Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 06-25-2008, 09:32 PM

Chief Inspectors of cases of fraudulent misprepresentation Huon. Do you have any of those people, in the northern hemisphere? Or people capable of putting on such a hat?

mountainman · 07-02-2008, 05:22 PM

One for the 17th and 18th centuries ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arnaldo Momigliano

The Classical Foundations of Modern Historiography
Arnaldo Momigliano
Sather Classical Lectures (1961-62)
Volume Fifty-Four
University of California Press, 1990

p.132

"The connection between ecclesiastical history and fireworks is perhaps
not the most obvious. But in one case fireworks demonstrably helped the
study of ecclesiastical history. The name of Bendetto Bacchini stands
out among the learned Benedictine monks of the end of the seventeeth century."

*********

Four pages are then spent outlining the attempts of this Bachi
to publish a document he had found - the "Liber Pontificalis".
p.133

"The author of the chronicle, Agnellus, a priest of Ravenna between 820 and 845, compiled his "Liber Pontificalis" as a series of lectures for his fellow priests of the Capitolum of Ravenna." This related to other evidence indicating an alleged conferment of the pallium on the Bishop of Ravenna by the Roman Emperor Valentinianus (III)

p.135

"At a certain point the Inquisition intervened and requested Bacchini to surrender all his papers on Agnellus: at the same time the Librarian of the Duke of Moderna, L.A. Muratori, who was Bacchini's pupil, was asked not to allow outsiders to read the "Liber Pontificalis" of Ravenna.

Finally a compomise was reached. Bacchini consented to write a new preface
in which he had to declare that Agnellus' statement on the pallium was utterly incredible and wicked - and after many further negotiations about the details the "Liber Pontificalis" could appear about 1708. It was incidentally the last book Bacchini was permitted to publish. At least two others were stopped by censorship."

Larry Fox · 07-03-2008, 12:04 PM

Thanks for another provocative post, mountainman.

I would add the Pseudo-Dionysius as a major fraud perpetrated in the middle ages, being an influential book of theology for over a half-millennium before it was exposed.

Also important in the 19th century, is the set of Mormon books claiming to be ancient discoveries, and maybe the book of Jasher.

I don't think modern Christians understand just how many lies have been foisted on them through their history. However, I think that this sort of thing is inevitable within the worldview where, if you can trace some statement or idea back to somebody who knew Jesus, that people would tend to make fake books and documents to get their own ideas accepted. I think it's worth considering, Is there another branch of human thought that has produced an entire body, thousands of pages, of literature dubbed "Pseudepigrapha"?

I also think this kind of thing is a pretty strong argument against Christian belief as well; if religious leaders have been deceived so many times by their fellow believers; why didn't God ever tell anybody that any of these books were forged? Why did scholars & philologists like Abelard & Valla have to always be the ones to discover the truth instead of the mystics & ascetics?

Roger Pearse · 07-03-2008, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Fox

I would add the Pseudo-Dionysius as a major fraud perpetrated in the middle ages, being an influential book of theology for over a half-millennium before it was exposed.

Interesting. Could you say why you think that these writings constitute a fraud (they are not by Dionysius the Areopagite, of course), and who wrote them with that intent?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 07-03-2008, 12:37 PM

I see this thread is treating all hagiography, not as a branch of folk-tale, but as evidence of intentional deceit. Perhaps those doing so would explain why?

andrewcriddle · 07-03-2008, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Interesting. Could you say why you think that these writings constitute a fraud (they are not by Dionysius the Areopagite, of course), and who wrote them with that intent?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

IMO some of Pseudo-Dionysius' letters - eg letter 9

Quote:

My dear Titus I do not know if the sacred Timothy at the time when he departed was unaware of the theological symbols of which I have been offering interpretations. Certainly in my own symbolic theology I explained to him...

and letter 10 where he writes consolingly and a little patronisingly to the Apostle John at Patmos - indicate a deliberate attempt to deceive going beyond a harmless conventional pseudonym.

Andrew Criddle

mountainman · 07-03-2008, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I see this thread is treating all hagiography, not as a branch of folk-tale, but as evidence of intentional deceit.

Yes - century after century of the same stuff.

Quote:

Perhaps those doing so would explain why?

To prove that the forgery of christianity commenced in the fourth century and was inextricably interwoven into a top-down emperor cult, with immediate and constant access to the imperial court, with extremely lavish tax-exempt status amidst the struggle against increasing taxation of the fourth century. And control of the technology of writing. Constantine made a takeover bid for the ancient sacred name abbreviation. The literature was scrutinised. Christian bishops scoured the territories of the empire in the mid fourth century on the lookout for "forbidden books".

Perhaps that is why "The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles" was buried at Nag Hammadi circa 348 CE acording to the C14 report.

Christianity was an imperially inspired religion.

For a precedent, 100 years prior to Nicaea,
research the relationship between Ardashir
and the religion of Zoroastrianism.

Ardashir and Constantine were military supremacists.
They created new religions from the old.
They controlled and then burnt the old civilisation's records.
In the case of Ardashir it was the Parthian.
In the case of Constantine it was the Egypto/Graeco/Roman.

Eusebius was Constantine's minister for communications.
Tertullian was one of Eusebius' many fraudulent non-de-plumes.

Ardashir gave the Iranian empire over to his son
with the advice to rule by the army and the religion.
Constantine left the reigns with Constantius.
What does Ammianus Marcellenus tells us about Constantius?

Have you ever carefully read his obituary?.

Best wishes,

Pete

Huon · 07-04-2008, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I see this thread is treating all hagiography, not as a branch of folk-tale, but as evidence of intentional deceit. Perhaps those doing so would explain why?

Yes, it is evidence of intentional deceit. The Catholic Church has been recently making attempts to canonizing J-Paul II, and tried to find "miracles" that he would have performed. Every day, in my local newspaper, owned by a demo-christian family (not necessarily bad persons, but "grenouilles de bénitier", holy water basin frogs) there is a small paragraph about the saint of the day. Some of them, the recent ones, existed, undiscutably. Did they perform miracles ? Hem, hem. But there are a number of "saints of the day" of whom nothing certain is known. Veronica, for instance.

In the region of Bordeaux, Veronica, shortly after the Ascension of Christ, lands at Soulac at the mouth of the Gironde, bringing relics of the Blessed Virgin; there she preaches, dies, and is buried in the tomb which was long venerated either at Soulac or in the Church of St. Seurin at Bordeaux. Sometimes she has even been confounded with a pious woman who, according to Gregory of Tours, brought to the neighboring town of Bazas some drops of the blood of John the Baptist, at whose beheading she was present.

[A DNA study could prove the authenticity of the blood of JtB].

mountainman · 07-06-2008, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

[A DNA study could prove the authenticity of the blood of JtB].

And a date. (C14)

The blood test was used to select the one true cross from the three in the fourth century by the ingenuity of Constantine's mother.

Best wishes,

Pete

mountainman · 07-06-2008, 04:14 PM

The changes of the refences of "chrestianos" to "christianos" in the thirteenth century need to be added to this list.

Every bit of evidence examined by ancient historians of BC&H needs to be perceived as a totality. Imagine it on a big table marked ... "here rests the evidence presented for the history of the term "christianos" century by century by century of authoritarian belief mongering via the fraudulent misprepresentation of historical truth.

christianos or chrestianos in Tacitus ?

Quote:

By far our oldest manuscript of 'Annals' XI-XVI is what is known as the '2nd Medicean' copied at Monte Cassino in the 11th century. There are several other surviving manuscripts written in the 15th century. The '2nd Medicean' was corrected at the time it was written probably by the original scribe and again in the late 13th century. It was still at Monte Cassino in the early 14th century when Paulus Venetus, Bishop of Puzzuoli used it between say 1325 and 1345. However it must have left Monte Cassino shortly afterwards, (before 1371 if it was the copy used by Boccaccio).

The original reading of the '2nd Medicean' is Chrestianos but this was corrected in the 13th century to Christianos. All or Almost all of the 15th century manuscripts read Christianos.

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

06-25-2008, 09:32 PM	#11
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Chief Inspectors of cases of fraudulent misprepresentation Huon. Do you have any of those people, in the northern hemisphere? Or people capable of putting on such a hat?

07-03-2008, 12:04 PM	#13
Larry Fox Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: London, England Posts: 8	Thanks for another provocative post, mountainman. I would add the Pseudo-Dionysius as a major fraud perpetrated in the middle ages, being an influential book of theology for over a half-millennium before it was exposed. Also important in the 19th century, is the set of Mormon books claiming to be ancient discoveries, and maybe the book of Jasher. I don't think modern Christians understand just how many lies have been foisted on them through their history. However, I think that this sort of thing is inevitable within the worldview where, if you can trace some statement or idea back to somebody who knew Jesus, that people would tend to make fake books and documents to get their own ideas accepted. I think it's worth considering, Is there another branch of human thought that has produced an entire body, thousands of pages, of literature dubbed "Pseudepigrapha"? I also think this kind of thing is a pretty strong argument against Christian belief as well; if religious leaders have been deceived so many times by their fellow believers; why didn't God ever tell anybody that any of these books were forged? Why did scholars & philologists like Abelard & Valla have to always be the ones to discover the truth instead of the mystics & ascetics?

07-03-2008, 12:37 PM	#15
Roger Pearse Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 4,370	I see this thread is treating all hagiography, not as a branch of folk-tale, but as evidence of intentional deceit. Perhaps those doing so would explain why?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.