Porphyry

The following excerpts are taken from the introduction and epilogue of Joseph Hoffman’s book, Porphyry’s Against the Christians. Ellipsis omitted between unquoted passages:


wanderer
Persecution is a slippery term in the annals of the early church. An older generation of church historians, using the martyrologies and writings of the church fathers as their sources, believed that the era from Nero to Constantine was one of almost unremitting slaughter of professing Christians. Their opinion was enfeebled somewhat by the certainty that the Romans could have tried a “final solution” to the Christian problem much earlier, if they had wanted, and the fact that along with boasting of their many martyrs, church writers like Origen also bragged that rich folk, high officials, elegant ladies, and illuminati were entering the church in great numbers. The pagan writers tried to counter this trend in their insistence that Christianity was really a religion for the lazy, the ignorant and superstitious, and the lowborn—“women, yokels and children,” Celsus had sneered. But the ploy was ineffective. Diocletian’s persecutions revealed that Christianity had crept into the emperor’s bedroom: his wife, his daughter, their servants, the treasury official Audactus, the eunuch Dorotheus, even the director of the purple dye factory in Tyre, were Christians or Christian sympathizers. Insulting the new converts did not stop the process of conversion. The political solution of the third century, therefore, was an attempt to scare people off—to make being a Christian an expensive proposition. Persecution was the strong-arm alternative to failed polemical tactics by the likes of Celsus, Porphyry and Hierocles.

In 250 Decius decreed simply that Christians would be required to sacrifice to the gods of Rome by offering wine and eating sacrificial meat. Those who refused would be sentenced to death. To avoid this punishment, well-to-do Christians seem to have given up this new religion in substantial numbers, becoming in the eyes of the faithful “apostates,” a new designation derived from the Greek word revolt. The apostates also numbered many bishops, including the bishop of the important region of Smyrna, as well as Jewish Christians who rejoined the synagogue, as Judaism was not encompassed in the Decian order.

In the reign of Valerian (253-260) the focus shifted from the practice of the Christian faith to the church’s ownership of property. In August 257, Valerian targeted the wealth of the clergy and in 258 the riches of prominent Christian lay persons. The tactic was obviously intended to make upper-crust Romans think twice before throwing their wealth in the direction of the “beggar priests” as Porphyry called them.

On 31 March 297, under the emperor Diocletian, the Manichean religion was outlawed. Like Christianity it was an “import” of dubious vintage. More particularly, it was Persian, and Rome was at war with Persia. Holy books and priests were seized and burned without much ado. Professing members of the cult were put to death without trial. The most prominent Roman Manicheans (the so-called honestiores) were spared, but their property was confiscated and they were sent to work in the mines. The process against the Manicheans boded worse things to come for the Christians.

Diocletian published his first decree against the Christians in February 303. The edict to stamp out (“terminate”) the Christian religion was issued. Diocletian had hoped to cripple the movement. Termination would have meant extermination. But the survival tactics of the movement made police work difficult. Christians had become sly. The enthusiasm of martyrdom was now paralleled by accomplished doubletalk.

Executions increased, especially after rumors reached Galerius that plots against the throne were being fomented in Christian circles. New edicts were issued with regularity, each a little more severe than the one before. The fourth edict (304) required that all the people of a city must sacrifice and offer libations to the gods “as a body,” Christians included. Diocletian abdicated, in declining health. Galerius issued an edict of toleration.

Maximinus Daia, who had an active retaining program in place, designed to reeducate lapsed Christians in their pagan heritage. But the life was going out of the movement to repress Christianity. The pagan critics had not succeeded in stemming the popularity of the movement, and the “persecuting” emperors (except perhaps Diocletian himself) had miscalculated both the numbers and the determination of the faithful. The movement was Rome’s Vietnam, a slow war of attrition which had been fought to stop a multiform enemy. Even at their worst under Diocletian, the persecutions had been selective and, in their intense form, short-lived. And (as has been known since the seventeenth century) the number of martyrs was not great.

The goal of the fourth edict against the Christians in 304, in fact, had been to compel loyalty to unpopular rulers, and in 308 the greatly detested Maximinus tried the same tactic, “to offer sacrifices and wine-offerings.” The tactic was ineffectual, Eusebius says, because even the enforcers had lost their heart to impose the penalties and to support the machinery required for the “sacrifice factories” Maximinus tried to set up.

Unhappy with this failure, he sponsored a literary attack, circulating forged gospels and memoirs containing the stock slanders against Jesus. These were posted in public gathering-places and schoolteachers were required to assign portions of them to children as lessons. To substantiate charges against the moral habits of the Christians, Maximinus then hired agents (duces) to round up prostitutes from the marketplace in Damascus. Tortured until they confessed to being Christians, they then signed statements to the effect that the churches routinely practiced ritual prostitution and required members to participate in sexually depraved acts. These statements were also distributed to the towns and cities for public display.

Desperate times, desperate men, desperate measures.

By the time Galerius issued his edict of toleration in favor of the Christians on 30 April 311 three waves of attack had failed: the erratic policies of emperors Nero and Marcus Aurelius; the literary and philosophical attacks, carried on in collusion with imperial sponsors; and the more sustained persecutions of the third century, ending in 311. Paganism was dying. Maximinus’ plan for “reeducating” Christians in the religion of their ancestors had failed.

After Constantine’s conversion—whatever it may have been—only Julian (332-363), his nephew, remained to pick up the baton for the pagan cause. Julian did his best to reestablish the old order. He reorganized the shrines and temples; outlawed the teachings of Christian doctrine in the schools, retracted the legal and financial privileges which the Christians had been accumulating since the early fourth century; wrote polemical treaties against the Christians himself, and—in a clever political maneuver—permitted exiled bishops to return to their sees to encourage power-struggles and dissention within the church. Naturally, the Christians despised him. The distinguished theologian Gregory of Nazianzus had been Julian’s schoolmate in Athens, where both learned a love for the classical writers (but where Julian had been converted to Greek humanism). Cyril of Alexandria wrote a long refutation of Julian’s Adversus Christianos (Against the Christians), parts of which hark back to Porphyry and Hierocles. All in all, this pagan interlude—never really a renaissance—lasted only three years, until Julian’s death in June 363.

In the middle of this period we have just described stands Porphyry of Tyre. Born in 232, Porphyry was eighteen when the persecution broke out under emperor Decius. Twelve years later, his dislike for Christianity was firmly established. Porphyry had heard Origen preach, studied the Hebrew scripture, especially the prophets, and the Christian gospels, and found them lacking in literary quality and philosophical sophistication. He had joined a “school” in Rome (ca. 262) run by the famous neoplatonic teacher, Plotinus, where he remained until about 270. In Sicily, following Plotinus’ death, and back again to Rome, Porphyry developed an intense dislike of popular religion—or superstition, as the Roman intellectuals of his circle preferred to call it, regarding Christianity as the most pernicious form of a disease infecting the empire. In a work titled Pros Anebo he pointed out the defects in the cults. Then he tackled Christian teaching in a work. Popular under the rescript of Galerius in 311, the work was targeted for destruction by the imperial church, which in 448 condemned all existing copies to be burned.

The first thing to say about Porphyry’s fifteen books against the Christians is that they are lost. The exact title is not known, and its popular title, Kata Christianon, can be dated securely only from the Middle Ages. Opinions radically differ over the question whether the books can be substantially restored. A few facts can be stated succinctly, however. First, the church was unusually successful in its efforts to eradicate all traces of Kata Christianon from at least 448. Not only were Porphyry’s books destroyed, but many of the works of Christian writers incorporating sections of Porphyry’s polemic were burned in order to eliminate what one critic, the bishop Apollinarius, called “poison of his thought.”

Second, the ninety-seven fragments gathered by Harnack, half of which were taken from the fourth-century writer Macarius Magnes, are enough—if barely enough—to give us shape of Porphyry’s critique. That Macarius does not name his opponent and sometimes seems to characterize rather than quote his opinions could easily be explained as a strategic decision by a Christian teacher who wished his defense to survive. Naming his adversary—or quoting him too precisely—would have almost certainly guaranteed the burning of Macarius’ defense. Put appositely, anyone wishing to write a defense of the faith in the fourth or fifth century would have been foolhardy to identify the enemy as Porphyry.

[Third], I think we owe it to Porphyry and his “interpreters” to permit them speak to us directly. Having been buried—more or less successfully—since 448, the words should be permitted to breathe their own air.

7 Replies on “Porphyry

  1. I took the trouble of typing these excerpts directly from Hoffmann’s book of Porphyry’s literary remains. Take it as an invitation to purchase a copy and enjoy a work that, we can surmise, reflects “the master mind of Porphyry.”

  2. “A Final Solution to the Christian Problem.”
    “Diocletian’s persecutions revealed that Christianity had crept into the Emperor’s bedroom…..” an astute observation indeed for the lazy historian/s who peddle the sewage of the “patrons of the Synagogue” with the language of the Hollow Hoax: The “Final Solution” of the Christian Problem.
    The joo SYPHILIZATION of European Christian history as: “The Final Solution of the Christian Problem,” is the absolute confirmation that the pedlars of joo sewage will harness the white Aryans as:”The Dupes of Judah” to destroy what the joos have tried to destroy for two thousand years: Western Christianity.
    So-clled Christian persecution was, as this page shows, a function of the Roman State and the Roman Emperor in order to forcibly unify a crumbling Roman Empire.
    What could not be achieved through Roman military force, was ultimately achieved through “spiritual” force by sanction of the Roman Emperor as Emperor and Pontifex Maximus (Pontiff and High Priest of Rome.)
    Please try to understand if you can,(is that possible?) that so-called Catholic Christian Persecution was a function of the will of the Pontifex Maximus who to this very day holds the title “Emperor” as well as “Pontiff” and is officially recognised by Roman Canon Law as: “Pontifex Maximus” and according to Roman Law the entire world is subject to: “Pontifex Maximus.”
    Don”t waste your time deconstructing Christianity in the blind hope that you can explain away Western Christianity as the sole cause of all of the ills and problems of humanity for two thousand years, because if you do you simply reduce your apparently intellectual discourse to the level of intellectual excrement at worst, and to a glorified knocking shop at best.
    What faults you are trying find in Christianity you will find in every religion on the planet with the possible exception of Buddhism, which can demonstrate 2000+ years of non-violence in Buddhist practice.
    I posited a question: “Hitler on Christianity”, “Nietzsche on Christianity,”
    “Porphyry on Christianity,” “Uncle Tom Cobbley and all on Christianity.”
    “But what is Christianity? (ihs) is Christianity, but what is (ihs)?
    If you can answer this riddle you have cracked the secret of the universe. Any takers?
    P.S. If you cant tolerate Christianity, convert to Buddhism and find spiritual peace.
    Saintclair

    1. Saintclair,

      The imperial Church burnt the work of the best minds of the Roman Empire who dared to question Church dogma—and even the work of Christian apologists who quoted the Roman intellectuals in their (vain) efforts to refute them!

      Not only the work of these Roman intellectuals is gone. Theodosius ordered to raze the temples to Apollo, Jupiter, Venus, Mithras and other Gods in order to force the Christian conversion of all citizens of the Empire.

      Such unprecedented destruction of classical culture—my culture (my real name is Cesar)—led some philosophers label these historical happenings as a self-inflicted lobotomy which dragged our civilization straight into the Dark Ages.

      If you don’t want to see that there’s indeed a Christian problem after these revelations I’ll have nothing else to tell you (your above question only mystifies the problem). In fact, the above one is your last comment in this blog. I have neither time nor the patience to argue with someone who’s not addressing the main issues: that the Christian axiology of equality and universalism, albeit transformed into a secular, French revolutionary meta-ethics, is behind the (momentous) emancipation of the Jews in the late 18th century.

      And I find it downright paranoid your blaming of the joos for what the Christian emperors did long before that, 1600 years ago, at Rome (“The Final Solution of the Christian Problem” is the absolute confirmation that the pedlars of joo…)

      As I have said before, fuck Christianity. And, incidentally, I despise all other religions and cults too, Judaism and Buddhism included.

      1. Cesar,
        You should spend more time studying the Law of Transmutation in Astrology which decrees that every 2000 or so years a new order of the Zodiac replaces the old, just as the Piscean Age (Sign of the Fish) replaced the previous age, so the Aquarian Age will replace the Piscean Age and usher in a new age of Astrological change.
        It is called The Immutable Law of Transmutation.
        In Astrology, the Zodiac is a circle of twelve 30 degree divisions of celestial longtitude that are centered upon the eliptic: the apparent path of the Sun across the celestial sphere over the course of the year.
        You say: “Such unprecedented destruction of clasasical culture – my culture – led some philosophers to label these historcal happenings as a self-inflicted lobotomy which dragged our civilization into the Dark Ages.”
        All civilizations inflict a Dark Age their culture – witness the Greek Dorian Dark Age which usurped the Athenian Golden Age of the Goddess Athena and imposed the Dorian Patriarchy and religion of Zeus worship. Matriarchy, Goddess worship, was ultimately replaced by Patriarchy. The Immutable Law of Transmutation upsets all values – it is Divine Law whether you like it or not.
        As for the emancipation of the joos in the 18th century, I refer you to the brilliant book: “The Hidden Hand” by Count Cherep Spiridovich  who was unquestionably the foremost authority on the intrigues and machinations of the joos, especially the rise of: The House of Rothschild (Red Shield) and the carnage that has been inflicted on Western Europe in the name of Rothschild (Red Shield) for the creation of IZRAHELL.
        Read the history of Soviet Bolshevik Communist Russia and the physical extermination of an estimated 66 million Aryan Eastern Europeans in the name of Rothschild, and the destruction of millions of Aryan Europeans in two world wars for the creation of IZRAHELL before you try to convince me that the emancipation of the joos was a (momentous) civilizing influence of Western Europe.
        I also suggest you read: “Deadlier Than the H Bomb” by Eustice Mullins (an American) who spent much of his life trying to educate ignorant Americans to the joo agenda for the destruction of the Aryan races by joo SYPHILIZATION.
        Your response clearly demonstrates that you are a NIHILIST after the manner of: MARX, ENGELS, TROTSKY, LENIN, STALIN,
        ALL JOOS, AND THAT YOU ARE A WILLING OR UNSUSPECTING VICTIM OF JOO AMERICAN SYPHILIZATION WHETHER YOU REALISE IT OR NOT.
        By the way, this is positively my last response, period.

        Saintclair
                

      2. So I must study astrology? And my pointing out that the Christian axiology of universalism and egalitarianism is noxious for our civilization makes me Jew-like and not the other way around (transvaluating values to our pre-Judeochristian, pagan culture will free ourselves from suicidal liberalism)? If your position is common in the white movement that’s why we must be in such a good shape!

  3. Pingback: PostGygaxian