Who Killed Jesus?
by
Julian Doyle

Paul Smith

17 January 2018
Put online at: 5:40 PM GMT
Revised 17 January 2018

The personal opinions and wishful thinking of various authors like Julian Doyle, Marie-Amélie Chartroule de Montifaud, Louis Martin, Louis-Sophrone Fugairon and Robert Graves – all had different takes and different reasons for rejecting the central tenet of Christianity – that Jesus Christ died on the cross and resurrected from the dead.

Sandy Hamblett gives an uncritical reception of Julian Doyle’s 2017 book “Who Killed Jesus?” – Doyle only mis-spells Rosicrucians as “Rosecrucians” and takes on board the conspiracy theories associated with the church of St Sulpice in Paris – something that only originated in the fertile imaginations of Pierre Plantard, Philippe de Chérisey, Gérard de Sède and the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail – thus representing an extreme minority.

As for the often-quoted letter by Abbé Louis Fouquet to his brother Nicolas Fouquet about Poussin – here is the relevant paragraph in full (that was not provided by Doyle or by Holy Blood, Holy Grail):

He and I discussed certain things, which I shall with ease be able to explain to you in detail; things which will give you advantages which even kings would have great pains to draw from him, and which, according to him, it is possible that nobody else will ever rediscover in the centuries to come; and what is more, this could be done without expense and could even turn to profit, and these are things so hard to discover that no one, no matter who, upon this earth today could have better fortune or even so much. (17 April 1656)

What was this reference: “this could be done without expense and could even turn to profit”? Since Poussin was an artist it could have been a reference to the secret of forgery to make things look ancient. Michelangelo in his youth was caught planting such a forged “relic” and nobody knows for certain, today, how many of the artifacts on display in museums around the world are really authentic or forgeries crafted by the likes of Michelangelo and Poussin. Authenticity and provenance of discovered artifacts did not exist centuries ago (Nicolas Fouquet was indicted over allegations of fraud and embezzlement).

Author Julian Doyle is merely the latest fringe theorist stepping into the footsteps of past Jewish scholar Hugh J. Schonfield – and this much-copied idea where Jesus Christ did not die on the Cross and did not resurrect from the dead – overlooks the basic and central tenet of Christianity and the reason behind its very origin.

Neither Julian Doyle nor Hugh J. Schonfield based their arguments on authentic historical sources – both authors merely presented a personal opinion.

As for sceptics, it is true that they reject religion and Christianity – but sceptics also reject just as much crazy doses of unlikely and implausible alternative versions of Christianity as put forward by Julian Doyle.

Note: what appears below is blurb from here.





Rennes-le-Château Timeline

priory-of-sion.com