To the many Christians offended by Dan Brown's novels-turned-films ("The Da Vinci Code, "Angels and Demons ), Stephen Huller presents a lesser quality non-fiction conspiracy theory which he calls "the Agrippa code . "The Real Messiah: The Throne of St. Mark and the True Origins of Christianity , written by Stephan Huller, claims that the story of Christianity passed down to Christians is a case of mistaken identity. Huller claims that Marcus Julius Agrippa was "the last King of the Jews, true heir to the royal title mockingly bestowed on Jesus of Nazareth. This as well as being "the author of St. Mark's gospel, and the true Messiah. Plus some more. Marcus is also Barabas, the man Pilate released into the Jews in place of Jesus. Oops, forgot another of the man's manifestations. He is also Marqe, son of Titus, an important Samaritan theologian. The book, which will surely infuriate the Coptic Church of Alexandria when they hear about it, will be filmed into a documentary in Alexandria this June. A philosophy graduate of the Canadian York University, Huller discovered that he is one of the last descendants of Jacob Frank, "a Jewish messianic leader whose unorthodox beliefs included acceptance of the New Testament. This is to say, he was a Jew and, as all Jews, believed that Jesus was not the Messiah but also believed that Jesus' gospel is holy. You think it can't get any more absurd? Well it can. While the book's introduction doesn't promise to present conclusive evidence to support Huller's wild claim, the rest of the pages eliminate the hope of a real connection between the pieces of "evidence the researcher presents. Did I say pieces? I really meant "one piece, which is the throne of St. Mark displayed in the Basilica San Marco in Venice. There are, however, many loose and disjointed connections Huller makes between the different inscriptions and pictures on the throne, without referencing them to similar symbols anywhere else. Huller writes that it was due to later revisions in the gospels - done with the hands of Roman theologians who were serving the Empire more than the Church - that Marcus was forgotten as the Messiah and the king that he truly was. He also says that Jesus was merely the herald to Marcus Agrippa. Apparently this is why, in the four Christian gospels, Jesus spoke in the third and not the first person, and this is why Marcus was resurrected from a Roman prison at the tender age of eight, the same night Christians believe Jesus died on the cross. Huller's real Messiah is one that can be easily scrapped off both the history books and his followers' hearts. A Messiah who - save for in one secret gospel - has left the basics of his message nowhere to be seen. A Messiah/client of Rome whose sister/wife was the acknowledged mistress of his countrymen's archenemy, the Roman emperor himself. Yet it's repeatedly claimed that he is the one responsible for the Christian faith. It also turns out that Pope Shenouda III, the current leader of the Coptic Orthodox church, is not only "aware of the connection between Mark and Marcus but also "comes very close to revealing the true identity of St. Mark. How does he do that? Huller quotes Pope Shenouda's "The Evangelist Mark where he speaks of a theology school St. Mark built which was managed by a man called Justus. It turns out that Marcus, according to Huller, had a secretary also named Justus. Does any sane person need to look for any further evidence? Another major assurance comes from another "self confessed warm-up to the main act - Jesus himself. "For at least a year prior to his crucifixion, the prophet and herald Jesus had made it abundantly clear that little Marcus indeed was the Messiah, the book reads. Huller makes it seem like everyone back then knew this fact except for the average Christian. The unsupported notion that Marcus was the "real Messiah is repeated to the point of nausea. The one question that lurks so large over the whole premise of the book is something Huller doesn't even come near: Why did the Roman empire force the Church so hard to cover the theorized truth about Marcus being the Messiah? In fact, this decision can't be more absurd. If the Roman empire's aim was to build a worldly kingdom, why did they not choose the teachings of their lifelong ally, Marcus Agrippa, instead of Jesus, a promoter of peace and forgiveness? Perhaps the answer is that Marcus had no teachings of his own. Not without difficulty, this could be a book for the history scholars, another interesting theory about an obscure period of history with a lot of holes yet to be filled in it. What the author depicts it as, and what it surely could not be, is a solid discovery that should change the way the whole thinking world views early Christianity.
