Christian Apologist “Secular Source Evidence” for Historical jesus #3: Pliny the Younger

December 28, 2012

This is the 5th article of our 12 part research:

Debunking the Fraudulent christian Apologist List of Extra-biblical but non-contemporary, claimed “sources” used as jesus “evidence.” (Jewish, “Pagan,” Non-christian, “Secular”)

http://tmblr.co/ZkpfQtmt2ygH

Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, born Gaius Caecilius or Gaius Caecilius Cilo (61 AD – ca. 112 AD), better known as Pliny the Younger, was a lawyer, author, and magistrate of Ancient Rome.

Born 29 years after jesus supposedly died.

Wrote in 110 AD, 77 years after jesus supposedly died.

His 2 letters in question:

- Don’t mention jesus

- Were written by christian leaders and then attributed to Pliny. The actual text we have today comes from a version by a Christian monk in the 15^th century, Iucundus of Verona, whose composition apparently was based on Tertullian’s assertions.

Great video! The Pliny the Younger section starts at 5:50

Jesus Has Left the Building, Part 3 (Tacitus, Suetonius, and Pliny)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlE89XULcrk

Pliny the Younger was a Roman politician who published nine books of his Letters.

His 10th book, contains letters 96 & 97 are the claimed evidence of jesus.

It’s worth noting that unlike the 247 letters Pliny himself prepared for publication in nine books, book 10, which contains the celebrated letters “96” and “97”, were published posthumously and anonymously.

Now, the facts are that no original manuscripts of his celebrated “96” and “97” letters have survived to our day!

All texts are based on a HEAVILY EDITED 15th Century printed texts by Avantius & Aldus made from a copy of a MSS that has since perished.

“It is surprising,” says Betty Radice (translator of the Penguin edition), “that no more letters were to be found in the imperial files or among Pliny’s personal papers to add to this record of the relations between one of the best of Rome’s Emperors and his devoted servant.”

On the other hand, Tertullian (c. 160-220 AD) discusses the letter and refers to Trajan’s reply in his Apology, chapter 2::

“ We find that even inquiry in regard to our case is forbidden. For the younger Pliny, when he was ruler of a province, having condemned some Christians to death, and driven some from their stedfastness, being still annoyed by their great numbers, at last sought the advice of Trajan, the reigning emperor …”

The letters were forgeries:

The letters were, first found by christians. Then the letters mysteriously vanished, so the Christian were conveniently able to rewrite them.

Many historians have dismissed these letters as later Christian forgeries, as it was not quoted by any of the early church fathers in all their attempts to supply evidence to support their religion’s history.

To make the letters even more unreliable, the actual text was purportedly discovered by a 15th century monk, Joannes Iucundus of Verona, then lost again a few years later. The texts used today claim to be copies made from his manuscript, whose composition apparently was based on Tertullian’s assertions.

Friar Giovanni Giocondo (ca. 1433 – 1515)

He was an Italian friar, architect, antiquary, archaeologist, and classical scholar. As a young priest, Friar Giovanni was a learned archaeologist and a superb draughtsman.

In 1498 Giocondo published Pliny’s Epistles in Bologna. He published another edition with Aldus Manutius’s press (1508), which he dedicated to King Louis XII.

The first, indeed almost the only, writer before modern times to have read them with care and to have signaled his admiration by imitation is Sidonius Apollinaris, bishop of Auvergne in the late fifth century.

Gaius Sollius (Modestus) Apollinaris Sidonius or Saint Sidonius Apollinaris (Born ??? died perhaps 430 -489 AD) was a poet, diplomat, and bishop.

In the Fourth century, however, Jerome also witnesses to others of the letters of Pliny, as does the Scholiast on Juvenal and Ausonius. Q. Aurelius Symmachus.

Supposedly, in the fifth century, Sidonius Apollinaris published his own letters in 9 books, and quotes Pliny in many places. This work has been “lost” too!

Books written about the letters:

‘The Fate of Pliny’s Letters in the Late Empire’ By: Alan Cameron - The Classical Quarterly New Series, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Nov., 1965), pp. 289-298 - Published by: Cambridge University Press

A.D.E.CAMERON, Pliny’s Letters in the Later Empire: An Addendum, Classical Quarterly, New Series 17 (1967), pp.421-422. Checked.

E.T.MERRILL, On the Eight-Book tradition of Pliny’s Letters in Verona, Classical Philology 5 (1910), pp.175-188.(Details from Mynors p.x n.1)

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/637924?uid=3739576&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21101123110777

Tertullian

Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, anglicised as Tertullian (160 –225 AD), was a prolific early Christian author from Carthage in the Roman province of Africa. He is the first Christian author to produce an extensive corpus of Latin Christian literature. He also was a notable early Christian apologist and a polemicist against heresy. Tertullian has been called “the father of Latin Christianity” and “the founder of Western theology.”

There is a full paraphrase of the famous letters 96 and 97 in Tertullian’s Apologeticum (“Defense”) in 197 AD.

Bishop J.B. Lightfoot, a Patristics Scholar who basically was the man responsible for the modern critical texts of the Apostolic Fathers, (because Tertullians version conflicted with his preconceived ideas and TRINITARIAN beliefs) actually took the liberty of changing the modern critical text!

This material appears in St. Jerome’s (Chron. s.a. 108) and Eusbius (HE 3.33.3) in the Fourth Century, but quoted from Tertullian.

Apologeticus or Apologeticum is Tertullian’s most famous work, consisting of apologetic and polemic; In this work Tertullian defends Christianity, demanding legal toleration and that Christians be treated as all other sects of the Roman Empire.

Here are the christian “Pliny” letters in full:

~Pliny’s Letter 96 to emperor Trajan:

It is my practice, my lord, to refer to you all matters concerning which I am in doubt. For who can better give guidance to my hesitation or inform my ignorance? I have never participated in trials of Christians. I therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what extent. And I have been not a little hesitant as to whether there should be any distinction on account of age or no difference between the very young and the more mature; whether pardon is to be granted for repentance, or, if a man has once been a Christian, it does him no good to have ceased to be one; whether the name itself, even without offenses, or only the offenses associated with the name are to be punished.

Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced to me as Christians, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to whether they were Christians; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed. For I had no doubt that, whatever the nature of their creed, stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy surely deserve to be punished. There were others possessed of the same folly; but because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to Rome.

Soon accusations spread, as usually happens, because of the proceedings going on, and several incidents occurred. An anonymous document was published containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ–none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do–these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.

They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food–but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.

I therefore postponed the investigation and hastened to consult you. For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting you, especially because of the number involved. For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.

~Trajan’s letter to Pliny the Younger:

You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it–that is, by worshiping our gods–even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.

Pliny’s Letter 97 to emperor Trajan:

It is my invariable rule, Sir, to refer to you in all matters where I feel doubtful; for who is more capable of removing my scruples, or informing my ignorance? Having never been present at any trials concerning those who profess Christianity, I am unacquainted not only with the nature of their crimes, or the measure of their punishment, but how far it is proper to enter into an examination concerning them. Whether, therefore, any difference is usually made with respect to ages, or no distinction is to be observed between the young and the adult; whether repentance entitles them to a pardon; or if a man has been once a Christian, it avails nothing to desist from his error; whether the very profession of Christianity, unattended with any criminal act, or only the crimes themselves inherent in the profession are punishable; on all these points I am in great doubt. In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have been brought before me as Christians is this: I asked them whether they were Christians; if they admitted it, I repeated the question twice, and threatened them with punishment; if they persisted, I ordered them to be at once punished: for I was persuaded, whatever their nature of the opinions might be, a contumacious and inflexible obstinacy certainly deserved correction. There were others also brought before me possessed with the same infatuation, but being Roman citizens, I directed them to be sent to Rome. But this crime spreading (as is usually the case) while it was actually under prosecution, several instances of the same nature occurred. An anonymous information was laid before me, containing a charge against several persons, who upon examination denied they were Christians, or had ever been so. They repeated after me an invocation to the gods, and offered religious rites with wine and incense before your statue (which for that purpose I had ordered to be brought, together with those of the gods), and even reviled the name of Christ: whereas there is no forcing, it is said those who are really Christians into any of these compliance: I thought it proper, therefore, to discharge them. Some among those who were accused by a witness in person at first confessed themselves Christians, but immediately after denied it – the rest owned indeed that they had been of that number formerly, but had now (some above three, others more, and a few above twenty years ago) renounced that error. They all worshiped your statue and the images of the gods, uttering imprecations at the same time against the name of Christ. They affirmed the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they met on a stated day before it was light, and addressed a form of prayer to Christ, as to a divinity, binding themselves by a solemn oath, not for the purposes of any wicked design, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble, to eat in common a harmless meal. From this custom, however, they desisted after the publication of my edict, by which, according to your commands, I forbade the meeting any assemblies. After receiving this account, I judged it so much the more necessary to endeavor to extort the real truth, by putting two female slaves to the torture, who were said to officiate in their religious rites: but all I could discover was evidence of an absurd and extravagant superstition. I deemed it expedient, therefore, to adjourn all further proceedings, in order to consult you. For it appears to be a matter highly deserving your consideration, more especially as great numbers must be involved in the danger of the prosecution, which have already extended, and are still likely to extend, to persons of all ranks and ages, and even of both sexes. In fact, this contagious superstition is not confined to the cities only, but has spread its infection among the neighboring villages and country. Nevertheless, it still seems possible once almost deserted, begin now to be frequented; and the sacred rites, after a long intermission are again revived; while there is general demand for the victims, which till lately found very few purchasers. From all this it is easy to conjecture what numbers might be reclaimed if a general pardon were granted to those who shall repent of their error.

Trajan’s reply:

You have adopted the right course in investigating the charges against the Christians who were brought before you. It is not possible to lay down any general rule for all such cases. Do not go out of your way to look for them. If indeed they should be brought before you, and the crime is proved, they must be punished; with the restriction, however, that where the party denies he is a Christian, and shall make it evident that he is not, by invoking our gods, let him (notwithstanding any former suspicion) be pardoned upon his repentance. Anonymous informations ought not to he received in any sort of prosecution. It is introducing a very dangerous precedent, and is quite foreign to the spirit of our age.

~Even if they weren’t forgeries:

The letters refer to the spread of christianity, 77 years after the supposed death of jesus, not to the historical accuracy of jesus as a person. As an aside, it is interesting that women officiated at the Christian rites.

Also, this is not a major issue for Pliny: it is among a series of letters to the Emperor raising minor administrative queries, like prize moneys for athletes and freedoms of the city.

Notice, the absence of the name Jesus. His mention is not of Jesus as a person, but of the group of Christians living in Bithynia.

The mention is that “Christians sing to Christ as a god.”

Well, don’t they? If he were to have said, “They sing to Apollos as a god,” would that lend any support to the historicity of Apollos?

The word “Christ” is a title. Pliny’s sentence could have referred to any of the other “christs” who were being followed by some Jews who thought they had found the messiah.

Pliny’s report is only of what other people believed. Even if this sentence does refer to a group who followed Jesus it is not particularly enlightening as no one denies that Christianity was in existence at that time. Pliny’s report might be useful in documenting the religion, but not the historic Jesus.

These letters mark the first time the Roman government recognized Christianity as a religion separate from Judaism.

~What other sites conclude:

“As you can see, this letter does nothing to establish the historical existence of Jesus, it merely talks about Pliny’s interrogation of Christians and the fact that some of them were willing to denounce Christ to avoid punishment. There is no attestation to the existence of Jesus here. This is no different than people who were later forced to denounce Zeus under the Christians, or similar such things. By all indications Pliny doesn’t even show here that Christ is regarded as a person, he states that Christ is treated as a god and that all he found of the religion was nothing but "depraved, excessive superstition.”

It should be noted that Trajan’s reply to Pliny stated that he was not to seek out Christians and that accusations against them be treated with care. He went on to warn that, “this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.”

http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/jesus_myth_history.htm

“If this letter be genuine, these nocturnal meetings were what no prudent government could allow; they fully justify the charges of Caecilius in Minutius Felix, of Celsus in Origen, and of Lucian, that the primitive Christians were a skulking, light-shunning, secret, mystical, freemasonry sort of confederation, against the general welfare and peace of society.

Taylor also comments that, at the time this letter was purportedly written, “Christians” were considered to be followers of the Greco-Egyptian god Serapis and that “the name of Christ [was] common to the whole rabblement of gods, kings, and priests.” Writing around 134 CE, Hadrian purportedly stated:

“The worshippers of Serapis are Christians, and those are devoted to the God Serapis, who call themselves the bishops of Christ. There is no ruler of a Jewish synagogue, no Samaritan, no Presbyter of the Christians, who is not either an astrologer, a soothsayer, or a minister to obscene pleasures. The very Patriarch himself, should he come into Egypt, would be required by some to worship Serapis, and by others to worship Christ. They have, however, but one God, and it is one and the self-same whom Christians, Jews and Gentiles alike adore, i.e., money.”

It is thus possible that the “Christos” or “Anointed” god Pliny’s “Christiani” were following was Serapis himself, the syncretic deity created by the priesthood in the third century BCE. In any case, this god “Christos” was not a man who had been crucified in Judea.

Moreover, like his earlier incarnation Osiris, Serapis—both popular gods in the Roman Empire—was called not only Christos but also “Chrestos,” centuries before the common era. Indeed, Osiris was styled “Chrestos,” centuries before his Jewish copycat Jesus was ever conceived….

In any event, the value of the Pliny letter as “evidence” of Christ’s existence is worthless, as it makes no mention of “Jesus of Nazareth,” nor does it refer to any event in his purported life. There is not even a clue in it that such a man existed. As Taylor remarks, “We have the name of Christ, and nothing else but the name, where the name of Apollo or Bacchus would have filled up the sense quite as well.”

Taylor then casts doubt on the authenticity of the letter as a whole, recounting the work of German critics, who “have maintained that this celebrated letter is another instance to be added to the long list of Christian forgeries…”

One of these German luminaries, Dr. Semler of Leipsic provided “nine arguments against its authenticity…” He also notes that the Pliny epistle is quite similar to that allegedly written by “Tiberianus, Governor of Syria” to Trajan, which has been universally denounced as a forgery.

Also, like the Testimonium Flavianum, Pliny’s letter is not quoted by any early Church father, including Justin Martyr. Tertullian briefly mentions its existence, noting that it refers to terrible persecutions of Christians.

However, the actual text used today comes from a version by a Christian monk in the 15th century, Iucundus of Verona, whose composition apparently was based on Tertullian’s assertions.

Concurring that the Pliny letter is suspicious, Drews terms “doubtful” Tertullian’s “supposed reference to it.”

Drews then names several authorities who likewise doubted its authenticity, “either as a whole or in material points,” including:

Semler, Aub, Havet, Hochart, Bruno Bauer and Edwin Johnson.

Citing the work of Hochart specifically, Drews pronounces Pliny’s letter “in all probability” a “later Christian forgery.” Even if it is genuine, Pliny’s letter is useless in determining any “historical” Jesus.

http://www.truthbeknown.com/pliny.htm

Non-Christian Testimony for Jesus? – From the authentic pen of lying Christian scribes ! http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html#pliny

The Usual Suspects

There is no doubt that Christians existed, from the early years of the second century certainly, and – as heretical Jews and under diverse names – up to a generation earlier. Belief in a Messiah (a ‘Christ’ in Greek) was endemic among the Jews after all.

But belief in a celestial Christ does not equate to belief in a flesh-and-blood 'Jesus of Nazareth’ – and when the 'heretical’ and 'gnostic’ views of early Christians are examined 'Jesus of Nazareth’ is noticeably absent. And to press the point, even a belief in a 'Jesus of Nazareth’ does not make him a reality – it is only the belief that is a reality.

None abashed, Christian apologists compound their suspect 'logic’ by recruiting notable pagans as witnesses, writers who were doing their best to faithfully report on a suspect cult. And as ever in the history of Christianity, in the hands of its scribes, forgery augments what the ancient writers actually wrote, the better to bring unbelievers to the One True Faith.

Pliny the Younger

Around 112 AD, in correspondence between Emperor Trajan and the provincial governor of Pontus/Bithynia, Pliny the Younger, reference is made to Christians for the first time. Pliny famously reports to his emperor:

Note that Pliny is relaying what those arrested said they believed (and there is no reference here to a 'Jesus.’)

Pliny had convened trials of Christians, not because of their beliefs but because he had 'forbidden political associations’ which he obviously suspected them of forming. He continues:

“Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.”

Some of those arrested recanted, worshiped the imperial image and state gods, and cursed Christ. But Pliny is uncertain how to proceed with numerous others in what he describes as a widespread 'contagion’ and asks Trajan for guidance. Trajan’s celebrated reply is:

“They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it – that is, by worshiping our gods – even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance.”

Pliny’s ignorance of Christians

Pliny was a lawyer in Rome before going to the east. He was only a child when the “persecution of Christians by Nero” supposedly took place but his guardian Verginius Rufus was a high-placed commander at the time, loyal to Nero. Following Nero’s suicide, Rufus actually declined an offer from the army of the Rhine to become emperor himself. Any “lurid massacre” of Christians, if it had taken place, could have been told to Pliny as a child – but in later life he recalls no such thing.

At the age of 17 Pliny inherited his uncle’s extensive estates after the elder Pliny died in the eruption of Vesuvius. Rich and talented, and with impeccable connections to the highest echelons of the Roman state, Pliny began a distinguished career. He served on the imperial staff in Syria, a centre – one is led to believe – of energetic Christian activity, but again it left no mark on Pliny.

Rising rapidly through the ranks of quaestor, tribune and praetor, while still in his thirties the bright young aristocrat was appointed state prosecutor at four major public trials of provincial governors. Such a career would have made any incumbent aware of “persecution” of Christians, if indeed there had ever been any such thing. But Pliny reports none of it.

Pliny survived the persecution of the Stoic opposition during the reign of Domitian (81-96). The emperor actually made him a senator, even though several of Pliny’s Stoic friends were executed. Subsequently Pliny went on to become consul, state priest, and finally, governor of Bithynia-Pontus.

Curious, is it not, that such a well-placed, well-educated Roman grandee, directly and intimately involved in the Roman judicial system at the highest levels, and a friend of historians Tacitus and Suetonius, should – in the second decade of the 2nd century – remain so ignorant of Christians and the persecution of them – unless, that is, they were nothing other than an obscure, and insignificant bunch of fanatics and the “persecution” is a fable?

“Having never been present at any trials concerning those persons who are Christians, I am unacquainted not only with the nature of their crimes, or the measure of their punishment, but how far it is proper to enter into an examination concerning them.”

Pagan Tolerance

The real value of this correspondence (the only example of its kind to survive the Christian dark age) is not that it is some 'proof’ of Jesus’s existence (which it manifestly is not) but evidence of the toleration of Roman jurisprudence in the 'golden age’ of the Empire. Says Trajan:

“But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.” – Trajan to Pliny, Letters 10.96-97.

Compare this ruling of the 'pagan’ Trajan in 113 AD with that of the Christian Inquisitors thirteen centuries later – for whom 'anonymous accusations’ and 'seeking out’ of heretics was the modus operandi!

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html#pliny

Although this passage mentions only Christ, it is virtually certain that this passage refers to Jesus. Given that everything Pliny claims to know about Christians is attributed to Christian sources (the recanters who reported what Christians really did, and the two deaconesses that he tortured to find out what the religion was about), it is extremely likely that Pliny was referring to the same “Christ” they would have spoken about: Jesus.

But even if the passage refers to Jesus, how does it provide independent confirmation of the historicity of Jesus? McDowell and Wilson argue the fact that Christians were willing to die for their beliefs is extremely unlikely unless there had been an historical Jesus. However, it is unlikely that all of these martyrs had firsthand knowledge of the historicity of Jesus since Pliny did not even become Governor of Bithynia until around 110. Furthermore, Pliny also stated that many people had renounced Christianity years before Pliny’s interrogation. Indeed, one could argue that some of the Christians who recanted under Pliny were the very ones with firsthand knowledge of the historicity of Jesus: they knew that their beliefs were false and not worth dying for! Although I think that explanation for their recanting is rather doubtful–we don’t know if any of the martyrs had firsthand knowledge of the historicity of Jesus–it is consistent with all of the evidence we have.

Christian historian Robert Wilken concludes, Pliny’s “knowledge of the new movement must have been slight and largely second-hand.” And France writes, “for our purposes, looking for evidence about Jesus, [Pliny’s letter] has nothing specific to offer. … Pliny seems to have discovered nothing about him as a historical figure.” Thus, Pliny’s letter cannot be used as independent confirmation of the historicity of Jesus.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/chap5.html

Trajan Conquers the East

'Wars & Rumours of Wars’ (Mark 13.7)

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/trajan.htm

Pliny purportedly wrote a letter in 110 CE to the Emperor Trajan requesting his assistance in determining the proper punishment for “Christiani” who were causing trouble and would not renounce “Christo” as their god or bow down to the image of the Emperor. These recalcitrant Christiani.

According to the Pliny’s letter, Christians gathered "together before daylight“ and sang ”hymns with responses to Christ as a god,“ binding themselves ”by a solemn institution, not to any wrong act.“

The value of the Pliny letter as ”Evidence“ of Christ’s existence is worthless, as it makes no mention of "Jesus of Nazareth,” nor does it makes any reference to anyEvent in his Alleged public life. There is not even a clue in it that such a man ever existed.

NOTE:- Pliny is just relaying what those arrested criminals said they believed and there is no reference here to a Jesus.

Pliny had convened trials of Christians because he suspected their forbidden “Political Association”. He continues:

“ I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.”

Unfortunately , such superstition still persists in the minds and hearts of Christians.

- Pliny the Younger was not born until 61 CE .

The “Belief of Others” is no Evidence. Early Christians are themselves presented as ”evidence.“ Thus the recorded beliefs of Church Fathers such as Ignatius, bishop of Antioch (50-115?), become the lynchpin of Roman Catholicism’s claim for world mastery.

- Pliny was a lawyer in Rome before going to the east. He was only a child when the "persecution of Christians by Nero” supposedly took place but his guardian Verginius Rufus .

- Rufus, following Nero’s suicide, actually declined an offer from the army of the Rhine to become emperor himself.

- Had any such Bogus “Massacre of Christians” taken place, Pilany would have been told as a child – but in later life he(Pilany) recalls no such thing.

- At the time this letter was purportedly written, “Christians” were considered to be followers of the Greco-Egyptian god Serapis and that “the name of Christ [was] common to the whole rabblement of gods, kings, and priests.”

Emperor Hadrian(134 CE) has made a very shocking revelation about earlier Christian beliefs :

“ The worshippers of Serapis are Christians, and those are devoted to the God Serapis, who call themselves the bishops of Christ. There is no ruler of a Jewish synagogue, no Samaritan, no Presbyter of the Christians, who is not either an astrologer, a soothsayer, or a minister to obscene pleasures. The very Patriarch himself, should he come into Egypt, would be required by some to worship Serapis, and by others to worship Christ. They have, however, but one God, and it is one and the self-same whom Christians, Jews and Gentiles alike adore, i.e., money.”

It is thus possible that the “Christos” of Pliny’s “Christiani” were following was Serapis himself, the deity which was created by the priesthood in the third century BCE. In any case, this god “Christos” was not a man who had been crucified in Judea.

Moreover, like Osiris ,Serapis also in the Roman Empire—was called not only Christos but also “Chrestos,” centuries before the common era. Indeed, it as no surprise that Jewish Scribers fashioned Jesus in Osiris and Serapis image centuries later.

- We have just the name of Christ, and nothing else but the name, one can also fill in the name of Goddess Isis and Baal etc. Again, that does’t mean that those Pagan gods/goddess are true. Do they?

- The actual text we have today comes from a version by a Christian monk in the 15^th century, Iucundus of Verona, whose composition apparently was based on Tertullian’s assertions.

- And we all know how Our Noble Chruch fathers used to apply Noble concepts like ‘Pious Fraud’.

http://robertmascharan.blogspot.com/2012/05/pliny-younger-and-mythical-jesus-cult.html

“Pliny the Younger, writing near 100 CE, corresponded regularly with the emperor Trajan. In these writings, Pliny specifically mentions and describes the beliefs and practices of Christians in Asia Minor, and asks Trajan’s advice about what action to take against them, if any. However, Pliny’s writings provide no independent confirmation of the events of the New Testament, but merely show that there were indeed Christians living in Asia Minor.” http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html

“His letter about the Christians only shows that he got his information from Christian believers themselves. Regardless, his birth date puts him out of range as an eyewitness account.” http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

“Pliny the Younger was a Roman official born in 62 CE. In one letter he said “Christians were singing a hymn to Christ as to a god …” That is all. In all of Pliny’s writings, we find one small tangential reference, and not even to Christ, but to Christians. Again, notice, the absence of the name Jesus. This could have referred to any of the other "christs” who were being followed by some Jews who thought they had found the messiah.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_for_the_historical_existence_of_Jesus_Christ#Pliny_the_Younger

“Pliny’s writings provide no independent confirmation of the events of the New Testament, but merely show that there were indeed Christians living in Asia Minor.” http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

“… says nothing about a recent historical man, let alone biographical elements. "Christ,” perhaps a reference to the Jewish Messiah idea, is simply identified as a god in Christian worship.” http://www.jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/postscpt.htm

Our related blog:

Christian Apologist “Secular Source Evidence” for Historical jesus #4: Phlegon

http://tmblr.co/ZkpfQtaOoHyF