Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshbazzar · 12-15-2008, 04:18 PM

So is it the Sibyllines parroting the chreistians, or the chreistians parroting the Sibyllines?
How queer that these "oracles" although allegedly of pre-chreistian and pagan origin, never speak one line that is not consistent with chreistian doctrine and dogma.

What a crock of fabricated crap, the final quotation from -The Christian Rememberancer- is only further proof, illustrating just how easy it is to fabricate an "holy" acrostic to support a myth.
Its a wonder indeed that people are still willing to buy into such blatantly obvious fraudulent fabrications.

mountainman · 12-15-2008, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Some scholars have questioned the acrostic origin of the fish symbol, but whether right or wrong this is an ancient explanation not a modern one.

See for example The Sibylline Acrostic

Dear Andrew,

Ancient though it be the precedent of its use by Constantine in his "Oration" at the Council of Antioch has been examined by Robin Lane-Fox and the assessment of that author (ie:FOX) is that it involves fraud. Constantine introduces the acrostic and then "proves" its antiquity by asserting its mention by two Roman BCE poets (Cicero and Virgil) who are thus boldly represented as having predicted the birth of Brian. Here are my notes on Fox's work Pagans and Christians.

Best wishes,

Pete

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-15-2008, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Some scholars have questioned the acrostic origin of the fish symbol, but whether right or wrong this is an ancient explanation not a modern one.

See for example The Sibylline Acrostic

Dear Andrew,

Ancient though it be the precedent of its use by Constantine in his "Oration" at the Council of Antioch has been examined by Robin Lane-Fox and the assessment of that author (ie:FOX) is that it involves fraud.

Where specifically in Pagans and Christians does Lane-Fox (not Fox) note that Constantine used the acronym (notfor "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour", let alone that his use of it involves fraud?

Jeffrey

mountainman · 12-15-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Ancient though it be the precedent of its use by Constantine in his "Oration" at the Council of Antioch has been examined by Robin Lane-Fox and the assessment of that author (ie:FOX) is that it involves fraud.

Where specifically in Pagans and Christians does Lane-Fox (not Fox) note that Constantine used the acronym (notfor "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour", let alone that his use of it involves fraud?

Jeffrey

Dear Jeffrey,

Quoting (with pagenumbers) from the link supplied which you axed above:

Quote:

Constantine's Orations to the Saints
At p.646/7 Fox suggests that Constantine's Oration to the Saints
was authored and orated by Constantine "at Antioch, Good Friday, 325".
Most ancient historians are today convinced that Constantine
both authored and read aloud this "document" in 324/325 CE.
It contains a number of novel social and political insights,
and a whole string of fraudulent misprepresentations:

(1) Berates the philosophers: "Socrates critical questioning ... menace to the state".
"Pythagoras had stolen his teaching from Egypt, Plato believed there were many gods."
"Plato strived for the unknowable ... wrote about a first and second God."

[Editor: When critical questioning is a menace to the state there's a problem.
When military supremacists edict for the destruction of the writings
of leading present and past academics (eg: Porphyry, Arius, Apollonius of Tyana)
by book burning, it is a clear and unambiguous signal (from modern history)
that we are dealing with a malevolent dictator, a megalomaniac with a big army.]

(2) Berates the poets as worse than the philosophers;
because "poets wrote falsely about the gods".
FOX: "In a few broad sweeps, Constantine had damned
the free use of reason and banished poetic imagination."

[Editor: Our thesis is that Constantine invented and sponsored christianity.
He would not lightly tolerate any opposition to his new invention.]

(3) "A dove, said Constantine, had alighted on the virgin mary,
like the dove which had flown from Noah's ark.

[Editor: A fact never before mentioned by casts of thousands.
Constantine probably enjoyed his own stories the most.
Nero wanted to be on stage and be a divine actor,
Constantine wanted the spotlights, and to be a divine author.]

(4) Constantine refers to an ancient Sibyl, a priestess from Erythrae
who had served Apollo at the 'serpents Tripod' at Delphi.
Constantine then quotes (in the Greek) thirty-four hexameters,
from the inspired truth of the Sibyl.
Most notably, the acrostic formed by the first Greek letter
of each line spelt "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour, Cross."

But Constantine was alive to the arguments of skeptics ...

"They suspect that "someone of our religion,
not without the gifts of the prophetic muse,
had inserted false lines and forged the Sibyl's moral tone.
These skeptics were already known to Origen ... (Constantine continues)
"Our people have compared the chronologies with great accuracy",
and the "age" of the Sibyl's verses excludes the view
that they are a post-christian fake."

[Editor: Here "The Boss" essentially shoots himself in the foot.
He explicity defines the recently appeared genre:
"We may be suspected of clever forgery"
said the Boss to his new troops, civilians and saints,
but our best intelligence people assure us
that these things definitely aren't fake."

Does this sort of propaganda sound familiar?
What is the modus operandi of malevolent despotism?]

(5) But wait, Robin Lane Fox has more to say:
His proof of this comparison was unexpected: Cicero (106-43 BCE)
Cicero chanced upon this poem and translated it to Latin.
The Sibyl, Constantine said, had prophecised christ
in an acrostic, known to Cicero.

Robin Lane Fox comments ... "the proof was a fraud twice over."

Attention Jeffrey,

Robin Lane Fox comments ... "the proof was a fraud twice over."

Quote:

[Editor: Fraud is demonstrated in the microcosm of the Oration.
Fraud is also demonstrated in the macrocosm of political reality.
Our thesis is that Constantine invented a fabrication and fiction.
Ancient history informs us that c.331 CE, he lavishly published.]

(6) Moving on through the Oration, Constantine informs us that
the advent of Christ had been predicted by Virgil (70-19 BCE)
in a Latin poem, written 40 BCE, to the poet's patron Pollio.
Fox says: "Constantine cites Latin's loveliest Eclogue
to a christian audience [ED: this is DISPUTED]
for a meaning which it never had."

Constantine began with the seventh line, in a free Greek translation which changed its meaning"

p.651: Fox writes:

"Has there ever been such a sequence of misplaced discoveries in a christian sermon,
let alone in a speech at the end of a Christian [ED: DISPUTED] synod?

[Editor: The Boss is on record, in his Oration to the Saints,
for outright fraudulent misrepresentation of the literature.]

(7) One sentence of the Oration trod unwarily on Arius' ground.

[Editor: The Arian controversy arose in opposition
to the fraudulent historical claims of christianity.
The words of Arius may be interpretted as historical commentary
raised in opposition to Constantine's new god.]

Conclusion: "Men have witnessed battles and watched war in which
God's Providence granted victory to this host." God, in short, had willed
Constantine's victory in response to his piety and prayers,
the themes of which ran through history and his entire Oration ...
Philosophy and paganism were as dead as the old Assyrian cities:
Constantine had freed the East by his prayers and piety,
and before them both lay the promised future of God."

Council of Antioch: Three of the "bishops" who supported Arius refused to join concensus.

Constantine writes letter to Arius after this council finished.

Ossius, Constantine's agent presiding, interrogated each one of its paricipants privately.

[Editor: I have serious reservations that Ossius was a "pious christian bishop"]

Best wishes,

Pete

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-15-2008, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Where specifically in Pagans and Christians does Lane-Fox (not Fox) note that Constantine used the acronym (notfor "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour", let alone that his use of it involves fraud?

Jeffrey

Dear Jeffrey,

Quoting (with pagenumbers) from the link supplied which you axed above:

Attention Jeffrey,

Robin Lane Fox comments ... "the proof was a fraud twice over."

Attention, Pete.

Nothing in what you noted speaks directly to, let alone answers the question I posed -- namely, where specifically in Pagans and Christians does Lane-Fox (not Fox) note that Constantine used the acronym for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour", let alone that his use of the acronym involves fraud?

Jeffrey

mountainman · 12-29-2008, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Dear Jeffrey,

Quoting (with pagenumbers) from the link supplied which you axed above:

Attention Jeffrey,

Robin Lane Fox comments ... "the proof was a fraud twice over."

Attention, Pete.

Nothing in what you noted speaks directly to, let alone answers the question I posed -- namely, where specifically in Pagans and Christians does Lane-Fox (not Fox) note that Constantine used the acronym for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour", let alone that his use of the acronym involves fraud?

Jeffrey

Attention Jeffrey,

Next time you meet Robin Lane-Fox please ask him why he asserts Constantine's proof (of authenticity) was a fraud twice over. I too would be interested to know.

Best wishes,

Pete

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-29-2008, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Attention, Pete.

Nothing in what you noted speaks directly to, let alone answers the question I posed -- namely, where specifically in Pagans and Christians does Lane-Fox (not Fox) note that Constantine used the acronymfor "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour", let alone that his use of the acronym involves fraud?

Jeffrey

Attention Jeffrey,

Next time you meet Robin Lane-Fox please ask him why he asserts Constantine's proof (of authenticity) was a fraud twice over. I too would be interested to know.

Best wishes,

Pete

I will (I may be seeing him in May). I will also ask him not only if this is indeed what he asserted, but also what he thinks of your use of his work --particularly the way you misrepresent, selectively quote, and misread it -- and the validity of the conclusions you base upon it, as well as whether he thinks you have any idea of what you are talking about.

Now will you please answer my question of where specifically it is in Pagans and Christians that Lane-Fox note that Constantine used the acronym for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour", let alone that his use of the acronym involves fraud?

Jeffrey

mountainman · 12-29-2008, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Attention Jeffrey,

Next time you meet Robin Lane-Fox please ask him why he asserts Constantine's proof (of authenticity) was a fraud twice over. I too would be interested to know.

Best wishes,

Pete

I will (I may be seeing him in May). I will also ask him not only if this is indeed what he asserted, but also what he thinks of your use of his work --particularly the way you misrepresent, selectively quote, and misread it -- and the validity of the conclusions you base upon it, as well as whether he thinks you have any idea of what you are talking about.

Dear Jeffrey,

In case you forget my conclusions
can be acronymised CCCAAACCC.

1) Constantine created christianity (NT canon)
2) Arius of Alexandria authored the (NT) Apochrypha (incl. NHC 6.1)
3) Cyril of Alexandria censored the controversies (of inauthenticities)

Quote:

Now will you please answer my question of where specifically it is in Pagans and Christians that Lane-Fox note that Constantine used the acronymfor "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour",[/B] let alone that his use of the acronym involves fraud?

Lane-Fox makes the explicit X-Rated reference to fraud. Ask him. And by the way, since the creeks were down I took the opportunity of driving the twenty seven hour trip to the library to get that reference that I had noted some years ago concerning the relationship between the use of the greek term episkapos and its meaning as "bishop" and "spy". Allow me to make a small disclaimer. At the beginning of my research I had no expectation of doing it [research] for more than a small time, an interlude of some form in my life, of unimportance. I expected to be refuted by evidence. I expected that there was something out there in the field of archaeology by which we could agree that "christians existed before the rise of Constantine". To my utter suprise, week after week, month after month, the forgeries mounted up on all sides, and the genuine citations were utterly ambiguous. Therefore, At some stage (which was not the beginning of my research) I decided to start documenting my notes. I read many books of Constantine.

Unfortunately (from memory) I cited Pohlsander. The correct reference I am now in a position to advise, is Julian Morgan in "Constantine (or via: amazon.co.uk)" in the series of books "Leaders of Ancient Rome". He writes at p.56/57 where [EDITOR: are my comments]

Quote:

Constantine kept tight control over the church, appointing all his bishops personally and maintaining a close relationship with them. These bishops had responsibilities for running churches in their so-called dioceses, or areas of local control. [EDITOR: Dioclesian created the "dioceses"] Much of their work was financial or administrative, and there were as many as 1,800 bishops across the empire, with large, landed estates under their control. Church land was exempt from taxation, so there were great advantages if a wealthy man could secure promotion to the position of bishop. Constantine referred to himself as the bishop of bishops, though this could well have been reference to the fact that episkopos, the Greek work for "bishop", can also mean "spy". He certainly wanted his bishops and priests to know that he was watching them and was involved in their activities.

I hope this is acceptable to justify the dual significance of episkopos in relation to the bishop of bishops Constantine, as a "spy of spies".

Best wishes,

Pete

Newfie · 12-29-2008, 09:33 PM

I know that some people put the symbol on their cars, but this guy goes a step further.

Now, he must be a real Christian.

"Aar! Have you ever been to sea, Billy?"

Toto · 12-30-2008, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

.... And by the way, since the creeks were down I took the opportunity of driving the twenty seven hour trip to the library to get that reference that I had noted some years ago concerning the relationship between the use of the greek term episkopos and its meaning as "bishop" and "spy". ...

Unfortunately (from memory) I cited Pohlsander. The correct reference I am now in a position to advise, is Julian Morgan in "Constantine (or via: amazon.co.uk)" in the series of books "Leaders of Ancient Rome". ,,,

You should have quit while you were ahead, or at least not so far behind.

This book is aimed at grades 5-8

Quote:

Series Review--
"Will be excellent additions to middle school ancient history collections. Recommended."
--Library Media Connection

Julian Morgan

Quote:

has had many years experience as Head of Classics and is currently working at Derby Grammar School. He has an MEd in Educational Computing, and is the author and publisher of a wide range of Classics software.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-15-2008, 04:18 PM	#11
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	So is it the Sibyllines parroting the chreistians, or the chreistians parroting the Sibyllines? How queer that these "oracles" although allegedly of pre-chreistian and pagan origin, never speak one line that is not consistent with chreistian doctrine and dogma. What a crock of fabricated crap, the final quotation from -The Christian Rememberancer- is only further proof, illustrating just how easy it is to fabricate an "holy" acrostic to support a myth. Its a wonder indeed that people are still willing to buy into such blatantly obvious fraudulent fabrications.

12-29-2008, 09:33 PM	#19
Newfie Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 2,457	I know that some people put the symbol on their cars, but this guy goes a step further. Now, he must be a real Christian. "Aar! Have you ever been to sea, Billy?"

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.