It became a thing over the last week not to say “Christ is King”, unless you really meant it, but not in a way that others knew you really meant it. Or something. The flap perplexed me, likely because I didn’t follow the debate closely, since I had to catch up on my beauty sleep (and boy did it work).
Today is Good Friday, the day Christ, who is King, was crucified under Pontius Pilate. He rose again from the dead on the third day, in accordance with the scriptures.
This rising is what is known as The Resurrection, a Historical Event.
It ought to be illegal to question or demean or disparage or ridicule this Historical Event.
There is, is there not, historical precedent for this kind of criminalization? Yes, sir, there is, as we shall see below. So once again, I propose that enlightened countries invoke this precedent and make it illegal to question what is inarguably the Historical Event in all of history.
Consider that historians historically have demarcated all of history by referring to The Resurrection, a Historical Event, by the terms and initials Before Christ (BC) and Anno Domini (AD). You have seen them.
Lately, historians have switched from BC and AD to BCE and CE, which I believe stand for Before Christ’s Empire and Christ’s Empire. An open and avowed acknowledgment that Christ is King.
Can we therefore question this most important Historical Event? Of course we cannot. And we must not.
Let’s first discuss the precedent of criminalizing denying historical events.
Perhaps you recall that historian David Irving was arrested in 2005 by Austrian police for a speech he gave sixteen years earlier, in 1989. He was charged with “trivialising, grossly playing down and denying” a historical event. These were crimes. I mean, it was illegal to question this historical event. But he did it anyway, which made him a criminal. He went to jail—they locked him right up—for three years.
Then there was the case of an eighty nine year old grandmother who was charged with denying a historical event. Before they could bin her, she went on the lam—this is a true story, my friends. Yet the law is indefatigable. They tracked down this old lady and chucked her in a cell. For denying a historical event.
Denying historical events has been called a form of hate speech. Which the woke will tell you ought to be vigorously stamped out.
We won’t have to work hard to create a law which makes criticizing The Resurrection illegal. There is already a wealth of legal language used in countries that outlaw denying historical events from which we can draw.
These laws say things like “whoever denies, grossly plays down” historical events commits a crime. Variants are “denies, grossly minimises” and “denies or grossly palliates”. Then there is “condoning, denying or downplaying” historical events, which can get you two years inside in Canada. Just for downplaying. Germany also uses the “downplaying” language.
In Italy, the “spreading” of “denial” can put you away from two to six years.
England says material “grossly offensive” to historical events is criminal. France says denying historical events falls under “crimes against humanity”. Other well known countries echo this.
That’s enough. You get the idea. The precedent is there, the laws are already on the books. We need merely add The Resurrection to the list of non-deniable events.
You must understand we are not today talking of evidence for–or. God forbid, against—The Resurrection. This is a complete distraction. And, if our law passes, it will be illegal to have any public discussion in any critical or negative way. As is proper.
The Resurrection is a documented historical event. It would be difficult to find anybody who disagrees that this Event was at least as important as any other event in history. And, indeed, some billions of people alive today say it was the most important Event. I am one of them.
Not all agree with the outcome of The Resurrection. That is, they are indifferent or hostile for its reasons. But this is not relevant. Even these people see that the Event is of civilizational and monumental historical import.
Nobody will be forced to say The Resurrection happened, nor will they have to swear to any of the details surrounding it (like, say, how John got to the empty tomb first). Everybody will still be absolutely free to believe what they want, in their hearts.
But any open questioning of The Resurrection should result in jail.
Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Or use the paid subscription at Substack. Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank.
Christ is King, and He shall rise again.
We have ancient precedent for the Jews convincing the government to silence and murder the good, the beautiful, and the true.
I think it’s Before the Christian Era and Christian Era
No victim, no crime. Historical events have no feelings to be hurt.
Would it be OK to toss Resurrection Deniers of the tops of buildings? Or should they just be defenestrated? 🙂
It was a wonderful full moon this week.
It was brief as it has been mostly cloudy in New England this week but one night it cleared up for a few hours and there it was. No denying it.
A strange article by a strange author.
Perhaps drunk or drowsy from pain killers?
If writing about censorship, why not focus on actual censorship and pending legislation that would result in censorship?
The resurrection is religious Nutter claptrap.
But so is the coming global warming crisis.
Leftist religion claptrap
@Gwyneth: But a billion Christians do have feelings.
If you insult Islam, do you not expect Muslims to be outraged and attack you?
Is Christianity so meek that we should not defend ourselves and our beliefs?
A documented historical event? Laughter has enhanced my enjoyment of Friday morning. Send me to jail!
We need a restoration of all blasphemy laws.
Agreed, pass the law!
Then once Richard Greene and his lot are in the camps awaiting their chamber time for denialism, let’s see how quickly they change their tune.
But even if they do, put them all down anyway, that way we can help them be utterly certain of the Truth that they have no choice but to confess. Either here and now, or as soon as possible on the other side, where the ackshual warming never ends.
Yes, a documented historical event.
Non-New Testament historians Tacitus, Suetonius, and Josephus verify the existence of Jesus.
Textual Criticism evidence of over 24,300 ancient copies of the New Testament in Latin, Greek, and other languages greatly exceed the 66 combined copies of the “historical” writings of Herodotus, Thucydides, Tacitus, Caesar’s Gallic War, and Livy’s Roman History.
Thank you, John M! And it is true that Jesus Christ died and arose from the dead , was seen by many, talked with many, amd ascended into Heaven in full view of His Apostles. Praying that all who read this column, receive Jesus Christ as their very own Lord, God, and Saviour. There is life after death, and where one spends it, in Heaven or in Hell, the choice is present to each person, day after day after day … but we do not know when God will call us from this life. As Jesus said, one cannot serve God and wealth.
A very blessed Good Friday evening, a very Holy, Holy Saturday, and a Resurrection Sunday full of God’s Love to us and ours. God bless, C-Marie
“The resurrection is religious Nutter claptrap.”
If an entity is able to create the universe, wouldn’t such an entity have the power and knowledge on how to resurrect a recently deceased individual. So if the universe was created by such an entity, the resurrection is a possibility and not nutter. You may argue that it didn’t happen but not that it is claptrap.
Atheism, or the philosophy that the universe was not created by an entity is intellectually bankrupt. Yet lots of educated people hold this intellectually bankrupt philosophy.
As far as the universe being created by some entity, how did it come into existence? Why is there anything? The only logical reason is that it was created by some entity. Now many call this entity, God, and there is good reason for that. If one objects, that is where they should start, not that there was no entity that was a creator.
I don’t know how the universe was created, or care
You don’t know
No one knows
That’s no reason to make up silly fairy tales
Intelligent people should be comfortable with the fact that many questions don’t have answers.
Resurrection, heaven and hell and god are fairy tales for people who can not tolerate “We dont know” answers to their questions
The climate religion is an alternative
Similar claptrap: Beliefs based on faith
That’s not science
They are just fairy tales
The world would be a better place if fewer decisions were made using beliefs based on faith.
“Intelligent people should be comfortable” suggests Mr. Greene. I agree. The problem is when you”re damned uncomforable. Like when facing DEATH.
“That’s no reason to make up silly fairy tales”
When events of extremely, extremely low probably happen, one is driven to logic for an answer. We know that intelligence is capable of these low probability events and nothing else.
So to speculate on a non-intelligent cause is the real fairy tale here. So wanting a fairy tale improbable explanation is the actual claptrap.
The important issue here is what is the nature of the intelligence and why.
“ The world would be a better place if fewer decisions were made using beliefs based on faith”
Those who have faith also know the universe is orderly. And they strived to find out the created order. This has been an essential to the modern world as people of faith created the scientific method to understand just what is behind the creator’s very precise creation.
Nothing contradictory between faith and science. Faith implies doubt. And doubt requires answers. So far non of the answers contradicts an intelligent creator who cares for this creation. All the science points to a caring creator.
Funny, how logic works. It points to the Truth.
Nice! I just saw the new blog format – very nice indeed. Bloglo? Works well on the ipad too – seems to load faster and cleaner on it than the old one did.
—
A new inquisition? Sure.. And while we’re at it:
Frequentist opinion = min sentence of 3 years
Baysian opinion = min sentence of 5 years
Stupid comments = min sent of 10 years if republican; min reward $10 if democrat
When I am King people will be burning at the stake for heresy for denying the Resurrection. Broadcast on pay per view streaming services with teaser trailers everywhere. I am confident the trial by combat resolution of contract disputes will be an earner too.
Tally about nonsense on stilts. It’s called lack of evidence which surrounds all the tales in the New Testament including the resurrection. The authors of the gospels were not present for this event in particular as they were written years and years after events, that they were somehow foretold, they were not , but were formulated to conform to their conception of the messiah of the Old Testament, a book of more myths, and unrelenting vindictiveness! Any testimony of JC walking around after he was dead is all second hand claptrap, along with the tombs that were opened of the saints that were raised. And again there is no more mention of these events outside of the scriptures or fairy tale books because if they happened as described historians of that time like Philo or Josephus would have very likely made mention.