Starting with the high prelates, all the Vatican exegetes fear debate with Emilio Salsi on Christian mythology. Here is the correspondence

Brief premise

Whoever carries out historical research, concerning the events of men who brought about the rise of the power of Ancient Rome and its consolidation as an empire which lasted over five hundred years, is aware that the narration of such incidents was transcribed in the Middle Ages within codexes drawn up by Christian scribes inside ancient abbacies equipped with a special scriptorium.
We can thank these ancient scribes if today we have the possibility to know about and preserve in our memories the wars, the names of leaders and the private lives of the most famous protagonists, despite the fact we are dealing with the distant past.
Nevertheless, although the copyists were careful not to lose the knowledge of such remote times, the fact that they have prevented us from accessing all handwritten scrolls and original codexes drawn up by the numerous imperial chroniclers from a highly organized state like that of the Romans is something which has led many experts of classical literature to believe that such documents were deliberately destroyed by the Christian clergy so as to eliminate, by means of targeted censorship, proof capable of undermining the reliability of the primitive Church and its subsequent "Tradition".

Nevertheless, every researcher of classical times is well aware that the ancient vestiges and archeological remains (still underway) continue to confirm the truthfulness of the accounts - which have reached us thanks to the copyists - lacking the passages wich deal with dawning first century Christianity.
Rome has not only left us with the ruins of its ancient splendour, but also epigraphs, engraved bronze laminae, inscriptions, history carved into stone and monuments. In order to carry out in depth research on the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (CIL) located in museums throughout Europe and beyond, there are specialists who dedicate their whole life to such endeavours. The masterpiece by Cornelius Tacitus, divided into thirty scrolls (each of which made up a book) by its calligraphers, was passed on to us thanks to two missing manuscripts from several books: the Codex Mediceus I (Laurentianus 68 prior) and the Codex Mediceus II (Laurentianus 68 secundus) transcribed for the first time, as far as we know, through one or more copies of archetypes a thousand years after the death of the famous historian. Forced to search for testimonies regarding Christ and his prodigous Apostles, Saint Jerome did not limt himself to counting the scrolls of Tacitus which described in great detail the events of the first century but, after reading them, his only urge was to translate the Gospels in to Latin at the end of the fourth century. While the ecclesiastical successors of Jerome had no problem preserving the New Testament documents in their entirety, this did not occur with regard to Tacitus's chronicles; in fact, as proof of the non-fulfilment of the scribes who censored the texts, over two hunderd years prior to the writings of Tacitus, the Essenes began to draw up the Dead Sea Scrolls which have reached us without undergoing any sort of preservation process.

The same goes for the entire work of Josephus Flavius (the most important for the Christians), written by him in Aramaic and Greek, lacking in the testimony about the period corresponding to the first century early Christian era narrated in books XVIII to XX of "Jewish Antiquities", completed under the reign of Domitian, and which have reached us in Greek and Latin.
The most ancient Greek text, the "Codex Palatinus MS 14" (written on a scroll) from the Vatican Library, paleographically dated to the tenth century and containing, originally, books XI to XX of "Jewish Antiquities" plus "Bios" (Life), "lacks", coincidentally, three books: XVIII, XIX and XX related to the time of Jesus and his successors. Nor will we ever know the total original content of these three books; while among the manuscripts of the Critical Apparatus (written in Greek) used by Benedikt Niese, considered to be valid this very day, the Codexes containing books XVIII, XIX and XX date back to a later period.  In particular book XVIII, dealing with the historical period corresponding to that of Jesus, has undergone major cuts, demonstrable through a specific study, thus creating a void in history which, however, can be filled for the most part thanks to comparative research on authors like Philo of Alexandria, Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio. Being that the knowledge of the land of Christ and Jewish traditions was fundamental for the Christians, the reading of Jospehus Flavius was indispensable for its Leaders from the very beginnning, therefore the dating of the Codex Palatinus and the suppression of the three specific books demonstrates the the Church's desire to subsequently modify the Codexes before publicizing them: such a fulfillment was carried out through purification and by inserting variants into the texts, but in an irregular manner and at different times. We find books written by the Jewish historian containing partial censorships dating back to the Renaissance when cultured humanists, specifically appointed by Bishops, translated Greek codexes and published them in Latin but with differing information.

The dissimilarity which distinguishes the many Christian Gospels - apocryphal, gnostic and pseudo - in comparison to the four canonical Gospels, can be seen not only in the depiction of the divinity of the Saviour but, above all, in the abundance of historical details, deliberately inserted, but totally absent in the others.
A possibility which materialized when the Christian authorities were given free access to state archives, in the fourth century, thanks to widespread popularity of the religion of the salvation for eternal life, which got underway during the previous century when the Empire's military crisis was interpreted by its subjects as sign of the failure of the Capitoline gods to defend the glory of Rome. By availing themselves of the forgery of history, the aim of the Christian leaders was tom demonstrate to humanity that that the new universal Saviour had truly lived. Proof of this can be found in the dating of the "Codex Vaticanus Graece 1209", whose first draft dates back to the fourth century, confirmed by the Codex Sinaiticus, also dating back to the fourth century, and by the Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis, drawn up half a century later.

Yet such expedients will not allow he creators of the new myth to safeguard its truthfulness forever. The modification of historical events or their reinterpretation, so as to throw off both believers and experts carrying out research, will reveal itself to be much more difficult than it must have seemed to the early forgers who limited themselves to a superficial reading of the events.
In fact the same historical information, passed on by the copyists and analyzed through a critical comparative reading of all the sources, along with archeological finds, have allowed us to the definitive demolition of the legendary universal "Saviour".
Obviously, the first to be aware of the alterations of history, with regard to the literature of the entire Christian "tradition", were the scribes of the New Testament who succeeded one another through the centuries. The ecclesiastical exegetes' need  to intervene and correct the mistakes made by the scribes in the distant past when compiling the New Testament and patristic documents is totally evident, as can be seen in our analyses from the "Nativity" onwards.

The prelates of the High Clergy know, and have always known, that the detailed narration of the evangelical protagonists and  their successors is something invented, created by the Fathers who devised the new Creed in order to reap the benefits deriving from the political power acquired thanks to the popularity congenial to the promise of resurrection after death.
They knew at that time and they know it today but, as specialists of comparative christology, have understood that we now have the proof which demonstrates the truth and, at the same time, inform their followers that the biblicists of the Church have always been aware of the deceit. Cornered by the lucid impartiality of History, today's ecclesiastical exegetes can no longer afford to carry out with impunity a debate, focused on the existence of Christ and the patristic apostolic "tradition", during which the inexistence of the mythological heroes of Jesuit Christianity ... and their respective relics is publicly verified. They are aware that, once the  "Jesus enigma" has been clarified, the implausible "trial against Jesus" would turn into a real "trial against the Church"; therefore, rather than come down their pulpits and carry out a public debate on the historical Christ, the "Ministers of God2 of the Vatican would prefer to go and convert to Christian idolatry those who are dying of hunger in the Horn of Africa: read in order to verify ...

Emilio Salsi

In November 2007, Giancarlo Tranfo and I, two almost unknown yet keen biblicists - aware that the program "La Storia siamo noi" broadcast on the Italian State education channel Rai Edu 2, directed by Dr. Giovanni Minoli, was about to air on all the Rai state networks the usual and awkward "Inchiesta su Jesus" ("Inquiry on Jesus"), started in 2004 - accepting the invitation given every time during the program by the presenter, the "vaticanist" Andrea Tornielli, we submitted a precise request for a public debate. Our request was ignored and the ridiculous "inquiry" was broadcast regularly.
The following year, in November 2008, aware that the State TV was about to show from the usual television pulpits the same shoddy "inquiry" useful for the evangelization of the incompetent, we sent a second letter via certified mail but ... this time, Tranfo and I we had both published a paper dealing with the specific matter. Therfore we could no longer be ignored. Here is the letter written in Italian translated into English:

Registered Mail                                                                                                                                    15 November 2008

Dr. Giovanni Minoli -
Rai Educational - Redazione La Storia Siamo Noi
via Ettore Romagnoli 30 Palazzina A
00134 Rome

Object: Request for a public debate on the topic Gospels and Origins of Christianity following the Rai program "Inquiry on Jesus".

As of December 2004, Rai Edu 2 has periodically aired, on all the RAI television networks, for the series "La storia siamo noi", the broadcast "Inquiry on Jesus" presented by Giovanni Minoli along with the vaticanist Andrea Tornielli. This "inquiry", passed off as historical and journalistic, comes to the conclusion that Jesus Christ truly existed and it is textually affirmed that " the last two centuries over a hundred books by experts have fiercely rejected (sic!) that Jesus of Nazareth ever existed".

Having observed:

that this broadcast prevented experts of christology compared to history from asserting their position based on a critical analysis of both the events narrated in the Gospels and the falsifications of the testimonies of first century writers which have reached us through the scribes;

that at the end of the program adverse historians were asked to come forward and offer proof contradicting the "Inquiry on Jesus", we thus, Emilio Salsi and Giancarlo Tranfo, after carrying out a longstanding investigation and in depth studies on the holy texts by comparing them to the historiography of the period, we decided to honour the reiterated invitation given by the RAI and, in November 2007, by means of Registered Mail, expressed our willingness to contest the true existence of Jesus Christ through a debate on live television with the historians of the Church represented by the priest Gian Franco Ravasi and Mr Vittorio Messori;

that the RAI, ignoring our willingness, during the Christmas period rebroadcast the same program and asked historians once again to "prove the contrary", making it seem as though no historian was capable of contesting the advent of the divine Messiah, the "Holy Family" and the Apostles, thereby deceiving spectators with this subterfuge.

Having said this, the undersigned, publicly renew their willingness to carry out a debate on live television with the above-mentioned experts of the Catholic Church, concerning the veracity of both "inquiry" and the Gospels, by means of the present letter.

Considering that the RAI is the principal media of mass information for the Italian state and all its citizens, we deem it necessary for the management to guarantee the utmost rigour with regard to the veracity of the facts raised and of the historical information having an impact on life, and to the cultural and social choices of each one of us and of our country as a whole.
This letter will be published and propogated.

Yours sincerely,
Emilio Salsi and Giancarlo Tranfo

As disclosed in the letter, the content was published and several readers, admirers of my analyses concerning the lack of historicity of Jesus Christ, wrote and phoned Giovanni Minoli asking him to organize a debate. Yet, in spite of this, the RAI has continued to remain silent but ... it has taken a very important decision: the Christmas program "Inquiry on Jesus" has not been broadcast. And never again.
Inevitably. the question we, Giancarlo and I, have asked ourselves is the following: after receiving, a letter via registered mail - through we which specifically asked for a television debate with Church exegete Gianfranco Ravasi and Mr Vittorio Messori, both famous historians of Christianity - did the Director of Rai Edu 2 deem it necessary to contact and inform these gentlemen or did he simply make the decision on his own? Before answering this question one must skim the following documents.

In January 2009, the Italian TV network ETV based in Como Italy, after covering travel and accomodation expenses, invited to the program entitled "30 Denari" Mr Luigi Cascioli, another critic of the existence of Christ, to carry out a discussion with with the priest and exegete don Agostino Clerici. The debate ended with a clear prevalence, accompanied by a good deal of arrogance, in favour of the "Minister of God", and the television program, also broadcast on Youtube, was reshown on clerical and secular websites. Within the "forums" believers belittled atheists, some of whom, refusing to remain with "their tail between their legs", reacted in an agitated manner. But after a short time the footage disappeared from all websites, first and foremost the ecclesiastical ones. In this case the reason "advising" the Church to take a decision that might appear self-defeating is not even addressed, as it is simple to understand ... being aware of what followed.
The studies in the true existence of the Jewish Saviour and Messiah have obligated me to communicate the results and, at the same time, confront the exegetes of the Church on the only terrain possible: that of history. Due to my personality, my education and my strict lifestyle in the airforce, I would have never allowed myself to criticize the religion of my country if this Creed was not in contrast with the authentic events, opportunely falsified, whose protagonists were are our distant ancestors. This is the reason which prompted me to carry out an in depth investigation on Jewish Messianism, the results of which are reported in the present website.

On 17 March 2009 I sent Professor Mauro Pesce, at the University of Bologna, the first analysis concerning the inexistence of the Apostles: two days letter he replied in a flattering manner ... but we we will come back to this correspondence in a short while.
In late June 2009 the editorial staff of Teletibur. a local TV station located in Tivoli just outside Rome, asked me to carry out a debate with the exegetical prelate don Silvio Barbaglia, author of the criticism towards the theories of Luigi Cascioli published in his blog "La Nuova Regaldi" (based in Novara), an association of young students and workers, catechized perfectly by the clever "shepherd of lost lamb". On July I communicated my willingness to take part in a discussion but, ten days later, the editorial staff informed me that the priest had changed his mind: don Barbaglia, after reading the book and the website, decided that ita was "advisable" to avoid such a debate. In addition, he even had the confutation of Cascioli's "The fable of Cascioli" "disappear" from his blog and adopted the strategy of "sinking" his own study by hiding it in the most isolated creases of his website. The priest gave no explanation, but the reason was (and is) clear: if he had left "The fable of Cascioli" in full view he would have been forced to contest ex novo the "The fable of Emilio Salsi". Such a confutation would still possible but ... how could Barbaglia then avoid a debate?

On 20 March the editorial staff of the TV channel Teletibur organized a debate at its headquarters in Tivoli between myself and the priest Gianluigi Pasquale, Headmaster of the "Studio Teologico Laurentianum" in Venice and Professor at the "FacoltÓ di Sacra Teologia della Pontificia UniversitÓ Lateranense" and at the "Studium Generale Marcianum" in Venice. The learned priest, an authentic believer (I know how to distinguish the true believer from a fake), was distraught after roughly two hours of comparisons between Gospels and history and had no idea how to get himself out of the mess. Being an expert in Pauline exegesis, towards the end he tried to play the "Saint Paul" card: he should never have done so! I seized the moment and invited the priest to take part in another discussion on the existence of the super Apostle.The prelate publicly accepted to take part in the debate to be held in the studio of the same TV network; the prelate and I, through a series of emails, agreed to hold the discussion on 3 June 2010, but ... shortly before this date, without warning me, he informed the editorial staff that he was unable to participate. He also had read my study on Paul of Tarsus, printed on the website, and he decided that it was better to desist.
After a couple of months, the Teletibur presenter phoned and asked me to remove the footage of the debate with the priest from my website otherwise he was going to be fired. I immediately called Gianluigi Pasquale who confirmed the need to remove the footage as his career was also at risk. What had happened was that in the Youtube forum misbelievers were making fun of practicing Catholics and the latter were so frustratedthat they decided to go to the Bishop of Tivoli in order to accuse the priest of incompetence. The only possible solution was to remove the Tv debate from my website so as to avoid damaging a priest and a journalist.

After over ten years of full-time studies, by now resigned to the fact that no Church exegete would have the courage to carry out a debate with me, I realized that I still had a little score to settle: don Agostino Clerici. How could the pugnacious priest shy away from a TV discussion when having no hesitation whatsoever in inviting Luigi Cascioli, who then "got a dressing-down", to take part in the program "30 Denari?" ("30 Pieces of Silver?") at ETV located in Como (near Milan). The title of the program, which refers to the reward given to "Judas the Traitor", is enough to understand ETV's inclinations: let's see.
Here is the letter written in Italian translated into English:

                                                                                                                                                        25 May 2012
Salsi Emilio
Via xxx
                                                         Registered Mail to                                 Priest Agostino Clerici
                                                                                                                          Parish of Ponzate
                                                                                                         Via M Grappa, 5 - 22038 Tavernerio (CO)

                                                         Registered Mail to                          Editorial Staff of Espansione srl TV (ETV)
                                                                                                                  Via Sant'Abbondio 4 - 22100 Como

Object: Request for a live television debate with Priest Agostino Clerici regarding the historicity of Jesus Christ

Dear Priest, my name is Emilo Salsi, I am an atheist who for years has been involved in critical philological research on the Bible and the patristic texts and whose aim it is to compare the events in the Holy Scriptures with their respective historical and archeological testimonies so as to verify the veracity of the protagonists of Christian mythology: Jesus, Mary, Apostles, Fathers, Disciples and Martyrs.
I have published the results of my studies on the website "Gospels and History", now entitled "Christ: an invented myth. Here is the proof" ("Historiological demonstrations" to the right on the Homepage), through which I have demonstrated the inexistence of the Advent of Jesus and his followers, placed, according to believers in the first century A.D. Studies that you, like anyone else, can freely view, and whose results rebut the testimonies of Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Plinius the Younger and Suetonius that have reached us through manuscripts drawn up, from the late Middle Ages, by pious scribes and lying in the libraries of Abbacies or which came from these during the pre-Enlightenment era.
By consulting your blog I recognize you as being a man of the Church who has not limited himself to just wearing his parish priest cassock, to directing a weekly diocese periodical and to writing books, but has carried out in depth studies which have gone beyond the fideist "facade" through the examination of texts attributed to the early "Fathers of the Church". Knowledge which gives you great honour and, at the same time, is useful to the daily "spreading of the word" capable of rebutting the theories of misbelievers who do not recognize the historicity of Jesus.
I am one of these people. In fact my "creed", far from that of animism, consists in going into the substance of New Testament testimonies and searching for historical evidence to support the imaginary evangelical protagonists who the "Fathers" of Christianity, from the "Nativity" onwards, had interact with famous people who really existed: my "creed" is based solely on incontrovertible facts.
In essence critical research sides with Luigi Cascioli, the elderly man (now deceased) who you challenged in the TV debate "30 denari" ("30 pieces of silver"), held in Como three years ago at the ETV television station headquarters, and whose editorial staff I solicited for the spread of historical knowledge and culture.
Aware of the importance and resulting interest of those citizens who wish to examine in depth the true events which gave birth to Christianity, I count on your spiritual fervour - being it your duty, as a "Minister of God" and His exegete, to defend the credibility of the Holy Scriptures, the real "Constitution" for Christians - and ask you to communicate the date of our live debate at the ETV television station. Yours sincerely                                  

                                                                         Emilio Salsi

I received the return receipt signed by don Agostino Clerici and the one signed by the ETV official .... and nothing else: absolute silence. The coherence between the priest and the Como ETV station, which should be responsible for guaranteeing public information, is shocking. A conspiracy of silence based on criteria of mutual opportunism, even if it jeopardizes culture and knowledge, right which belongs to every single person. The priest's "chamaleon" behaviour unveils the wretchedness of his character: aggressive when aware that he is the strongest, fearful when on the losing side; therefore, as in this case, he prefers to hide in the shadows.

Therefore I decided to write to the world's top Catholic exegete: Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi.

Salsi Emilio                                                                                                           5 July 2012
Via xxx     5
www.Gospels and

                                                                            Registered mail to               Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi
                                                                                                                        Pontificio Consiglio per la Cultura
                                                                                                                       00120 Vatican City

Ref.: Cortile dei Gentili
Object: Request for a live TV debate on the topic "Jesus Christ: historical truth or myth?".

Dear Cardinal Ravasi, the need of the Catholic Church, expressed by the Pope, to "open a dialogue with the atheist brother" through a specific Institution called "Courtyard of the Gentiles") - carried out by you with authority as President of the "Pontificio Consiglio per la Cultura" ("Papal Council for Culture") - cannot prescind from the critical scientific verification of the true existence of Jesus rather than restrict oneself, these are your words, to a gemeral appeal against "the indifference which buries the yearning for research".

My name is Emilio Salsi, an "instinctive" atheist since childhood, involved for many years in historical research aimed at verifying the veracity of the mythological Christian personalities. These are described in the New Testament and in the patristic texts in detail, and the writers go as far as to involve many famous and, this time, real protagonists of the Roman Empire, attested in the authentic historiography confirmed by archeology, epigraphs and numismatics; unlike Jesus, Apostles, Bishops, Fathers, Disciples etc.

The final conclusion of the historiological analyses concerning the New Testament testimonies supported by rigorous historical data, proof that the imaginary evangelical protagonists, from the "Nativity" onwards, never existed. And the same goes for the non-Christian testimonies of Tacitus, Suetonius, Plinius the Younger and Josephus Flavius, which have reached us through manuscripts drawn up in the late Middle Ages by pious scribes inside monastic abbacies.
There is clearly an irreconcilable contrast between the "evangelical message of salvation for eternal life", advocated by the Church, and the untrustworthy events narrated in the Holy Texts of the Christian tradition, foundation of a doctrine wanted by a "Jesus Christ" who never existed.

The conferences convened by your ministry - whose participants belong to the inner circle of the refined, obsequious and worldly political and mystical elite - are so exclusive that they end up being a "foreign body" in relationship to almost all the masses of "Gentiles".
No "yearning for research" can be more stimulating for that broad segment of the population - made up of believers, atheists, agnostics and rationalists - than a live television debate which deals with the topic of the origins of Christianity availing itself of historical rationalism, therefore the concrete existence of the important evangelical personalities, as described in the Bible. The aim? ... Very simple: open the "Cortile dei Gentili" to the many individuals who desire to broaden their knowledge of the events which gave birth to Christianity and its theological protagonists.

I am aware that I am writing to an excellent exegete and "Minister of God" whose task it is to spread and safeguard the contents of the Holy Scriptures "dicated by God" (as decreed by the "Council of Trent" roughly five centuries ago), therefore I hope that this invitation does not fall on deaf ears, as already has occurred with other priests specialized in critical analysis, who, after viewing the studies on my website and freely accessible to anyone, have preferred to "play ignorant"; a choice which is equal to  "forfeiting" and which in Italian means "being unable to compete" ... with History, obvously.

At the end of 2008, solicited to carry out a tv debate through an ostentatious challenge launched towards experts on the subject - via the Italian state television network RAI TV by the Vaticanist Andrea Tornielli - during an inept television program entitled "Inchiesta su Ges¨" ("Inquiry on Jesus"), I decided to take it on and and, considering Tornielli not up to par (he trats hostory as if it were a rubber band), I explicitly asked Dr. Giovanni Minoli, patron of the "inquiry", for a debate with you and Mr Vittorio Messori, often together in various television programs and always ready to defend the historicity of Christ. Unexplainably, despite the fact that Minoli was solicited personally by numerous admirers of my studies, by telepone and by letter, even the Rai Edu 2 Director of "La Storia siamo noi" decided to "play ignorant" ... with "History", but, coincidentally, the awakward program "Inchiesta su Ges¨" ("Inquiry on Jesus") disappeared from RAI TV, finally, after four years of inglorious media "apostolate".The challenge launched by the experts of the historical Christ constituted, indeed, a sort of "Courtyard of the Gentiles" which ended badly.

Unlike the authentic Jewish "Atrium of the Gentiles" in front of the Temple of Jerusalem over two thousand years ago, I hope that no High Priest, today, prevents the Gentiles from speaking about God under penalty of stoning ... obviously, at that time, through approval given by the imperial Legate of Rome. Not even preclude a public in depth analysis of the topic "Christ God" so as to verify whether or not he truly existed availing ourselves of analyses regarding the gross historical errors made by the Christian scribes, editors of the Gospels, when aiming at demonstrating the existence of the myth "Christ" by the protagonists of the Holy Texts artfully interact with famous people of the time who really existed.

Honourable Cardinal Ravasi, I cannot even dare to think that even you, just like the other prelates contacted, would ignore the importance of an open debate on the historical Christ. If this is the case, it can be for only one inevitable reason: the Church does not want to run the risk of having the "Courtyard of the Gentiles" turn into a "Pandora's Box" which, once opened by the Faith which keeps it sealed, rapidly spreads the worst "evils" of Archeology, Epigraphs, Philology and History.
In the meantime I look forward to receiving news with regard to your willingness to take part in a debate focused on "Jesus Christ: historical truth or myth?".

                 Your sincerely           Emilio Salsi

Letter of Ravasi:

                                                                                                                                                             Vatican, 12 July 2012

Dear Mr Salsi,

We have received many requests concerning the object of your letter, and the program set up - at international level - already includes about twenty events in European   and American cities and a series of themes.

What you are asking would need to be conducted in a strictly "tecnical" and not "instinctive" manner, as emerges a bit in your letter (only as basic data: have you read the volumes by J.P. Meier, A marginal Jew, ed. Queriniana, so as to have an idea of the "non-apologetic" but historiographical quality needed?).     

Yours sincerely,

Gianfranco Card. Ravasi

Dear Mr Emilio Salsi
Via Pietra Padule 3415

The Great Authority of the Vatican responds ambiguously, deliberately ignoring the precise references to the historical and archeological testimonies related to the evangelical protagonists; he chooses to duck out through "strictly tecnical" banal tergiversations but ... he is so thoughtless as to cite John Paul Meier. This not simply a coincidence due to the fact that the American exegete, among all the Catholics around the world, is the closest to my studies, therefore Ravasi has read them. I have decided to put his back to the wall: if the Eminent Prelate of the Vatican is busy, then he must give the name of the person who, among the numerous "Ministers of God" operating in the "Centers of Biblical Studies", is willing to have a public debate with me on the topic of the historical Christ.

My answer to Ravasi

Salsi Emilio
Via  xxx       5  Massarosa                                                                                                                            25 July 2012
www.Gospels and

                                                                                                        Registered Mail to             Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi
                                                                                                                                            Pontificio Consiglio per la Cultura
                                                                                                                                                   00120 CittÓ del Vaticano

Dear Card. Ravasi

I consideration of the topic proposed, I have read with great interest your long and articulated reply, very deep and exhaustive ... it must be acknowledged that we are dealing with a true "evangelical parable". The apparent disinterest in commenting the foundations of Christian doctrine makes us doubt that you have not read the letter received, where it is attested that "imaginary evangelical protagonists, from the Nativity onwards, never existed. And the same goes for the non-Christian testimonies of Tacitus, Suetonius, Plinius the Younger and Josephus Flavius - which have reached us through manuscripts drawn up in the late Middle Ages by pious scribes within their respective Abbacies - that are invalidated one by one.
Being that you have written that "the program has already been defined", this means that it has an "end"; and at the end of the program there is nothing preventing us from having a debate focused on the verificaton of the New Testament Bible and the patristic Texts, from a strictly historical, archeological, philological, rational and scientific perspective. In addition I am willing to take part in a public debate on the historical Christ with any any exegetical "Minister of God" from your Biblical Study Centers.

Before you I invited to take part in a public debate the rampant Don Agostino Clerici from Como - former Director of a diocesan newspaper, expert of patristics and author of specific books - who had no problem speaking in public on the ETV television station (located in Como) with the atheist Luigi Cascioli ... but, upon viewing (after an explicit indication) some of the critical analyses reported on my website, preferred, conveniently, to "play ignorant".

In reality a public discussion with an exegete wearing a cassock took place i 2010 at the Teletibur TV station in Tivoli (near Rome); here I debated with the priest Gianluigi Pasquale, Dean of the Studio Teologico Laurentianum in Venice and Professor within the Department of Holy Theology at the Pontificia UniversitÓ Lateranense and at the the Studium Generale Marcianum in Venice.
The learned priest - author of many books, the last of which being "La Ragione Della Storia" ("The Reason of History") published in 2011 - claims that (and I agree with his rationality) " ... the philosophy of history is a science", therefore the Hegelian historical dialectic process must, in order to be completed through Reason, mandatorily take into account the recent archeological and numismatic discoveries, bronze diplomas and epigraphs, all of which dating back to imperial Roman times and related to the Christ.
The correct and cordial TV discussion saw a Professor Pasquale literally under "historical anaphylactic shock" due to the overabundance of evangelical historical antibodies, thus prompting him to withdraw from the following debate - which was to take place on 3 June 2010 at the same TV station - focused on the real existence of the Apostle Paul. Evidently, despite having taken part in the pubic debate, the Dean, expert on Pauline exegesis, after the first experience had consulted the specific analysis and realized that the "super apostle of the people" was not historically defendable.

The Teletibur footage went on to "youtube" where it was commented but, after a couple of months, the TV program's presenter, in order to avoid being fired, asked me to remove the footage. I spoke to Gianluigi Pasquale about the matter over the phone and he told me that also his career would be at risk if the footage was not removed ... even from my silent website. What happened was that several Christian followers, frustrated by the sarcastic comments of disbelievers on the youtube blog, decided to write to the Bishop of Tivoli and accused the priest of being "incompetent". Do you know anything about this incident? And do you think it is fair that the right to publish a real event on my website be limited by the impelling need to protect the job of a TV presenter (good at doing his job) treated as if he were a hostage?

Previously, on 12 July 2009, the editorial staff of Teletibur, after having invited both of us, informed me of the decision not to take part in the public debate on the part of Don Silvio Barbaglia, teacher of biblical science at the diocesan seminary in Novara (Italy) and author of a "groomed confutation" against Luigi Cascioli ... but I am also an atheist yet with a slight difference: I manage to make use of historiography; and moreover I am a "Gentile", just as you described me in the letter. So, my goodness, let's enter the "Courtyard" together and verify whether the "heavenly" protagonists of the New Testament are fact or fiction.

Recalling one's attention to the Catholic exegete John Paul Meier and his "A marginal Jew" is extremely appreciated: the theories of the famous biblicist regarding Jesus's brothers resemble most the findings of my analyses and, once having been proven historically, become the starting point that allowing us to follow the itinerary of the evangelical events ... keeping a firm hand on the handrail of history. I know that this quote is not coincidental and it has allowed me to understand that you also had a "peek" at the analyses published on the "Gospels and History" website; in fact, while the historical verification of the "ecclesiastical tradition" with regard to the lives of the Aposltes (attested by the "Fathers") unveils their inexistence, on the contrary, critics ascertain that Jesus's brothers met His same death: they were a family of Zealot Jews, not at all "marginal"; they instead belonged to a priestly line of excellence that claimed the right to the throne of the Jews usurped by Herod and his successors.
A century prior to the Jesuit John Meier, another famous biblicist, he too an expert on Judaism, the Catholic Alfred Loisy, carried out an in depth study on Christ but dared to go beyond the rigid boundaries of the "Creed" ... and was excommunicated.

The school of Vatican exegesis is the most advanced in the world; its main task is to safeguard the "Truths of the Faith" and who knows if even Meier, just like Loisy prior to him, had understood that Jesus was a Nazirean Jew, not "Nazarene", with serious consequences on the eucharastic rite of salvation created in "The Last Supper". Therefore, it is no coincidence that the Pope pointed out the limits of the ponderous exegetical work with which, "only for basic data" (this is what you wrote me), Meier has yet to prove anything definitive.

Like any parabola, obviously, even your mini-letter has made me reflect upon the "moral" it contains: just like the other exegetes of the Clergy you have no intention of debating with those who dare to open "holy" and "patristic" texts in order to publicly highlight the countless "blunders" made by the ancestral editors of Christian mythology. On the other hand you have always been willing to take part in general "spiritual" public debates of ethical and anthropological nature, non-historical, even with champions of mathematics and physics (but with scarse knowledge of the science of Herodotus), well aware that no formula will ever be able to demonstrate that Jesus, son of God, never existed.

Any atheist "with many requests" can enter the "Courtyard of the Gentiles" of the present-day Vatican ... apart from those who create "Culture" by reading the Bible. The institution which you preside "in order to open a dialogue with the atheist brother" in reality demonstrates its sole true objective: carry out the usual "spreading of the word" ad maiorem Dei gloriam.

                                                                                                                    Emilio Salsi


As was forseeable, the "prince" of the Vatican exegetes turned down a public debate regarding the true existence of the theoogical protagonists of the canonical Gospels, well aware, he more than anyone else, that they never existed, at the same time skating over the request for a debate with any exegete from the Biblical Study Centers. The same reason which prompted him to avoid me, as of November 2008, after the Director of the the Italian TV channel Rai Edu 2 had informed both he and Messori (Minoli was obligated: a registered letter called them into question and hide it from the interested parties), of my and Giancarlo's decision to accept the invitation sent out by Rai Edu 2, This program was removed once and for all from the Rai TV chedule for a simple reason: if Minoli had broadcasted the program, he would have had to have "cut out" the invitation-challenge launched at listeners so as not to run the risk of having other people come forward (Tranfo and I before others). But, after the invitation was censored, the inquiry on Jesus, already weak, would have raised further doubts concerning the ability to "spread the word" as many would have noticed the absence of the blatant challenge.

But let's come back to the present.

Pope Benedict XVI, in addition to wanting "the Courtyard of the Gentiles to open a dialogue with the atheist brother", he took another important initiative as an attempt to resuscitate the by this time lifeless process of evangelization of a humanity too indifferent toward's spiritual holiness, but distracted by discos, sex and football: the Eleventh General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops.
The Great Coordinator, who is historically responsible for guaranteeing the success of the Mission inspired by God, is the President of the "Papal Council for the promotion of New Evangelization": Archbishop Rino Fisichella.
Indeed, the problem concerning the soundness of the Gospels involves the Archbishop personally. I have attempted to address the issue directly to the High Prelate of the Vatican.

Massarosa 14 September 2012

Emilio Salsi
Via   xxx    15                                                                       Registerd Mail to               Archbishop Rino Fisichella
                                                                                                                            Papal Council for New Evangelization
                                                                                                                                         00120 Vatican City

Object: request for a public debate TV debate on the topic "Jesus Christ: historical truth or myth?"

Dear Archbishop Fisichella, after being involved for years in historical research on the protagonists of Christian myhtology and the patristic "Tradition", before writing to you I invited important exegetes of the Catholic Clergy to take part in public debates so as to verify the truthfulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ by comparing it to archelogical and philological findings, foundation of historical rationalism.

My name is Emilio Salsi, an atheist from the time of my childhood and thus not enlightened by faith, who in his old age has published analyses on the website "Gospels and History" (Homepage right-hand column "Historical demonstrations") through which the inexistence of the Advent of Christ and his followers - set, according to believers in the first century A.D. - is proven.

Aware of the mission they have undertaken, from the time of the primitive Church, and which has carried on through the centuries by the prelates of the Only Saviour, I believed that it was their duty, even today, to guarantee the truth of the Only Begotten Son after He had the Holy Spirit descend upon His successors with a precise commandment to carry out.
But yet, so far, the Ministers of God have not dared to confront this research in order to defend the events narrated events from the shattering conclusions of impartial, lucid History. I have tried, repeatedly, to knock on the balustrade of the "Courtyard of the Gentiles", the Institution wanted by Benedict XVI with the precise aim to "open a dialogue with the atheist brother" ... but in vain.

Having taken note of the scarce desire of the Venerable high prelates contacted to become a tool of The Word, no longer knowing which Saint to devote myself to, I came to the conclusion that, in the role of President of the specific Ministry for New Evangelization, it is your duty to deal with the serious matter related to the historical contradictions described in the New Testament documents and, consequently,  the real existence of the mythological heroes of the Doctrine of Salvation.

I still remember the authoritativeness and scientific sel-confidence with which you, four years ago, took an official stand in favour of the Holy Father's visit to the "La Sapienza" University in Rome, requested as a "Messenger of Peace" by the Rector Magnificent Renato Guarini. Just like when, and rightfully so, you had no qualms about scolding publicly on TV three impenitent atheists: Cini, Odifreddi and Pannella who had the nerve to sabotage the papal blessing of the University. And yet, although you fond yourself before two luminary representatives of Science like Cini and Odifreddi, you personally, laying claim to this discipline as Your cardinal virtue, were able to cause them suffering thus provoking the impulsive reaction of Pannella*.

And now, as mentioned above, availing myself of detailed analyses, supported by the cognitive contribution of archeology, bronze diplomas and epigraphs related to the historical Christ and dating back to the time of imperial Rome, in addition to historiography and philology, I have verified, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the theological protagonists of the events narrated in the Gospels and in the patristic texts, foundation of the Christian Tradition, never existed.
More specifically Jesus Christ was never born let alone resurrected; nor did the Apostles or the Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God ever exist.
Even the non-Christian testimoniesof Tacitus, Josephus Flavius, Plinius the Younger and Suetonius prove themselves to be fakes drawn up by scribes in the late Middle Ages within their respective Abbacies.

Having said this, I ask you expressly: do feel like publicly contesting, through the presentation of factual information, the long-standing studies which totally contradict the New Testament documents reported in the above-mentioned website? Or do you, like Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, prefer to face a mathematician rather than a biblical analyst accustomed to having the evangelical and and patrisic narrations undergo historical verification.
Open analyses which many readers have read and which others, little by little, will read; among these even faithful believers who are forced to aske themselves why the exegetes of the Vatican continue to remain silent... and you, as head of the Ministry for New Evangelization, are the most personally interested in the completion of the mission dictated by the Supreme Evangelizer Jesus to His Apostles and to their successors: the Ministers of God, Spiritual Heads of the Christian Churches.

In view of the Thirteenth Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, convened by Benedict XVI, which will have to deal with the topic of the new evangelization the commitment to resume the process of catechumenate in favour of today's secularized humanity burden on your investiture wanted by the Vicar of Christ in Rome.
As a result, the latest archeological discoveries and their inevitable repercussions on the knowledge of History and filology, with their negative response against the Holy Texts, will, inevitably, spitefully hang over the Synod as an evil omen for the future of the Church, too significant to be ignored by the Assembly.

Dear Archbishop, I rely on the awareness of your role - deriving from the mission assigned to you by the divine purpose with the primary role of safeguarding the Truth of the Scriptures dictated by Him as the Constitution of the faithful - in order to have news as to how and when it will be possible to arrive at a public debate centered on "Jesus Christ: historical truth or myth?".

Yours sincerely                     Emilio Salsi

Archbishop Fisichella's letter

         The President                                                                                                     From Vatican, 26 September 2012

Dear Mr Salsi,

It is with deep interest that I have learnt about your continuous and passionate search for the historical truth on Jesus and about the various results of your studies. My studies, equally scientific due to the fact that I have conducted research, studied and taught for twenty years in Universities and even in very prestigious foriegn Universities, have brought about results which are completely different from yours.

Unfortunately my numerous commitments, especially those I will have in the upcoming Year of Faith, wanted by the Holy Father, prevent me from accepting your invitation to take part in a public debate on the topics which you studied.

I thank you for informing me, and take the opportunity to offer you my kind regards.

To the most illustrious Lord
Emilio Salsi
xxx Massarosa Italy


                                                                     original letter from Rino Fisichella

The authoritative Archbishop, weighed down by commitments, "postponed" the debate until the end of the "Year of Faith" 2013. In the end this was to be expected ... but that's not all: another registered letter is aout to be sent out.
No! Not to the Pope. It would not change the aim and the substance of the strategists in cassocks. I will attempt to send a letter to an expert in plain clothes who, in theory, should deal with the topic of the historical Christ through a solely scientific method, in compliance with his institutional role: Prof. Mauro Pesce.

                                                                                                                             Massarosa 17 October 2012

Salsi Emilio
Via  xxx      15
www. Gospels and History
                                                                                          registered letter to                Professor Mauro Pesce
                                                                                                                                          University of Bologna
                                                                                                                               Department of Historical Disciplines
                                                                                                                                   Piazza S. Giovanni in Monte, 2
                                                                                                                                            40124       Bologna

Object: Request for a public debate on the History of Christianity

Dear Professor,
An admirer of my research on the historical Christ, published on the website entitled "Gospels and History", has just informed me about your critical observations regarding the results of these analyses, published under the heading "John of Gamala".

I would like to point out immediately that I do not intend to carry out a personal and fruitless debate which would be of no interest to anyone, but instead take the opportunity to address in an official manner a teacher of History of Christianity whose responsability it is to inquire, by means of factual data, into the real existence of the character "Jesus Christ" and the other divine protagonists of the Gospels, object of worship for a minority of practicing Christians.

The reason why I have decided to write derives from my great interest for the events involving our distant ancestors of the Roman Empire; a stimulus whic prompted me to learn about, verify and then send you, in an official manner, the first analysis on the inexistence of the Apostles, still freely consultable on the above-mentioned website. Through the same report I notified you that the historical assessments saw the theological shell embodied by "Saint Paul" as the first and easiest to disappear from reality.
On 19 March 2009 you replied and complimented me in a flattering manner but by private email (which I continue to save), not the official one of the University of Bologna where I forwarded the study; you also added that you would have contacted me a later time, once free from urgent matters in need of attending, in order to have an in depth look at the topic of mutual interest.

After a couple of months I sent the first part of the second study centered on the Apostle James, brother of Jesus, whose conclusions prove the inexistence of this evangelical character. The faliure to reply clearly demonstrated that you no longer wished to an inconvenient relationship, due to the shattering conclusions of History in contrast with the religion of your State; not the usual "inquiries" in order to intrigue potential readers, but "verifications" and nothing more. But, by breaking off the correspondence, you turned down the critical verification contained in the second part of the analysis, substantiated by archeology, capable of demonstrating that at the end of the Jewish War against the Roman Empire under Hadrian no Bishop existed in Jerusalem, until at least 135 A.D.
According to the Church, James the Just, Jesus's brother, was the first Bishop of Jerusalem; replaced by Simon, another relative of Jesus; who was succeeded by Judas Just, son of James the Just, therefore Jesus's nephew, "linked to the Lord by the flesh"; soon followed by another 12 Bishops. A total of 15 venerable Spiritual Heads of the Church, invented by a false "tradition" devised in the fourth century: a a primitive ecclesiastical structure personified by mystical heroes with extraordinary divine powers who guided ethereal followers, all of whom devoted to martyrdom. This reference represents just one example.

It is no coincidence that the New Testament document fundamental for Christianity. the "Codex Vaticanus Graece 1209" was drawn up for the first time in the fourth century, that is to say after Christianity's victorious evolutionary process had allowed the subsequent authentic Bishops to access the state archives and insert into the "holy text" real historical data ad abundantiam so as to make the the narrated events truthful.
Through the aid of archeology, history and philology it is possible to highlight the blunders made by the scribes when inserting, with the same precise aim, other significant historical data even in the patristic writings; but, as also was the case for the Gospels, this was done without carefully analyzing the studies in depth by comparing the events prior to attesting them.
Incorrect historical information, still latent in the "holy writings", which escaped the copyists of the primitive Gospels when transcribing these writings into the current Gospels, as this data was not fully analyzed before being manipulated by people unaware of first century Israelite customs.

Unlike the imaginary Apostle Saint John "in oil", fried in a pan, which history inexorably cancels, "John of Gamala" existed - and this is proven through a complex analysis after getting rid of  the mythological Christian heroes, yet no one kneels down under his simulacrum, unlike Jesus, Madonna, Apostles, Fathers, Bishops and Popes, in addition to the long series of Saints with their inevitable relics.

Professor, we are both elderly people and after long studies dedicated to critical historical research aimed at investigating the topic in depth, it is our duty to offer a contribution, even if minimal, capable of allowing those people who desire to learn from verified knowledge to escape from superstitious obscurantism.
Aware of the recent archeological discoveries, bronze diplomas, coins and epigraphs, dating back to imperial Roman times, related to the historical Christ (which no exegete must ignore), the reason of history and of critical rationalism makes me appeal to your sense of ethical duty and I invite you to take part in a public debate on the real existence the New Testament evangelical protagonists: the investigation and in depth study of the History of Christianity is a commitment which your role forces you to respect.

And all this cannot invalidate the true Faith, a right which must be recognized to anyone: justice and logic govern the conscience of every single person who decides to believe or not to believe, regardless of the verdict issued by the historiographical sources validated by archeology.
But for the same essential need for freedom we must allow others to become aware of this information before they decide to make their choice.
Enough with these convenient personal interpretations, written magniloquently and promoted by faithful scholars, of invented historical events and characterized by insignificant conditional sentences with the precise aim to arrive at set conclusions or make an awkward attempt to justify the errors and contradictions contained in the holy texts.
And it is on the basis of such abstruse theories that, in the meanwhile, in Italy, fifteen thousand religion teachers chosen by the Bishops and active in schools of all types and levels, on permanent contracts and therefore paid by the community, carry out uncritical unilateral teaching that is trivial and childish as well: counter-information which results in the brainwashing of the young who are denied well-attested scientific knowledge.

I look forward to your confirmation, from this time onwards you can consider me available for an open public debate on any TV channel that you prefer, a discussion in solely historical terms on the true existence of the mythological heroic protagonists of the Christian "tradition".

Yours sincerely,
                                                                                                                   Emilio Salsi


A month has passed without a reply and I hereby publish letter so as to highlight another sleazy decline: although the invitation was expressed solely "on the basis of verified findings", the teacher of "History of Christianity", Mauro Pesce, has turned down a public debate on the truthfulness of Christ, Madonna, Apostles, Bishops, Fathers and the entire primitive ecclesiastical structure. In addition, which make things even worse, the biblicist does not comply with his institutional duty to carry put in depth critical research, which is indispensable to verify the events narrated in the New Testament documents, where the Christian scribes depicted the evangelical protagonists and their subsequent Fathers by having them interact with famous people, who truly existed at the time of the Roman Empire, so as make events invented from scratch sound truthful.
This diametric contrast between these narrations and reality has been well-proven by historiology, the science which avails itself of historiographical reading supported by archeology: linear and impartial History has passed on to us all the useful data which allows us to contradict the evangelical "truths". As a result the findings must be officialized through public research tools and made readily available to all those interested in the topic thanks to information technology.
Whoever attempts to prevent this from happening commits a crime against knowledge and history. If there are reasons behind Mauro Pesce's decision not to comply with this duty, he is called to express them in a live public debate and take responsibility for his conclusions just like I do through my studies.

But, being that he is not a priest, why does a historian, teacher of Christianity and biblicist, decide to hide such significant historical data that he himself had found and endorsed as being exact and then raise doubts as to admitting the definitively proven inexistence of Jesus, Madonna, Apostles, Bishops and Fathers of the imaginary primitive Christian Church? There is only one answer: he is aware that the proof uncovered is not the fruit of his intellect. He realizes that after many years of study dedicated to the origins of Christianity he has been unable to glean any piece of significant historical data from the direct sources, compare it to the archeological findings and draw the obvious conclusions.
And he also endorsed his inability by writing books on the topic without getting to the root of the problem concerning the real existence of the Christian divinities. He took everything for granted dwelling on the anthropological aspects of the religion and adding personal interpretations and theories, all of which included in books which bring readers back to the starting point.

We cannot accept that a teacher of "History of Christianity", today, limits themself to expressing a simple and reductive "I don't believe", after dwelling for years on useless theories regarding what Jesus said or did, carefully avoiding to offer the proof as to "why" he does not believe (if he does not believe); when, instead, State ecclesiastics and their scholarly followers, opportunely selected, loudly proclaim in classrooms and on national TV the historical truths of their divinities availing themselves of clearly incorrect research, which must be denounced as such through evidence contradicting the Advent and Resurrection of Christ. In addition, evangelical mythology and Christian patristics go as far as to ridicule the authentic protagonists of imperial Rome and offend their memory, without anyone daring to criticize such absurdities.

I invite all readers, especially the elderly, to themselves whether during their existence they have ever attended a public debate on a national television network in which a biblical critic has opened the Gospels or the patristic texts, comparing them to historical texts, so as to highlight the impossibility of the facts described by narrations passed off as being "dictated by God". This has never happened nor will it ever occur as long as the men who govern us continue to be bound to religious power, combining the interests of the Caste and those of the Clergy so as to preserve their respective privileges. The Rai Edu 2 program "La Storia siamo noi", directed by Dr. Giovanni Minoli, for four years was the pulpit par excellence for the "apostolic mission" of his "Inquiry on Jesus" episodes. Just like the showman Roberto Giacobbo who continues in his efforts to carry out (he attempts to do so) the catechization of the people in order to make up for the Church's loss of credibility resulting from the contrived Shroud of Turin, the Holy Rostrum (Holy Face of Oviedo), and the Nazareth of Jesus; he is very focused on putting together his "inquiries" in a way that allows him to avoid live public debates between scholars and he always "forgets" to inform listeners that the three relics of Christ (including the Tunic of Argenteuil in France) which have undergone C14 radiocarbon testing have been found to be false.

Other examples. The recent "reconstruction" of an imaginary "Quo Vadis", carried out by the "scholar of primitive Christianity" Alberto Angela (very pleased with the "discovery") in the Italian Rai 3 program "Ulisse", during the episode which takes place in imperial Rome at the time of Nero, inside Roman catacombs that did not exist until the third century ...  as did not exist the Christian Jesuits who could have never seen them. In fact the "Acts of the Apostles" make no mention of them, starting with the the imaginary Saint Paul who the TV presenter Alberto even has "say mass" inside burial recesses full of bodies, underground ambulacra which began to be built outside Rome almost a century and a half later. As well as the previous chronicle about the 64 A.D. fire of Rome described by Alberto's father, the "scientist" Piero Angela who depicts the usual martyrizer of imaginary Jesuit Christians, Nero - right after rebuilding (in two or three months) a metropolis of one million people almost totally destroyed - without asking himself how this was possible being that no Apostle, Bishop, Pope, apologetic Father or supposed successor of Christ knew anything about the events involving their own martyrs. And the servile Piero was very careful not to mention to viewers that the the oldest docment reporting the incident accredited to Tacitus dates back to a thousand years after the death of the Roman historian, duly specifying that it is a transcription from the Abbacy of Montecassino (Italy), the "Codex Laurentianus Mediceus Ms 68 II", but, despite the importance and seriousness of the narrated event, the Church made it public a few centuries later, during the Renaissance ... without ever recognizing these martyrs as belonging to the followers of Christ.

The "common denominator" of the strategy which associates these pseudo inquiries is strikingly serious: there is never the dissenting voice of the specialist in "History of Christianity". The information which is passed on is univocal, therefore it becomes "truth". All the national television network presenters deal with the topic in order to safeguard the "eternal life" of their careers, possibly until the "fifth age". The same goes for the journalists in vogue in the press, all the better if openly atheist: their "testimony" (intentional), in these cases, acquires even more probative value ... therefore guaranteeing a a highly paid job for life.
We live in a political system which blatantly continues to indoctrinate its citizens to believe in a State religion founded upon myths which by this time have been proven to be false. Starting in schools and availing itself of an uncritical teaching method coherent with official information technology, the political Caste has deliberately created a tool which is useful for the brainwashing of many future citizens. The latter are subordinate to the conservation of a bloated clerical structure is an exorbitant burden not only on believers, but also on the masses of atheists, agnostics and rationalists, not at all consenting but aware of being defrauded of even the basic personal freedom of choice, as in the case of authentic euthanasia (sweet death: which has nothing to do with "pulling the plug") requested by those who, undergoing unbearable pain, ask to be put out of their misery. A compassion which I had for my faithful, beloved friend of the family, our dog, and for which there were no legal problems.

On bended knee before a dogmatic will, imposed by clericalists who assume the right to interpret the "postulate" of a divinity invented by their predecessors, politicians have passed laws having the power to ruin the existence of those physicians and citizens, including believers, who, driven by conscious compassion, decide to help those who choose to put an end to their excruciating suffering, physically humiliating for the succubus and agonizing for the family ... with no alternative other than a torturous and prolonged agony.

Censorship is the modus operandi of Professor Mauro Pesce, who holds the chair of History of Christianity

On 30 March 2013 Doctor Feruccio Rondinella expresses his views in a "facebook" forum and, with the aim of examining in depth an anti-Shroud comment published by Professor Mauro Pesce, writes the following to the latter:

"Professor I admire the high moral value of your posts, but please allow me to say that from a historical point of view you are totally off.
There was no cloth because there was no burial: a rebel leader, self-proclaimed messiah, of Zealot ideology, would have never been given a burial that risked making this sepulchre a meeting place for hard-core followers.
The history of the "holy faces of Jesus" is late and it is well-analyzed here by Emilio Salsi":

Pesce replies immediately:

"Rondinella please allow me to say that I do not agree with any of these statements which are completely marginal in international criticism. Excuse me it is my job.

On 31 March Doctor Rondinella objects:

Dear Professor pesce, please excuse me for replying to your response and for this brief off topic, but I would like to point out that for many years I have been following with great interest the past events which gave birth to the myth of Jesus Christ, availing myself of textual and internet research. Despite not being my profession (I am a physician), I believe to be aware of the basic criteria of historiological research just like I am aware of research criteria in the clinical field.
I have written many books by authors who have dealt with this topic and believe to be capable of evaluating the real efficacy of these writers, therefore, after admiring their ability to deal with the specific historical analyses, I felt it my duty to draw your attention (and that of the other group members) to the studies which Emilio Salsi has pubished on his website, aware that I am speaking to a Professor of History of Christianity.
Moreover, I have read the letter that Salsi sent you and in which he proposed a public debate based on verified facts; invitation, published on his website, in which he states that he had already sent you the first study on the inexistence of the Apostles, study which you, from what I have read, gave an answer to and for which you complimented him.
Being that the scholar carries on his research by directly comparing the historical sources with events narrated in the New Testament and patristic documents, highlighting the contradictions which disavow the holy texts, I consider you behaviour to be elusive being that you that you refuse to go into the substance of Salsi's research through precise confutations on topics in the pubic domain and at the same time closely linked to your institutional role: the History of Christianity.
I wish to confirm that I remain strongly interested in reading about your views, and take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Easter."

We have taken note of the precise duty, pertinent to a teacher's institutional role, to go into the substance of the historical research on the origins of Christianity through exact confutations of precise analyses which avail themselves of the comparison of the sources handed down by the chroniclers of imperial Rome with the sources perpetuated by New Testament and patristic documentation ... but what does Professor Pesce do? He censors Doctor Rondinella's letter and avoids publicizing arguments for and against detailed studies, well-aware of running the risk of getting caught up in clumsy historical mistakes which Salsi would certainly not pass over in silence.

But let's go back and deal with the religious institutions particularly interested in "spreading the word", indoctrinating masses of citizens who have never read the Gospels (let alone critically) and the so-called "Christian tradition".
UCCR: Italian acronym of "Christian Union of Rational Catholics", an association founded in 2011 and, according to Cathopedia, with the following aim:
- "react peacefully to the aggression of miltant atheism, secularism and the so-called theoretical and dramatic atheism;
- create a virtual space in which whoever is distant from religious and non-religious fundamentalism can converse, discuss, express doubts and recover reason".

Apparently in line with such principles, on the UCCR website we can read the following self-referential "motto", but, as will be proven further ahead, not at all historical nor rational:
We must be Christians, because Christianity has shaped our way of feeling and of thinking in an indelible manner; and the profound diversity between us and the ancient people is due to the Christian Word. Even the so-called "free thinkers" and the "anticlericalists" cannot escape this common destiny of the European spirit".  Federico Chabod (1901  -  1960 historian and politician).

In light of the aims of the UCCR, we can understand the partial ideological motive which has obligated this association to dedicate a public "analysis" to the critical studies of Emilio Salsi related to the historical Christ; or rather, instead of an "analysis", a series of incoherent comments made by the UCCR, later officialized, which sever the logical train of thought that scientifically link them together rather than verify the true events of the past at the expense of the invented myth Jesus Christ. If on the other hand this association hypocritically makes no mention of the blunders made by the scribes who who wrote the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles (which we highlighted in the previous studies), at the same time its editors are careful not to inform scholars about the lies concerning the "Historia Ecclesiastica" by Eusebius of Caesarea. The latter was the famous fourth century Bishop who invented the so-called "Christian tradition", disproved  - thanks to the documentary evidence provided in the studies contained in the present website - by History, Archeology. Philology, Jewish toponymy and by the scribes of God themselves, when, many centuries ago, they attempted (in vain) to patch up the clumsy evangelical blunders and the bogus "Christian traditon".

In particular, with regard to the protagonists of the canonical Gospels, UCCR totally realizes that the ones canonized by Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea (died in 340 A.D.), and which he describes in "Historia Ecclesiastica", are different from the ones transcribed into the current Gospels, thus demonstrating that they were invented. Moreover the UCCR deliberately fails to inform its followers that the Apostle Paul is not mentioned in the Gospels and knows nothing about the existence of Mary, despite being the "Mother of God", nor has he heard about the "city of Nazareth". These are just a few examples of a long series of contradictions resulting from the falsifications devised by the Christian scribes in order to deceive the masses through the promise of eternal life ... but the association hides these contraditions from its followers for personal gain.
Afterwards the UCCR concludes with an inevitabe rejection of Emilio Salsi. Here is the link:

This all took place as of 2017, and Emilio Salsi knew nothing, not having been informed in advance, nor was he invited to part in a direct debate (in contrast with the principles of the UCCR association praised by Vatican "Cathopedia") despite having been called in to question by the UCCR.

Nevertheless the readers and admirers of the discoveries of Emilio Salsi took it upon themselves to inform him about the public doctrinal attacks carried out by the UCCR. Here is Salsi's reply to the comments made on the above-mentioned link, sent by email on 2 November 2019 to the Editorial Staff of the UCCR and duly published on the present website:

To the Editorial Staff of the Christian Union of Rational Catholics

Object: Article against the Emilio Salsi's studies

A few admirers of my studies, freely consultable on the website "Christ, an invented myth, here is the proof", have sent me a link concerning the article in question, signed by "The Editorial Staff". Article in which, in my absence, I am accused of ignorance and of conspiracy aganst the existence of Christ and his successors.

If the facts, as you have presented them to your readers, were true, I am certain that the UCCR Editorial Staff with great pleasure accept the invitation to take part in a filmed public debate between the undersigned, Emilio Salsi, and one of your experts in History of Christianity, who, on the basis of the foolish things you have said about me, will have no difficulty whatsoever demolishng my investigations.

I would like to point out that this invitation will be published on my website, and therefore, if declined, it will be exhibited as proof of the fact that my theories are unassailable on the part of any ecclesiastical exegete.

Yours sincerely,

Emilio Salsi

P.S.: I look forward to a positive reply to the present request for a public debate with your representative, to be held in whatever location you please, starting with academic institutions, such as the "UniversitÓ del Sacro Cuore" in Milan.

More than a month has passed since I sent the email to the Editorial Staff of the UCCR and im which I invited them to find an exegete, expert in History of Christianity, in order to have a public debate with the undersigned aimed at verifying whether Jesus Christ and his followers truly existed; or if, as I have demonstrated through specific inquiries, we are simply dealing with myths created in the form of theological shells forthe sole aim of deceiving the masses through the promise of eternal life.
My request for a public debate with the UCCR has been reiterated in the present website and I have expressed my willingness to hold it at the UniversitÓ del Sacro Cuore in Milan; nevertheless the Editorial Staff has preferred to pass over it in silence, well aware that the "fantasies of Emilio Salsi" (as attested by the Catholic Vaticanists) regarding the inexistence of Jesus Christ and his successors are in reality studies which have been well-verified thanks to History, Archeology, Philology, Jewish toponymy, imperial Roman law and comparative reading of Codexes drawn up by Christian scribes, but in contrast with one another, at the time in which the "scribes of God ", through the centuries, have attempted to patch up the blunders made by the evangelists when, in the fourth century, they drew up the current Gospels.

Moreover, I openly declare that the UCCR must absolutely prevent Emilio Salsi from from officializing his scientific discoveries, which invalidate the myth of Christ, in front of the students attending the History of Christianity course at Milan's UniversitÓ Cattolica, young people who would immediately realize that their teachers have been kept in the dark over proof that verifies, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the thousand-year old invention of the heroic saints of primitive Christianity, artfully passed off as the founders of the inexistent "initial Jesuit Catholic movement", said to have existed until the fourth century, when Catholicism imposed itself, for the first time, as the sole religion of a Roman Empre on the brink of dissolution.

All the teachers of History of Christianity have failed to fulfill their institutional duty and have preferred not to make public the historical and archeological findings which demonstrate that the "Universal Saviour" is just an invented myth; such behaviour can be seen, just above, thanks to the "modus operandi" of Prof. Mauro Pesce who -  after sending to his official University of Bologna email the investigation which proves that Gamaliel's speech in Acts of the Apostles is a hoax (see first study) - replied to me through a private email address ... however, he cleverly avoided sending it formally and did not duly inform his university students.
Any comment regarding such "didactic conduct" (common to all the professors of "History of Christianity") is superfluous.

Emilio Salsi

[ go back ]