the west. Within a year, in 306, Constantius died, precipitating his ambitious son, Constantine, to pronounce himself Emperor of the West -- but acting as senior emperor Galerius coerced him to be Severus' co-ruler.

Constantine acquiesced, but distinguished himself by establishing his authority over Britain, Gaul and Spain. Constantine was smart enough to know that most foot soldiers were poverty-stricken immigrant Christians, and by gaining their trust they would support him in his rise to power. In his new capacity as co-ruler of the western empire, he rescinded his father's edicts against the Christians and became their savior. There is no evidence that Constantine was a 'believer'. He simply used the Christians as a support base.

Meanwhile Maximian's son, Maxentius, followed Constantine's lead and took advantage of dissent in Rome to have himself declared as Emperor in 306. Galerius refused him recognition and ordered Severus to remove him by force, but faced with Maximian suddenly re-claiming the emperorship from his son, Maxentius, Severus was forced to abdicate (and was eventually killed).

Galerius finally invaded Italy in 307, wanting the reinstatement of Severus, but was defeated and had to withdraw. Then Maxentius argued with his father about who was the rightful emperor.

In the meantime, Constantine remained neutral as the co-ruler of the west - despite the fact that he had married Maxentius' sister and was therefore involved in the family struggle whether he liked it or not. When the army sided with Maxentius, Maximian fled to Constantine's court in the west.

Maximian -- the Western emperor -- was forced to abdicate, and his son, Maxentius, was denied any status. A new emperor for the west was appointed - Licinius, a general - and Constantine remained as his co-ruler.

Maximian still yearned for power and was forced to commit suicide after an attempt to overthrow his son-in-law, Constantine, in 310. In that year, too, the Carnuntum Conference was convened by the Eastern Roman Emperor, Galerius, to restore order among those contending to be the western emperor. This conference was attended by Diocletian.

To complicate matters, Galerius' co-ruler, Maximinus, resented the elevation of Licinius and to keep peace, Galerius made him his co-emperor.

In 311 Galerius died and Maximinus, implacably against the strange Jewish cult of Christianity, took over. To secure his shaky position, Constantine offered the marriage of his sister, Constantia, to Licinius, Emperor of the West.

Maximinus, now Emperor of the East, promised Maxentius, living in Rome, the emperorship of the west, causing Constantine to invade Italy in 312. At the Battle of the Mulvian Bridge outside Rome Maxentius met Constantine (who used a Christian symbol on his shield) and Maxentius was defeated.

In the following year 313, while Licinius was in Rome marrying Constantine's sister, Maximinus marched across Asia Minor, taking Byzantium and crossed into Europe. The armies of the east and west met, Maximinus fled, abandoning his army, and Licinius pursued him to Tarsus in Asia Minor, besieged him and finally he committed suicide.

Licinius kept his promise to Constantine about restoring church property taken by Maximinus, and was ruthless in eradicating all members - including women and children - of the families involved in persecuting Christians (he far more ruthless than any previous emperors had been against members of the new Jewish sect called Christianity).

Amazingly, after Licinius had exterminated all of Constantine's rivals, and done much of his dirty work for him, Constantine then feared Licinius in his position as new Emperor of the East - with a male heir, Constantine's own nephew - and declared war on him in 316, got as far as Byzantium but was outsmarted by Licinius and retreated.

Previously sympathetic to Christians, Licinius now saw them as treacherous and protected himself by dismissing them from his service.

By 321 the empire was split, and wanting total control Constantine amassed a huge force of mainly Christian soldiers and invaded Licinius's territory northwest of Thessalonica, northern Greece, and in 324 the two armies did battle. Licinius fell back and was finally defeated near Chalcedon. Licinius's life was spared when his wife (Constantine's sister) and the Bishop of Nicomedia interceded.

With Licinius's abdication, Constantine became the first emperor in 40 years to rule the empire on his own and, while rewarding his Christian followers with political power within the state -- performing many of its functions -- he very wisely did not impose a Diocletian-type policy of social uniformity on all Roman citizens.

Constantine, like Diocletian, realized that multiculturalism was destroying the Empire.

He actually achieved the lasting social uniformity that Diocletian wanted -- but it was not based on the traditional Roman culture that Diocletian had wanted to save.

By bestowing money, honor and prestigious positions on those who converted, large numbers of high-class Romans happily converted to Christianity. In doing so, the Roman Empire changed to a very early version of western civilization.

(This article first appeared as the diocletion social experiment and is reprinted with permission.)

constantine, savior or opportunist?

Constantine was responsible for starting the process whereby the Church assumed the functions of the state -- a system which persisted until the Reformation, and beyond in some parts of Europe -- and his rise to fame began in 293 AD when threats from all parts of the Roman Empire were so dire that the Emperor, Diocletian (with Maximian as co-emperor) appointed his father Constantius (married to Maximian's daughter) to help rule the west and Galerius (married to Diocletian's daughter) to help rule the east.

Both Constantius (Constantine's father) and Galerius were of German, not Roman ethnicity, and when Diocletian abdicated in 303 - persuading Maximian to do likewise - he gave full power to Constantius in the west and Galerius in the east. The Roman empire was now ruled by Germans!

Galerius appointed his nephew Maximinus as co-ruler, and urged Constantius to appoint Severus, a general, as his co-ruler in the west, but within a year, in 306, Constantius died, precipitating his son, Constantine, to pronounce himself Emperor of the West but, acting as senior emperor, Galerius coerced him to be Severus' co-ruler and so Severus became Emperor of the West.

Constantine acquiesced for the moment and distinguished himself by establishing his authority over Britain, Gaul and Spain and in his new capacity as co-ruler rescinded his father's edicts against the Christians and became their savior. Constantine was smart enough to know that most foot soldiers were poverty-stricken Christians, and by gaining their trust they would support him in his rise to power.

Meanwhile Maximian's son, Maxentius, followed Constantine's lead and took advantage of dissent in Rome to have himself declared as Emperor in 306. Galerius refused him recognition and ordered Severus to remove him by force, but faced with Maximian suddenly re-claiming the emperorship from his son, Maxentius, Severus was forced to abdicate and was eventually killed.

Galerius finally invaded Italy in 307, wanting the reinstatement of Severus, but was defeated and had to withdraw. Then, Maxentius argued with his father about who was the rightful emperor.

In the meantime, Constantine remained neutral as the co-ruler of the west - despite the fact that he had married Maxentius' sister and was therefore involved in the family struggle whether he liked it or not. When the army sided with Maxentius, Maximian fled to Constantine's court in the west.

Maximian -- the Western emperor -- was forced to abdicate, and his son, Maxentius, was denied any status. A new emperor for the west was appointed - Licinius, a general - and Constantine remained as his co-ruler.

Maximian still yearned for power and was forced to commit suicide after an attempt to overthrow his son-in-law Constantine in 310. In that year, too, the Carnuntum Conference was convened by the Eastern Roman Emperor Galerius to restore order among those contending to be the western emperor. This conference was attended by Diocletian.

To complicate matters, Galerius' co-ruler, Maximinus, resented the elevation of Licinius and to keep peace, Galerius made him his co-emperor.

In 311 Galerius died and Maximinus, implacably against the strange Jewish cult of Christianity, took over.

To secure his position, Constantine offered the marriage of his sister, Constantia, to Licinius, Emperor of the West.

Maximinus, Emperor of the East, promised Maxentius, living in Rome, the emperorship of the west, causing Constantine to invade Italy in 312. At the Battle of the Mulvian Bridge outside Rome Maxentius met Constantine (who used a Christian symbol on his shield) and Maxentius was defeated.

In the following year 313, while Licinius was in Rome marrying Constantine's sister, Maximinus marched across Asia Minor, taking Byzantium and crossed into Europe. The armies of the east and west met, Maximinus fled, abandoning his army, and Licinius pursued him to Tarsus in Asia Minor, besieged him and finally he committed suicide.

Licinius kept his promise to Constantine about restoring church property taken by Maximinus, and was ruthless in eradicating all members - including women and children - of the families involved in persecuting Christians (far more ruthless than the previous emperors had been against members of the new Jewish sect called Christianity).

Amazingly, after Licinius had got rid of all of Constantine's rivals, and done much of his dirty work for him, Constantine then feared Licinius in his position as new Emperor of the East - with a male heir, Constantine's own nephew - and declared war on him in 316, got as far as Byzantium but was outsmarted by Licinius and retreated.

Previously sympathetic to Christians, Licinius now saw them as treacherous and protected himself by dismissing them from his service.

By 321 the empire was split, and wanting total control Constantine amassed a huge force and invaded Licinius's territory northwest of Thessalonica, northern Greece, and in 324 the two armies did battle. Licinius fell back and was finally defeated near Chalcedon. Licinius's life was spared when his wife (Constantine's sister) and the Bishop of Nicomedia interceded.

With Licinius's abdication, Constantine became the first emperor in 40 years to rule the empire on his own and immediately became embroiled in complicated Christian theological disputes, necessitating calling a Church Council in 325, held in Nicaea, attended by 300 bishops mainly from the east. Though largely a Greek affair, its decisions were to be binding in the west as well and became known as the Nicene Creed.

As well as setting a fixed date for Easter, this council also eradicated Jewish customs from the service.

Constantine was open about his preference for Christianity - and his disgust at the old religions - but very wisely did little to force his views upon all citizens in the Roman Empire. Instead, by bestowing money, honor and prestigious positions on those who converted he cleverly induced large numbers of high-class Romans to convert to Christianity.

Constantine started the process whereby the Church assumed the functions of the state, and he also continued, with much vigor, the process whereby Germans were enrolled in the Roman army and given the highest positions of command -- an act that ultimately would lead to the end of the Roman Empire.

In Rome, he built many churches and turned over vast amounts of Imperial property to the Church, but it was the building of the new capital city - Constantinople - on the site of the old Greek city of Byzantium that distinguished his reign.

He looted pagan shrines to adorn his new city; offered tax incentives and other rewards to attract settlers; and started a new Senate for the city. It was dedicated in 330 and was established as the capital of the Christian Empire -- an act which led to the decline of Rome.

Before he died in 337, Constantine acted in a most un-Christian manner. He secured his position as Emperor by executing his eldest son Crispus and his second wife Fausta for conspiracy, and reconciling with his half brothers (from his father's marriage to Maximian's daughter) in order to protect his young sons Constantine II (who became the North Western Emperor), Constantius II who became the Eastern Emperor) and Constans (who became the Emperor of Italy, the Balkans and Africa).

His son, Constantius II, acted in a similar un-Christian manner by massacring all adult relations of Constantine (except for his brothers) and all possible rivals. (This massacre of 337 excluded children, one of which, Julian, the son of Constantine's half brother, later became emperor).

Although co-operative in murdering rivals, the brothers did not co-operate in ruling the Empire and the first to go was Constantine II (after he invaded Constan's Italian territory in 340 and was killed).

In many ways Constantine was definitely more a ruthless opportunist than a Christian Savior, but his legacy nevertheless was a western civilization, ruled by Christianity, that might never have come about without him.

(Constantine's story first appeared in 290 Eve, 310 Eve and 330 Eve and has been edited and reprinted with permission.)

constantine's legacy

Constantine was responsible for starting the process whereby the Church assumed the functions of the state -- a system which persisted until the Reformation, and beyond in some parts of Europe -- and his rise to fame began in 293 AD when threats from all parts of the Roman Empire were so dire that the Emperor, Diocletian (with Maximian as co-emperor) appointed his father Constantius (married to Maximian's daughter) to help rule the west and Galerius (married to Diocletian's daughter) to help rule the east.

Both Constantius (Constantine's father) and Galerius were of German, not Roman ethnicity, and when Diocletian abdicated in 303 - persuading Maximian to do likewise - he gave full power to Constantius in the west and Galerius in the east. The Roman empire was now ruled by Germans!

Galerius appointed his nephew Maximinus as co-ruler, and urged Constantius to appoint Severus, a general, as his co-ruler in the west, but within a year, in 306, Constantius died, precipitating his son, Constantine, to pronounce himself Emperor of the West but, acting as senior emperor, Galerius coerced him to be Severus' co-ruler and so Severus became Emperor of the West.

Constantine acquiesced for the moment and distinguished himself by establishing his authority over Britain, Gaul and Spain and in his new capacity as co-ruler rescinded his father's edicts against the Christians and became their savior. Constantine was smart enough to know that most foot soldiers were poverty-stricken Christians, and by gaining their trust they would support him in his rise to power.

Meanwhile Maximian's son, Maxentius, followed Constantine's lead and took advantage of dissent in Rome to have himself declared as Emperor in 306. Galerius refused him recognition and ordered Severus to remove him by force, but faced with Maximian suddenly re-claiming the emperorship from his son, Maxentius, Severus was forced to abdicate and was eventually killed.

Galerius finally invaded Italy in 307, wanting the reinstatement of Severus, but was defeated and had to withdraw. Then, Maxentius argued with his father about who was the rightful emperor.

In the meantime, Constantine remained neutral as the co-ruler of the west - despite the fact that he had married Maxentius' sister and was therefore involved in the family struggle whether he liked it or not. When the army sided with Maxentius, Maximian fled to Constantine's court in the west.

Maximian -- the Western emperor -- was forced to abdicate, and his son, Maxentius, was denied any status. A new emperor for the west was appointed - Licinius, a general - and Constantine remained as his co-ruler.

Maximian still yearned for power and was forced to commit suicide after an attempt to overthrow his son-in-law Constantine in 310. In that year, too, the Carnuntum Conference was convened by the Eastern Roman Emperor Galerius to restore order among those contending to be the western emperor. This conference was attended by Diocletian.

To complicate matters, Galerius' co-ruler, Maximinus, resented the elevation of Licinius and to keep peace, Galerius made him his co-emperor.

In 311 Galerius died and Maximinus, implacably against the strange Jewish cult of Christianity, took over.

To secure his position, Constantine offered the marriage of his sister, Constantia, to Licinius, Emperor of the West.

Maximinus, Emperor of the East, promised Maxentius, living in Rome, the emperorship of the west, causing Constantine to invade Italy in 312. At the Battle of the Mulvian Bridge outside Rome Maxentius met Constantine (who used a Christian symbol on his shield) and Maxentius was defeated.

In the following year 313, while Licinius was in Rome marrying Constantine's sister, Maximinus marched across Asia Minor, taking Byzantium and crossed into Europe. The armies of the east and west met, Maximinus fled, abandoning his army, and Licinius pursued him to Tarsus in Asia Minor, besieged him and finally he committed suicide.

Licinius kept his promise to Constantine about restoring church property taken by Maximinus, and was ruthless in eradicating all members - including women and children - of the families involved in persecuting Christians (far more ruthless than the previous emperors had been against members of the new Jewish sect called Christianity).

Amazingly, after Licinius had got rid of all of Constantine's rivals, and done much of his dirty work for him, Constantine then feared Licinius in his position as new Emperor of the East - with a male heir, Constantine's own nephew - and declared war on him in 316, got as far as Byzantium but was outsmarted by Licinius and retreated.

Previously sympathetic to Christians, Licinius now saw them as treacherous and protected himself by dismissing them from his service.

By 321 the empire was split, and wanting total control Constantine amassed a huge force and invaded Licinius's territory northwest of Thessalonica, northern Greece, and in 324 the two armies did battle. Licinius fell back and was finally defeated near Chalcedon. Licinius's life was spared when his wife (Constantine's sister) and the Bishop of Nicomedia interceded.

With Licinius's abdication, Constantine became the first emperor in 40 years to rule the empire on his own and immediately became embroiled in complicated Christian theological disputes, necessitating calling a Church Council in 325, held in Nicaea, attended by 300 bishops mainly from the east. Though largely a Greek affair, its decisions were to be binding in the west as well and became known as the Nicene Creed.

As well as setting a fixed date for Easter, this council also eradicated Jewish customs from the service.

Constantine was open about his preference for Christianity - and his disgust at the old religions - but very wisely did little to force his views upon all citizens in the Roman Empire. Instead, by bestowing money, honor and prestigious positions on those who converted he cleverly induced large numbers of high-class Romans to convert to Christianity.

Constantine started the process whereby the Church assumed the functions of the state, and he also continued, with much vigor, the process whereby Germans were enrolled in the Roman army and given the highest positions of command -- an act that ultimately would lead to the end of the Roman Empire.

In Rome, he built many churches and turned over vast amounts of Imperial property to the Church, but it was the building of the new capital city - Constantinople - on the site of the old Greek city of Byzantium that distinguished his reign.

He looted pagan shrines to adorn his new city; offered tax incentives and other rewards to attract settlers; and started a new Senate for the city. It was dedicated in 330 and was established as the capital of the Christian Empire -- an act which led to the decline of Rome.

Before he died in 337, Constantine acted in a most un-Christian manner. He secured his position as Emperor by executing his eldest son Crispus and his second wife Fausta for conspiracy, and reconciling with his half brothers (from his father's marriage to Maximian's daughter) in order to protect his young sons Constantine II (who became the North Western Emperor), Constantius II who became the Eastern Emperor) and Constans (who became the Emperor of Italy, the Balkans and Africa).

His son, Constantius II, acted in a similar un-Christian manner by massacring all adult relations of Constantine (except for his brothers) and all possible rivals. (This massacre of 337 excluded children, one of which, Julian, the son of Constantine's half brother, later became emperor).

Although co-operative in murdering rivals, the brothers did not co-operate in ruling the Empire and the first to go was Constantine II (after he invaded Constan's Italian territory in 340 and was killed).

In many ways Constantine was definitely more a ruthless opportunist than a Christian Savior, but his legacy nevertheless was a western civilization, ruled by Christianity, that might never have come about without him.

(Constantine's story first appeared in 290 Eve, 310 Eve and 330 Eve and has been edited and reprinted with permission.)

is christian unity possible?

With the global upsurge in Islam, you'd think that the Christians would be prepared to bury their differences and provide a united front, wouldn't you, but the Pope's recent announcements have highlighted why the Christians split up in the first place and will never, ever be able to unite.

What makes Islam such an attractive alternative to Christianity is that nobody is in charge and it's a way of life rather than something you think about on Sundays or special occasions such as Easter or Christmas -- or when there's a need for a wedding or a funeral.

In its very early days, Christianity operated like modern Islam, sort of, in that it was a community of like-minded souls who faithfully lived their daily lives according to certain principles. What changed it was its incorporation into the Roman Empire.

To put it bluntly, the Roman Catholic church from the time of Constantine onwards has viewed itself as a political force, if not the heart and soul of the Roman Empire, and despite the fact that the physical empire crumbled the Roman Empire, in the shape of the Roman Catholic Church and its emperor Pope, has steadfastly continued to see itself as ruling the world.

The Vatican successors of the Roman Empire, and Italians generally -- most of whom are descendants of the early Greek Christians -- cannot get over the fact that they've lost what they consider to be their rightful place as rulers of the world.

First came the split with the Eastern Orthodox church, then came the Reformation and then came the democratic revolution.

As the Pope's recent announcements make clear, the issue has very little to do with religion and everything to do with power (and the riches that goes with it).

He is in charge, nobody else, and if you can't accept that then continue on your evil ways as non-church Christians!

Apparently, the Vatican describes the Protestant and Orthodox faiths as 'not proper Churches'; their 'defects' constitute a major obstacle to ecumenism; and the main defect of both faiths is that they do not recognise the primacy of the Pope.

Christian unity is something that the Vatican desires as much as the other faiths, but it is predicated upon the Pope being in charge in accordance with Jesus' disciple, Peter, choosing Rome as the rock of Christ’s Church and being its first leader.

Whether Peter ever went to Rome, or whether Jesus ever instructed him to do so, is something we cannot be sure of -- it is purely a matter of faith, as is everything else written about Jesus' life -- but as far as most Christians are concerned, it is not Rome that inspires us. It is Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus in present day Israel.

And, it is not the Pope, or the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other Christian leader who inspires us. It is the humble Christian monks going about their daily lives, doing good deeds, as Jesus himself did.

If Christians must have a supreme leader and a supreme place for worship, then let that leader live and work in Bethlehem, far away from Rome and its connections with the blood and guts of the Roman Empire.

Only then will Christian unity be achieved.

has the reformation achieved its purpose?

While the split with the Eastern Orthodox church had a lot to do with geography, the Reformation came about solely as a protest against the evil ways of the Roman Catholic church -- the selling of indulgences, the utter depravity of its popes, cardinals and priests and its total disregard for the poor and sick in its grab for more land and riches -- and while religious principles played a part it was largely a social movement.

Granted, some of the the protestant sects evolved into similar depraved and money-grubbing industries oppressing the poor, but most have done more to alleviate the plight of the poor and sick in the 500 years they have been in existence than the Roman Catholic church did in the previous 1500 years.

Democracy and the industrial revolution owed their beginnings in Europe to the protestant churches, and during that time it was not too difficult to equate the Roman Catholic church with oppression, ignorance, sickness and poverty and the protestant churches with freedom, education, health and prosperity.

In fact, the protestant churches have been so successful at lifting the masses out of oppression, ignorance, sickness and poverty that their very existence is today in jeopardy.

Generations raised with the protestant work ethic have become so prosperous -- taking their democratic rights, education and good health for granted -- that they have little interest these days in religion, other than on special occasions.

One can make the argument that the Reformation has now achieved its ultimate purpose as a social movement and its religious roots are largely redundant, but where does that leave the protestant churches and the many people who rely on them for employment?

Many, of course, are leaving the protestant churches to seek employment with the wealthy Roman Catholic church; others are seeking employment as counselors in government and non-government bodies; and others see their work continuing in the Third World -- raising the living standards of the poor, sick and oppressed in Africa and elsewhere.

Should we rejoice in the fact that the Reformation has raised us to stand on our own two feet,to commune with our Maker in our hearts and minds without a priest standing between us, hands out grasping for money, or should we bemoan the fact that the protestant churches have been so successful that they are no longer needed?

To drum up doom and gloom in the hope of attracting parishioners is to behave in a manner similar to that used by the pre-Reformation Catholic Church. It would be abominable.

There are many useful avenues of employment open for people previously employed in protestant churches, and although it is sad to see our churches close and be used for other purposes, we should bear in mind that just like doctors trained to treat the scourge of polio have been largely made redundant we should be thankful that our work, too, has been done.

germanic consolidation under catholicism

At the same time as Pagan Germanic conquerors were making a deal with the Roman Church following the fall of the Roman Empire, a new religion was emerging in the east that would act to consolidate Germanic power in Europe.

Preached by Mohammed - incorporating features of Christianity and other religions - Islam was an attractive unifying religion that took advantage of bitter theological arguments and power struggles between the eastern and western Christian bishops to sweep through the Middle East and reclaim most of the territory ruled by the Christians of the old Eastern Roman Empire.

Syria, Palestine and Persia converted to Islam in 637, Egypt in 641 and then Africa, penetrating to central Asia and the frontier of India and China. By 715 the Moslems had conquered Spain (ruled by the Germanic Visigoths), and the Christian nobles of Spain rapidly converted to Islam in order to retain their land, wealth and power in the same way that Pagan Roman nobles had rapidly converted to Christianity after the 390 policy of Emperor Theodosius.

All that remained of the eastern Roman empire of Heraclius was a wide area around Constantinople which was known as the Byzantium Empire

It was the Germanic Franks, led by Charles Martel, who stopped the Moslems at the Spanish border in 732 and gained southern Gaul for the Franks; and it was his grandson, Charlemagne, d. 814, who had bestowed upon him by Pope Leo III the ambiguous title of Holy Roman Emperor in 800 for saving the good pope's life.

Far more than the bishops, the Germanic Franks could see the remarkable parallels between the rise of Islam (and the fall of eastern Christianity) and the rise of Christianity (and the fall of Paganism). Charlemagne did not want western Christianity - and his kingdom - to suffer a similar fate, so he cracked down harder on his subject people than any Pagan Roman emperor ever did - brutally enforcing total obedience to Christianity (which, to him, encompassed his kingdom), burning all heretics and those who refused baptism.

The marauding Pagan Vikings, however, were more of a threat to Charlemagne and his descendants - and other European states - than the Moslem Arabs in terms of lost land.

The lower Loire and Seine were abandoned to the Vikings about the same time, 866, that the Vikings conquered York, Eastern Mercia and East Anglia in Britain, forcing the Germanic Saxon King Alfred to make a treaty in 900 creating a frontier between West Saxon territory and the Danelaw. In 879 the Vikings took Flanders, in 882 Cologne and Trier were taken, but Paris was saved by the Capetian, Odo, who, in 888, became first king of Francia unrelated to former rulers. In 911, the Frankish king Charles the Simple finally legitimized the authority of the Vikings by granting them the area around Rouen (the Duchy of Normandy), and they eventually settled down and became Christians.

While Spain thrived under the Moslems, seeing a flowering of culture and learning, the rest of Europe was thrown into the Gothic Dark Ages under oppressive Germanic Catholicism.

The argumentative Roman and Constantinople Christians finally parted company with a schism in 1054 - followed in 1096 by the 1st of 8 Crusades against the Moslems in the Holy Land - but despite Gregory VII's papal infallibility announcement in 1073 and Thomas Aquinas's (born 1225) announcement that faith and reason are compatible, doctrinal controversy and outright disbelief continued to plague the Roman Catholic Church. It took a brave Scot, John Duns Scotus (born 1270), to contradict Aquinas by holding that faith and reason are incompatible.

the germanic deal with rome

Italy's nearest land neighbors - the Germanic tribes - had always been troublesome, but once the seat of the empire's power moved to Constantinople the Persian Empire became a bigger threat and the Empire came to rely more and more on Germanic soldiers to fight its wars until the Germans, inevitably, had so much military power that they usurped the emperorship in the west for themselves and with successive migrations of Germanic tribes into Italy - and elsewhere in Europe - the ethnic mix of Rome changed to reflect the new Germanic arrivals.

By 390, Emperor Theodosius -- a Visigoth (Germanic) Spaniard who had converted to Christianity and was heavily influenced by the Bishop of Rome, Ambrose -- attempted a new policy of SOCIAL UNIFORMITY by imposing upon everyone the observance of Christian traditions that led to the persecution of the traditional Pagans (as well as other religions).

By 410, Rome itself was "sacked" (according to the Christians) or "delivered" (according to the Pagans) by King Alaric of the Germanic Goths. The Germanic tribes - the Angles and Saxons - had by then also taken over Roman Britain, almost obliterating the native Britons in the same way that the Greeks and Phoenicians (Syrians) had obliterated the native Latini in Italy.

By 491, with the death of the Roman Emperor Zeno in the East, there was no longer an Roman emperor in the west and the Pagan Germanic tribes had total control of western Europe.

The Germanic tribes were not Christians and their own religion -- although Pagan -- differed from that of the Romans. They did not worship Roman gods. What set them aside from the Romans was their ethnicity. The Germanic tribes were predominantly white skinned, blond-haired and blue-eyed like the Vikings -- from which they probably descended -- and the Romans were predominantly olive skinned, black-haired and brown-eyed like the Syrians and Greeks, from which they definitely descended.

At this point in time, western Europe might also have unshackled itself from other foreign eastern influences such as the Abrahamic religions of Judaism and Christianity, but the complete economic and social breakdown of the old western Roman Empire caused more and more Romans -- most of whom were by now Christian converts, and of Greek and Syrian ethnicity -- to turn to religion for salvation and successive bishops of Rome harnessed these fears so successfully that the Germanic conquerors were forced into making a deal.

In return for agreeing to the conversion of all Pagan lands in the west to Christianity, the Bishops of Rome would pacify the natives and give temporal control of them to the Germanic conquerors. The deal also included mutually beneficial ways in which the spiritual and temporal rulers would enrich each other.

There is no concrete evidence of this deal, but the rise of fabulously wealthy Germanic kingdoms ruled by divine right and Papal blessing -- and the emergence of the Holy Roman Empire -- shortly after the fall of the Roman Empire in the west attests to the fact that something very fishy happened in Rome.

How else could the proudly Pagan Germanic tribal leaders have agreed to the mass conversion of their people -- first by mild means such as incorporating Pagan traditions into Christian practices, but later by brutal means -- if there was not incredible wealth to be made from it? And how else could the Greek-Syrian Church of Rome -- sacked, impoverished and left in ruins -- have agreed to barbarian kings ruling the land if there was not incredible wealth to be made from it, too?

The more people tithing to the Church, the richer the Pope became. And, the more people scared out of their wits by the fear of Abraham's God, the easier they were to control and tax and the richer the Germanic kings became.

It was a clever deal, mutually beneficial to both the Pope in Rome and the Germanic leaders, and it persisted until recent times.

how did judaism affect early western civilization?

The converts from Judaism and Paganism to the new religion of Christianity found a new and mostly tolerant home in the big city of Rome where they flocked in their thousands looking for work and a better life.. Most of them were impoverished Greeks and their leaders tended to be relatively wealthy Jews from Judea, one of whom was Peter, a disciple of Jesus, who became the first Bishop of Rome

There is little doubt that the Christians were trouble-makers who were offended by what they saw as the barbaric practices of the Pagans, and when they were all blamed, rightly or wrongly, for the Great Fire of Rome in 64 -- during which Nero allegedly played his fiddle, totally oblivious of the chaos around him -- many innocent Christians lost their lives in the retribution that followed.

In fact, Peter himself, was blamed, and his request to be crucified upside down was granted.

But was the Great Fire of Rome lit by Christians angry at the Pagans, or by Jews angry at the Romans?

Two years later, in 66, the inflamed Jews of Judea revolted against aggressive Roman intrusion into their affairs, causing many to flee from the area -- so the Jews were causing as much trouble for the Romans as the Christians were.

Although we draw distinctions between Jews and Christians today, way back then they were essentially seen by the Romans as the same people with the same religion and the same leaders.

Sixty-five years later, in 131, another Jewish revolt against Roman rule took place in Jerusalem, led by Simon Bar Kokhba. Its brutality resulted in the great Jewish Diaspora of 132 -- moving west to North Africa, east to Syria, north to Greece or south to Arabia -- and most of the displaced Jews would have outwardly converted to the religion of their hosts.

From 193-235 the Roman Empire fell under the rule of fabulously wealthy African and Syrian emperors who brought their extended families, administrative staff and slaves with them. Consequently Rome's ethnic mix changed to reflect these new arrivals (some of whom were undoubtedly the descendants of the Jewish Diaspora, and practising their faith in secret).

By 293 the Empire was so big and so diverse that the Emperor Diocletian divided its rule between an eastern and western emperor and attempted a policy of SOCIAL UNIFORMITY by imposing upon everyone the observance of Roman traditions. 

This policy led to the persecution of the Christians (as well as other religions).

In 330 the Emperor Constantine confounded the native Romans not only by converting to the new religion of Christianity -- which was known as the new Judaism -- but also by establishing Constantinople in the east as the new seat of the empire's power. In doing so, Constantine gave the Bishop of Rome more power in relation to the traditional Pagan Priests and precipitated the decline of Rome's prestige which made it more vulnerable to Germanic invasion.

If you look upon early Christianity as the new Judaism -- with only the hardline Jews refusing to accept Jesus as their Messiah -- then early western civilization was not only founded upon Greek and Syrian ethnicity but also upon the ancient religion of Abraham from Ur in Iraq.

How on earth, then, did western civilization come to represent white Anglo-Saxons of Puritan persuasions?

Why is Islam being demonized this century?

After centuries of relative peace between the Christian and the Moslem world, the whole world became focused on Islam after 9/11 but the rise of Islam in Europe, particularly, has worried a lot of people for a long time.

The rise of extremist or Jihadist Islam has parallels between what happened 2,000 years ago when radical Jews broke away from Judaism and formed the new religion of Christianity. The early Christians left their Middle Eastern homelands and made the heart of the Roman Europe -- Rome itself -- their base for conscripting converts and preaching what was, in fact, sedition. Being radical Jews, the early Christians wanted to rid their homeland, Judea, of Roman rule and to this end they worked from within, right under the noses of their Roman masters, in Rome itself.

Last century, while the Western nations were turning against the Jews, fighting against communism and, indeed, fighting each other for control of the worlds resources they stepped upon a lot of Moslem toes -- just as the Romans did to the Jews in Judea. At the start of the 20th century, there were very few Moslems in Europe or any western nation -- and certainly no mosques dominating the suburbs -- but by the end of the century every European capital city had been populated by radical Moslems acting in the same manner as the early Christians in Rome.

Like the Romans 2000 years ago, nobody paid much attention to these new people and their strange religion until a calamity happened. The Great Fire of Rome in 64, was like our 9/11 in 2001.

Like the Christians in Rome supported the uprising of their Judaen brothers against Roman rule two years later in 66, so the Moslems of Europe supported the uprising of their Moslem brothers against the American invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Extremist or Jihadist Islam is similar to early Christianity, the adherants of both being happy to give their lives to the cause. And it is political cause they are fighting for. The early Christians were Jews who wanted the Romans out of Judea, and they were willing to enlist unclean Gentiles into their fold -- just like the Jihadists are enlisting vulnerable western converts into their fold even they it is the west they are fighting.

Like the Christians in Rome multiplied their numbers and grew stronger, repelling all attempts to make them assimilate into the Roman culture, the Jihadist Moslems in Europe are behaving in a similar manner

Islam is being demonized this century because the parallels between the behavior of the early Christians and the Jihadists is clear for all to see. Eventually, a western leader will convert to Islam -- like Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity in 330 -- and the new religion will become enforced throughout the West.

will islam or judaic-christianity prevail?

If history is to repeat itself, then one religion will prevail in the West and it will not be the Judaic-Christian faiths. Jihadist Islam, like early Christianity, will sweep through Europe and the western nations and will be enforced by new leaders who have seen the 'light' of Islam.

Sounds far-fetched? Well, the Romans and their Emperors probably thought the same thing 2,000 years ago when the Jewish Peter, the disciple of Jesus, arrived in Rome and started preaching the virtues of his Abrahamic God in relation to the the depravities of the Roman Gods.

It took about 300 years and much pain and anger on both sides to convert an Emperor -- Constantine -- but once that momentous event had been accomplished the whole of the Roman Empire would later fall into line with the new religion of Christianity.

This time around, the conversion will not be so profound because, after all, Islam believes in the same Abrahamic God as the Christians and the Jews. It was for worse for the Romans in 330 because they had many Gods -- Jupiter, Zeus and Venus being the most well known -- and they worshipped at many temples dedicated to each God.

This time around, too, the conversion may not take as long as 300 years but assuming it does, the following is the likely scenario for how it will happen.

The Christians caused the Great Fire of Rome in 64 and the Islamists caused 9/11 in 2001. Like the Christians in Rome supported the uprising of their Judaen brothers against Roman rule two years later in 66, so the Moslems of Europe supported the uprising of their Moslem brothers against the American invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Sixty-five years later, in 2068, another Moslem revolt against the West will take place in the Middle East, possibly Jerusalem, led by a Moslem similar in character to Simon Bar Kokhba who led the second Jewish revolt against the Romans in 131. Its brutality will result in a great Moslem Diaspora in 2069 and a long period of persecution of both moderate and extremist Moslems during which the ideology becomes even more entrenched.

By 2230 the west will be so big and diverse and strife ridden that a leader like the Emperor Diocletian will divide his rule between an eastern and western emperor and attempt a policy of SOCIAL UNIFORMITY by imposing upon everyone -- Jews, Moslems, Hindus and Buddhists alike -- the observance of Christian traditions. His attempt fails. The Moslems revolt.

In 2267 a western leader like the Emperor Constantine will confound all by not only converting to Islam but also establishing a new state of power in Iran -- far away from Europe and the western nations. In doing so, this leader, like Constantine, will give the Islamic Mullahs more power in relation to the existing Christian Priests and precipitate the decline of the West's prestige which will make it more vulnerable to Russian invasion.

The old Christian West's neighbors, the atheist Russians, had always been troublesome -- just like the Pagan Germanic tribes had been troublesome for the Romans. Once the seat of the new Islamic Empire's power moves to Iran, a new threat emerges -- China -- just like the Pathans became a threat for Constantinople in Turkey. The Islamic Empire comes to rely more and more on Russian soldiers to fight its wars against the Chinese, and inevitably the Russian generals gain so much military power that they usurp the emperorship for themselves -- just like the Germanic generals gained control of Rome.

By 2327, the new Russian leader of the Islamic Empire, like the Germanic Emperor Theodosius, converts to Islam under the influence of the Mulla of Rome -- someone like Ambrose -- and attempts a new policy of SOCIAL UNIFORMITY by imposing upon everyone the observance of Moslem faith and traditions. The Christians revolt.

By 2347, an atheist Russian leader like King Alaric of the Goths sacks Europe and both the Christians and Moslems are terrified.

By 2428, with the death of the Islamic Mullah of Iran, the Islamic Empire ceases to exist, just like the Christian Roman Empire ceased to exist after the death of the Eastern Roman Emperor Zeno in 491.

With the complete economic and social breakdown of the West under Moslem rule, the atheist Russian conquerors make a deal with the European Mullahs. In return for agreeing to the conversion of all Europe and Russia to Islam, the Mullahs would keep the natives pacified and give temporal control to the Russian conquerors. The deal also included mutually beneficial ways in which the spiritual and temporal rulers would enrich each other.

Just like Christianity was spread and enforced throughout Europe by an alliance between the Roman Pope and the Pagan Germanic conquerors (the current European kings and queens), the Mullah of Rome will succeed in spreading Islam via Russian conquest and rule -- and a similar Dark Age will befall Europe for the next 1,000 years.

why is judaism less popular than christianity and islam?

Unlike Christianity and Islam, Judaism never developed into a proselytizing religion. Formed from the 12 tribes of Israel, Judaism is a 'family' religion. It does not urge its 'family' members to reach out to the far corners of the Earth and convert non-believers to its creed, and indeed even the early followers of Christ were only interested in converting Jews.

Jesus believed he was the son of God and the rightful heir to the Kingdom of Judah - for which he was sentenced to death by crucifixion by his own people - but even his own family did not believe in him, thinking him crazy, during his lifetime. It was only after his death that his family, seeing a multitude of people mourning him, that his family - particularly his brother James - took up his cause, appealing to the tribes of Israel to acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah.

For this, James, too, was sentenced to death. He was stoned to death by the Jewish Sanhedrin in c 60AD - making Jews less likely than ever to accept Jesus as their Messiah. Faced with this fact, the early Christians eventually decided, with much heartache, to break with the Jews and win, instead, the hearts and the minds of the pagans that they had previously despised as being 'unclean'.

If Christianity and Islam are more popular today than Judaism then it has a lot to do with the aggressive way both of these religions developed into organizations bent upon mass conversion of non-believers, but there is another 'popular' force within these religions that differs markedly from Judaism and makes conversions palatable.

Basically, both Christianity and Islam promise a 'paradise' after death that Judaism has no need to dwell upon. To be the Chosen People of God is 'enough' for the Jews. Their religion does not need a 'carrot' in the form of: behave well in this life and you will be rewarded in heaven (with young virgins, or whatever).

Judaism is a 'here and now' religion. God takes care of His Chosen People - the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Isreal) - by ensuring their prosperity on Earth, and the Jews take care of God by following the Covenants. When awful calamities befall the Jews - and there have been many calamities throughout history that have directly affected them - there is an acceptance that God has punished His Chosen People for a good reason.

Christianity and Islam are not exactly 'here and now' religions. Because both rely heavily on the pleasures of paradise after death, they are extremely attractive religions to the multitudes of poor and afflicted people whose lives on Earth are hellish.

Simply put, whereas a wayward Jew may be chastised by a threat that 'God will strike you, make your business go bankrupt or deprive you of children', a wayward Christian or Moslem is more likely to be chastised by a threat that 'God will send you to Hell when you die'. Also, whereas a Christian or Moslem visiting an African refugee camp is likely to hand out bibles or religious tracts, a Jew is more likely to hand out contraceptives (to prevent more Africans from being born into misery.)

It can be surmised by this that those in control of both the Christian and Moslem religions - who have traditionally lived in luxury in Rome or Mecca - have a vested interest in both maintaining the hellish lives of their flocks on Earth and creating more hell on Earth in order to 'save' the new generation of converts. Hence, the Dark Ages, marked by deliberate withholding of knowledge from ordinary people by religious leaders; promotion of endless wars creating endless misery; the practice of tithing of earnings by which poor families were further impoverished; and strict religious laws promoting the creation of far more children than any poor family can sustain.

Being popular religions, therefore, does not necessarily make Christianity and Islam better or more truer than Judaism or any other religion.

When the popularity of any religion in the world - assessed by census statistics - can be directly correlated with the incidence of poverty and affliction, it is more an indictment against that religion than an accolade.

was race or religion the unique feature of western civilization?

At no other time in history - other than in the 7th century when Rome chose it as the bastion of Christianity in the face of rising Islam - has Ireland played any major role in shaping the political, economic or cultural evolution of the western world. Indeed, the universal state of western civilization was represented by the Hapsburg Monarchy 1526-1918, not the Celtic kings.

And, except for continuing to lead the Catholic Church, the political power of the Pope in Rome has diminished considerably in modern times.

If Christianity - in particular Catholicism - were the unique feature of Western civilization at its inception in 675 in Ireland, then it did not remain so forever.

However, Ireland cannot be discounted for another major unique feature of Western civilization at its inception in 675 that has remained strong - it's white Celtic ethnic identity.

Because of the abominable conditions of overpopulation and poverty in Ireland, the Irish provided by far the most immigrants to the new worlds in centuries to follow. In that respect, the Irish Celts most certainly played the most important part in shaping the ethnic identity of the evolving western civilization.

In that respect, Ireland in 675 was indeed the 'cradle' of western civilization. If historians believe that a unique ethnicity founded western civilization, then it was a white Irish Celtic ethnicity - not the Mediterranean ethnicity of the Romans, French and Spanish, nor the polyglot ethnicity of the various other northern tribes in the western world at the time.

In fact, because three separate and distinctive Christian civilizations evolved in Turkey, Russia and Europe - respectively represented by the Ottoman Empire, the Muscovite Empire and the Hapsburg Monarchy - indicates that Christianity was not a unique feature of western civilization.

Of race and religion, then, race in the form of white Celtic ethnicity, was the unique feature of Western civilization.

did christianity hold back western civilization?

While western civilization may have had Ireland as its cradle, it nevertheless evolved to become distinctively European - geographically, racially and culturally - and it remained geographically, racially and culturally intact for another 600 years, repelling Jews and Moslems and other non-Christian invaders.

At that time, Christianity was a repressive religion and it was used by the political rulers to make the masses do their bidding. It destroyed the pagan culture upon which the glorious Hellenic civilization and the Roman Empire was based, and definitely held back western civilization for centuries.

What brought western civilization out of a period that historians call the 'Dark Ages' was increasing exposure to the fabulous wealth and inventiveness of other civilizations - notably the Chinese through Marco Polo's travels between 1275-1292, and the Islamic nations through the Crusades of the same era.

The horrors of overpopulation and disease represented by the Black Death of 1348-1349 also had its impact.

The Christian Western civilization was looking decidedly primitive in relation to other civilizations.

An enlightenment was necessary, and the course it took brought out the best but also the worst in the white Christian populations.

will western civilization repeat history?

Western civilization - now led by the USA - appears to be following the same route as the Hellenic civilization which, in its later years, was led by Rome. The Romans crucified Jesus of Nazareth - a revolutionary Jew whom they saw as a rabble rouser - and in doing so they made a martyr of him, allowing his followers to found a new religion based on his life and teachings that eventually swept through to the four corners of the Earth, destroying not only the Hellenic civilization but also the Roman Empire.

The parallels with the current situation in the Middle East are glaring.

Some claim that the clash of civilizations desired by Islamic revolutionaries - such as Osama bin Laden and the young Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq - will not eventuate, ever. They base their claim on the fact that the Islamic world did not rise up to support bin Laden after 9/11, and it never will. They claim that the Islamic world is far too divided along national lines - and is far too eager to remain trading partners with the western world - to become a cohesive belligerent force determined to impose its beliefs on the world.

However, the Jews did not rise up to support Jesus either. In fact, they 'betrayed him' to the Romans in much the same way that liberal Islamic nations wash their hands of the Islamic revolutionaries and 'betray' them to the Americans.

By sparing the lives of prominent Islamic revolutionaries - allowing bin Laden to go free, and negotiating with al-Sadr - America will avoid repeating history. This, in fact, is exactly what America is doing.

Had the Romans allowed Jesus to live and carry on his revolutionary social war against his own people - the Jews - Christianity, if it survived, would have probably remained an eastern cult religion and the Romans would never have had to deal with the spread of religion that ultimately destroyed their own.

Although purely speculative, in that Christianity might have spread with or without the crucifixion of Jesus, America is banking on the belief that revolutionary Islam will die out if its leaders are allowed to live.

However, by invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein in order to impose democratic leadership in Iraq - and in doing so hopefully protecting Israel and lessening the spread of Islamic revolutionaries - America is courting trouble because Saddam was more western in outlook than any other leader of the Islamic nations and as monstrous as his regime was it did, at least, keep Iraq free of Islamic revolutionaries and provide its citizens, especially women, with basic freedoms.

The scenario unfolding in Iraq would be like the Romans deposing the Jewish leader in some other city where Jesus was not preaching and imposing upon the Jews of that city a Jewish leader of Roman persuasion in the hope that in doing so the revolutionary Jews, like Jesus, would not spread.

That the Romans did not do this is to their credit for it would have incensed the Jews in that city and no doubt precipitated the very situation that the Romans were trying to avoid.

In invading Iraq, America has, in effect, precipitated the spread of Islamic revolutionaries. In trying to avoid repeating history by making a martyr of the Islamic revolutionaries, America chose a route that the Romans wisely avoided.

If America really wanted to avoid repeating history it might have followed the teachings of Jesus and turned the other cheek.

does westernized constitute western civilization?

There is a big difference between being a western nation and being 'westernized'. The adoption of western architecture and technologies - or food or clothes - does not make a nation part of western civilization.

Japan, for instance, is highly westernized, yet remains uniquely Japanese.

Christianity as opposed to Paganism was one of the distinctive founding bases of western civilization in 675AD, but this distinction has progressively eroded over the years to the point where it is more a force in Africa and Asia than it is in Europe.

The Orthodox Christian populations of Turkey and Russia split from Europe centuries ago to form their own distinctive civilizations, so being Turkish or Russian or European was far more distinctive than being Christian - and as far as Western civilization was concerned, being white was far more important than anything else.

To qualify as being part of western civilization up to 1918, and largely up to 1945, was - in order of importance - to be ethnically white, geographically European and culturally Christian.

The differences between the pre 1918 and the post 1945 western nations are so obviously different - like chalk and cheese in some nations - that 'western' civilization is no longer an appropriate umbrella term.

Many nations these days are 'westernized', but it is still commonly understood that Western civilization resides primarily in Europe.

what's the new basis of western civilization?

Through immigration of non-white races, the concept of racial purity and superiority - the same concept that keeps other civilizations proud and strong - is being largely destroyed, along with Christianity, in all western nations.

In place of Christianity and racial purity, the new western nations espouse:

racial diversity;
cultural diversity;
religious diversity;
equal opportunity,
affirmative action;
political correctness,
globalization;
open immigration; and
extensive welfare and human rights programs.

These factors most definitely separate and divide western civilization from other civilizations - in that no other civilization would dream of implementing such crazy, liberal ideals - but what is the cohesive force that keeps western civilization together?

What is the essence, what is the unique feature of the new western civilization that distinguishes it from other civilizations and protects it from extinction?

Diversity? How can diversity be a cohesive force?

In the event of war with a civilization from which most immigrants came, what side would they be on?

is the west an extension of the old roman empire?

In that the Roman Empire adopted Christianity as a way to quell rebellion and maintain in control of the known world - and the Pope chose Ireland as the last bastion of Christianity in 675 - both Christianity and Western civilization did indeed become extensions of the old Roman Empire.

At the time when Ireland became the cradle of western civilization in 675, Rome was in peril of being sacked by the Arabs and Ireland was seen as a safe haven for the continuation of Christianity but also, through it, Roman rule.

By 675, the entire Celtic Pagan population of Ireland had been converted to Christianity by Roman priests. It was more Papist than Rome itself!

In the safe and strongly Christian island of Ireland, western civilization found a fertile cradle but Rome remained in control of the administration of the Church in Ireland - and still does - and at the time, in the 7th century, it effectively controlled the entire country, too.

It was a Roman church system, not an Irish one, and - just like Rome ruled the later years of Hellenic civilization with its cradle in Greece - Rome ruled the early years of Western civilization with its cradle in Ireland.

Without the birth of Islam in 622, the birth of western civilization in Ireland might never have occurred; and, without the adoption of Christianity, Rome might never have remained a seat of power.

how did Islam affect early western civilization?

Right from the start of the birth of the new religion of Islam in 622, the Arabs that espoused it were perceived as being bent upon destroying Christianity and thus Western civilization most definitely took shape as a reaction against Islam.

By 638 the Arabs had invaded and conquered Jerusalem - creating much angst for the Christians as well as the Jews - and when the Arabs headed for Europe via Spain, there was real concern that the whole of Europe would fall under Arab rule and Christianity would die out in Europe.

The Pope in Rome was in peril. Not even the island nation of England was seen as being a safe haven for the Christian church - and Roman power - and that is why Rome chose far-away Ireland to be the last bastion of Christianity.

Actually, the Arab conquerors - unlike their Christian counterparts - were far more interested in acquiring wealth and power than converts. Wherever they conquered, Jews and Christians were heavily taxed and treated like second class citizens - like all subject peoples are, whoever the conquerors - but the Arabs did not force subject peoples to convert to Islam. Until Ferdinand and Isabella expelled the Arabs at the end of the 15th century, the Arab kingdom of Cordova in Spain lasted for almost eight centuries and was highly civilized.

It was therefore not so much Christianity that was in peril by the advancing Moslem Arabs but Roman power and wealth.