Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Tulip
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman
The consultative assertion here was that the majesty of the Roman Emperor Constantine was transferred to the figure of Jesus Christ. Whether Jesus was invented or not is irrelevant to the OP. Historically Jesus was elevated to the purple by a Pontifex Maximimus in the 4th century and received due state reverence and majesty at that time, but not at any time earlier.
|
The majesty of an actual king is different from the majesty of an imaginary king. Constantine did not "transfer" his majesty to Christ any more than Stalin transferred his power to Marx. The veneration of the messianic idol was in both these cases an article of scheming fantasy.
Constantine no more venerated a historical Jesus than Stalin venerated the actual Karl Marx (or Vlad the Impaler for that matter). In both cases it is the preached saviour who is venerated, a construct designed to serve a political narrative.
The majesty of the preached Christ is cuckolded firstly by nails, with him absurdly reigning "from the tree" (come back and fight you yellow bastards!), secondly by ascension, with him sitting conveniently as deus absconditus at God's right hand on high from whence he will allegedly return to judge the quick and the dead, and thirdly by virgin birth, an impossible myth designed to place an aggressive absurdity in the face of any who challenge it by reason, and to emphasise that Christ is myth not fact, but with the most powerful part of the myth being the assertion that it is not a myth. |
And the endless repetition of the assertion ...
Quote:
|
Speaking of Constantine’s majesty, I think the vision of the Chi Rho cross before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge on 28 October 312 AD may be decisive.
|
This represents one of the legends by which Constantine brought the majesty of Jesus into the political arena. In this legend it would appear that the god Jesus (who brought a sword) favoured Constantine in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge.
01-22-2013, 10:21 AM
