Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 08-02-2010, 01:44 PM

http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/luc/tsg/tsg05.htm

Quote:

"Lucian was at one time secretary to the prefect of Egypt, and he boasts that he had a large share in writing the laws and ordering the justice of that province. Here this laughing philosopher found a broad mark for his humour in the religion of the Egyptians, their worship of animals and water-jars, their love of magic, the general mourning through the land on the death of the bull Apis, their funeral ceremonies, their placing their mummies round the dinner table as so many guests, and pawning a father or a brother when in want of money."—Sharpe's History of Egypt, Chap. xv., § 51.

Quote:

Lucian has heard of Christianity, but seems to have regarded it as an ordinary Oriental cult. He refers to it twice; the first passage is in the memoirs of Alexander, in which the false prophet is alleged to

p. 36

have proclaimed: "If any atheist, Christian, or Epicurean has come to spy out the sacred rites, let him flee"; and in the same tract (§ 25) he couples Christians and atheists. The second passage is in the treatise on the death of Peregrinus the impostor, who, according to Lucian, was a renegade from Christianity and indeed had occupied an important post among that community. The translation is Sir Richard Jebb's.

"He had thoroughly learnt," says Lucian, "the wondrous philosophy of the Christians, having consorted in Palestine with their priests and scribes. What would you expect? He speedily showed that they were mere children in his hands: he was their prophet, the chief of their religious fraternity (θιασιάρχης), the convener of their meetings (συναγωγεύς) —in short, everything to them. Some of their books he interpreted and elucidated; many of them he wrote himself. They regarded him as a god, made him their law-giver, and adopted him as their champion (προστάτην ἐπεγράφοντο)."

Concerning their tenets he says, "They still reverence that great one (τὸν μέγαν ἐκεῖνον), the man who was crucified in Palestine because he brought this new mystery into the world. The poor creatures have persuaded themselves that they will be altogether immortal and live for ever; wherefore they despise death and in many cases give themselves to it voluntarily. Then their first Law-giver (i.e., Christ) persuaded them that they were all brethren, when they should have taken the step of renouncing all the Hellenic gods, and worshipping that crucified

p. 37

one, their sophist, and living after his laws. So they despise all things alike (i.e., all dangers and sufferings) and hold their goods in common: though they have received such traditions without any certain warrant. If then an artful impostor comes among them, an adroit man of the world, he very soon enriches himself by making these simple folk his dupes."

It is fair to say that by some writers of repute 1 Peregrinus is regarded as a conscientious mystic, and Lucian as unqualified to understand mysticism and religious enthusiasm. In any case it is clear that Lucian for all the scorn with which he regards the various religions and philosophies of his age, showed considerable interest in collecting facts about them, and those which he gives us in the tract on The Syrian Goddess are as instructive as any.

Clivedurdle · 08-02-2010, 01:49 PM

From a Machiavellian perspective, xianity may be an excellent choice for an emperor....

aa5874 · 08-02-2010, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

From a Machiavellian perspective, xianity may be an excellent choice for an emperor....

But, the Emperor Julian did not think so at all.

"Against the Galileans" by the Emperor Julian.

Quote:

It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.

Though it has in it nothing divine, by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable and is childish and foolish, it has induced men to believe that the monstrous tale is truth....

Seems like it was a monstrous fable for Julian.

Loomis · 08-02-2010, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loomis

The practice of replacing “Yahweh” with “Lord” is consistent with the Law in Leviticus 24:16 LXX

Yes, in our oldest extant copy of LXX: Codex Sinaiticus, for example, which dates from the fourth century CE. Yes, in those Christian doctored documents, where "Lord" = "Jesus" = "God", according to trinitarian doctrine, you are correct.

But the author of Romans 10:9-13 did not say "Lord" = "Jesus" = "God". The author of Romans 10:9-13 only said "Lord" = "Jesus".

Quote:

if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

See?

He said Jesus is Lord, and that God raised him from the dead.

stephan huller · 08-02-2010, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Seems like it was a monstrous fable for Julian.

Have you ever actually read the writings of Julian? Just wondering because he made a lot of objections to Christianity. That it was a 'fable' would be a strange argument as he was a pagan who accepted all sorts of equally silly stories. It's been awhile since I read the fragments of Against the Galileans but from memory the only time he mentions the word 'fable' is when he references the Garden of Eden.

Julian and Celsus thought Christianity was morally DEGENERATE. That's a different argument than the mythicist position.

aa5874 · 08-02-2010, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

Seems like it was a monstrous fable for Julian.

Have you ever actually read the writings of Julian? Just wondering because he made a lot of objections to Christianity. That it was a 'fable' would be a strange argument as he was a pagan who accepted all sorts of equally silly stories. It's been awhile since I read the fragments of Against the Galileans but from memory the only time he mentions the word 'fable' is when he references the Garden of Eden.

Julian and Celsus thought Christianity was morally DEGENERATE. That's a different argument than the mythicist position.

Julian made an argument of fiction, fable and fabrication 300 years later.

The translator, William Cave Wright PHD, of "Against the Galileans" must have seen something that you did not see.

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/ju...ans_1_text.htm

Quote:

It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.

Though it has in it nothing divine, by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable and is childish and foolish, it has induced men to believe that[ the monstrous tale is truth....

stephan huller · 08-02-2010, 08:25 PM

Hi AA

Since you are using Roger Pearse's site you might be interested in hearing what even he admits is wrong with that translation in a recent discussion we had:

By the way, be a bit wary about the “Against the Galileans”. All that material comes from Cyril of Alexandria, “Contra Julianum”. But when I was translating book 2 of that, I had occasion to compare the text of “Julian” in that with the translation of W.C.Wright, in the Loeb. Wright seems to have treated the text extremely loosely, and I’m not at all sure that he represents Julian correctly.

Another point to bear in mind is that the arrangement of the material is not Julian’s, but Cyril’s. Julian apparently rambled like anything, and it was Cyril who arranged it in logical order and chopped out the repetition so that he could refute it.

It's possible then that Julian actually said these things. Even if it is, Julian was certainly a believer in 'fables' and 'fabulous stories' himself. He's not Richard Dawkins. I was just pointing out that his decision to abandon Christianity had less to do with his discovery that Christianity had fables than he liked the traditional Greek fables better because they were less degenerate ...

spin · 08-02-2010, 08:44 PM

In case you'd really like to see some nomina sacra, here's a page from papyrus P46:

4th line down towards the end, you see what looks like a KY (short for kuriou), with a bar over it.

5th line, towards the middle, what looks like XW (christw).

7th line, middle, O ΘC (o theos).

The structure is the first letter and the last letter of the word -- the last letter for the grammatical needs of the Greek.

Of course the nomina sacra was used in the christian versions of the LXX. Here's a page from the earliest copy of Joshua (chapter 10):

Halfway down on the left you'll see a KN (kurion) - Jos 10:12.

Below that another O ΘC.

Interestingly, look at the right hand column, halfway down, start of the line. You'll see IHC - three letters instead of two. I can't say whether they are the first three letters of the name of Jesus or the first two and the last. But it is here Joshua, called Jesus (ιησους) in Greek.

This is interesting because it seems that Roman praenomen were written in Greek as the first three letters of the name with a bar over it. (See this blog, which refers to a text with the abbreviation of Τιβεριος ("Tiberius") to Τιβ with bar.)

In the earliest copies of the LXX, presumably Jewish copies, the tetragrammaton was used: Hebrew letters were written in the Greek text, where now the LXX has the various grammatical forms of κυριος abbreviated.

Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls have the tetragrammaton abbreviated as the Hebrew equivalent of YY, so the abbreviation of the sacred name was found in pre-christian Jewish sources.

spin

aa5874 · 08-02-2010, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Hi AA

Since you are using Roger Pearse's site you might be interested in hearing what even he admits is wrong with that translation in a recent discussion we had:

By the way, be a bit wary about the “Against the Galileans”. All that material comes from Cyril of Alexandria, “Contra Julianum”. But when I was translating book 2 of that, I had occasion to compare the text of “Julian” in that with the translation of W.C.Wright, in the Loeb. Wright seems to have treated the text extremely loosely, and I’m not at all sure that he represents Julian correctly.

Another point to bear in mind is that the arrangement of the material is not Julian’s, but Cyril’s. Julian apparently rambled like anything, and it was Cyril who arranged it in logical order and chopped out the repetition so that he could refute it.

It's possible then that Julian actually said these things. Even if it is, Julian was certainly a believer in 'fables' and 'fabulous stories' himself. He's not Richard Dawkins. I was just pointing out that his decision to abandon Christianity had less to do with his discovery that Christianity had fables than he liked the traditional Greek fables better because they were less degenerate ...

What?!!!???!!!

Toto · 08-02-2010, 09:11 PM

This froum has been subjected to mountainman repeating that quote from Julian about the "monstrous fable" too often. He has refused to listen to any reasonable argument about what it actually means.

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

08-02-2010, 01:49 PM	#22
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	From a Machiavellian perspective, xianity may be an excellent choice for an emperor....

08-02-2010, 08:25 PM	#27
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Hi AA Since you are using Roger Pearse's site you might be interested in hearing what even he admits is wrong with that translation in a recent discussion we had: By the way, be a bit wary about the “Against the Galileans”. All that material comes from Cyril of Alexandria, “Contra Julianum”. But when I was translating book 2 of that, I had occasion to compare the text of “Julian” in that with the translation of W.C.Wright, in the Loeb. Wright seems to have treated the text extremely loosely, and I’m not at all sure that he represents Julian correctly. Another point to bear in mind is that the arrangement of the material is not Julian’s, but Cyril’s. Julian apparently rambled like anything, and it was Cyril who arranged it in logical order and chopped out the repetition so that he could refute it. It's possible then that Julian actually said these things. Even if it is, Julian was certainly a believer in 'fables' and 'fabulous stories' himself. He's not Richard Dawkins. I was just pointing out that his decision to abandon Christianity had less to do with his discovery that Christianity had fables than he liked the traditional Greek fables better because they were less degenerate ...

08-02-2010, 08:44 PM	#28
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	In case you'd really like to see some nomina sacra, here's a page from papyrus P46: 4th line down towards the end, you see what looks like a KY (short for kuriou), with a bar over it. 5th line, towards the middle, what looks like XW (christw). 7th line, middle, O ΘC (o theos). The structure is the first letter and the last letter of the word -- the last letter for the grammatical needs of the Greek. Of course the nomina sacra was used in the christian versions of the LXX. Here's a page from the earliest copy of Joshua (chapter 10): Halfway down on the left you'll see a KN (kurion) - Jos 10:12. Below that another O ΘC. Interestingly, look at the right hand column, halfway down, start of the line. You'll see IHC - three letters instead of two. I can't say whether they are the first three letters of the name of Jesus or the first two and the last. But it is here Joshua, called Jesus (ιησους) in Greek. This is interesting because it seems that Roman praenomen were written in Greek as the first three letters of the name with a bar over it. (See this blog, which refers to a text with the abbreviation of Τιβεριος ("Tiberius") to Τιβ with bar.) In the earliest copies of the LXX, presumably Jewish copies, the tetragrammaton was used: Hebrew letters were written in the Greek text, where now the LXX has the various grammatical forms of κυριος abbreviated. Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls have the tetragrammaton abbreviated as the Hebrew equivalent of YY, so the abbreviation of the sacred name was found in pre-christian Jewish sources. spin

08-02-2010, 09:11 PM	#30
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	This froum has been subjected to mountainman repeating that quote from Julian about the "monstrous fable" too often. He has refused to listen to any reasonable argument about what it actually means.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.