Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 03-15-2013, 04:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I never realized what the etymology of the name Arius (Αρειος = 'of Ares') was before. There is a strange parallel here with regards to the name Mark or Marcus (= 'belonging to Mars').

Constantine called Arius an 'Ares' in his letter of 333 CE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BULLNECK

(6.) Indeed, I myself shall advance a little farther,
that I may become a spectator of those wars of insanity.
I myself, I said, shall advance, I who have been
accustomed to end wars of senseless men.

Come now Ares Arius,? there is need for shields.
Do not do this, we beg; at least, then,
let Aphrodite’s intercourse detain you.

But really, would that, as you seem to fashion
the finest things for the masses, so it would be
our part to abound in piety toward Christ!

Quote:

The Arians claimed to represent the original Alexandrian tradition.

Didn't Arius (in one of these sources) call his (spiritual) father [by the name of] 'Ammonius'?

If this is true, what type of Alexandrian tradition has an 'Ammonius' as a 'father'?

εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

mountainman · 03-15-2013, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

.....

but look at the picture. He is being trampled.

---------- Arius here

Maybe he said that Brian Jesus was a naughty boy and not the Messiah?

εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

tanya · 03-15-2013, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Eusebius's references to 'Arius' and 'Arians'

Is Eusebius our only source of information about Arius' mentor, Lucian of Antioch?

How do we know that Jerome, son of Eusebius, relied upon Lucian's recension of the bible, in constructing the Latin Vulgate?

Chili · 03-15-2013, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Terry Jones Barbarians comments on "lovely bath". One could not have a nice bath without getting pulled into a heated discussion about is the son equal to the father or not. The fourth century emperors were often arian - including Constantine. Many of the barbarian groups were.

So the question is are there key figures behind this dispute? Is it only a result of the formalising in creeds of theological viewpoints?

Constantine is alleged to have said on his death bed to his xian priests - you better be right!

That sounds about right because the Christian must necessarily resign from the argument and from politics all together, wherefore then the papal seat is "ex-cathedra" as the chair that radiates so that the Church Millitant can sit on 'it' as Catholic and not as Christian to 'hand down' the menu that is designed outside the throne [by those inside the know].

Galilee is where the fire is at and if you go to Rev.13 the actions of the first and second beast are much the same, but notice that the first beast came out of the water and the second from the earth.

"Out of the water" here is by faith that is born out of tradition, while the "out of the earth" is by way if reason that was side aside as dry land for him to walk on already in Gen.1 so he could see for himself [with his eyes wide open now], as the rational animal man 'to be' in Gen 3 where he would be called Adam as imposter now (second nature now as human).

So now the heresy of the Arian is not necessarily in the proclamations they make, but in the source of them that must be intuit to him instead of from the books he reads (or knowledge retained) as look-alike.

The same with gnostic, wherein the mind of Christ is gnostic but not as look-alike with the -ism attached inside movement they formed to proclaim those gnostic lines.

This concept comes across better with pantheist, wherein the Pantheist can see God in nature but not in himself and so denies himself as God.

There is a jump-shift to be made wherein 'the upper' room is occupied and the lower house is vacated to also set the Ex Cathedra throne aside. In Buddhism that jump-shift is from Yang to Yin, and so must also necessarily be all male below or the woman could no longer be the Queen of Heaven and Earth as seen by humanity below where only the trinity is known to them.

So now 'all male only' in the priesthood is a necessary condition to venerate the woman above as the most engmatic of them all. After all, she was never banned from Eden to also never be crucified by men below, but effectively she just humms along as if the only to be heard from behind the veil in the sanctuary of the human mind, and actually loves to be there if he is responsive to her silent call.

stephan huller · 03-15-2013, 11:46 AM

this is where Pete's theory breaks down. If Eusebius did not write In Praise of Constantine I don't see any other references to Arius

stephan huller · 03-15-2013, 12:51 PM

I think it might be important to develop a chronology of the earliest references to Arius. Most noteworthy is Rowan Williams point that Alexander of Alexandria's letter against Arius doesn't mention the Thalia or as he puts it:

Quote:

It is difficult to believe that Alexander would have written a lengthy rebuttal of Arius's ideas with no reference to Arius' manifesto, had this been available p. 254

stephan huller · 03-15-2013, 12:54 PM

Another thing I have noticed FWIW almost all the early references couple Arius with someone else. In other words, the name 'Arius' could have been added to a text that just mentioned one person. We find 'Arius and Meletius' and 'Arius and Achillas' but rarely Arius on his own. So Alexander of Alexandria's epistle to Alexander of Constantinople begins with a mentions of 'they' (= Achilles and Arius) rather than 'Arius':

Quote:

The ambitious and avaricious will of wicked men is always wont to lay snares against those churches which seem greater, by various pretexts attacking the ecclesiastical piety of such. For incited by the devil who works in them, to the lust of that which is set before them, and throwing away all religious scruples, they trample under foot the fear of the judgment of God. Concerning which things, I who suffer, have thought it necessary to show to your piety, in order that you may be aware of such men, lest any of them presume to set foot in your dioceses, whether by themselves or by others; for these sorcerers know how to use hypocrisy to carry out their fraud; and to employ letters composed and dressed out with lies, which are able to deceive a man who is intent upon a simple and sincere faith. Therefore Arius and Achilles, having lately entered into a conspiracy, emulating the ambition of Colluthus, have turned out far worse than he. For Colluthus, indeed, who reprehends these very men, found some pretext for his evil purpose; but these, beholding his battering of Christ, endured no longer to be subject to the Church; but building for themselves dens of thieves, they hold their assemblies in them unceasingly, night and day directing their calumnies against Christ and against us. For since they call in question all pious and doctrine, after the manner of the Jews, they have constructed a workshop for contending against Christ, denying the Godhead of our Saviour, and preaching that He is only the equal of all others. And having collected all the passages which speak of His plan of salvation and His humiliation for our sakes, they endeavour from these to collect the preaching of their impiety, ignoring altogether the passages in which His eternal Godhead and unutterable glory with the Father is set forth. Since, therefore, they back up the impious opinion concerning Christ, which is held by the Jews and Greeks, in every possible way they strive to gain their approval; busying themselves about all those things which they are wont to deride in us, and daily stirring up against us seditions and persecutions. And now, indeed, they drag us before the tribunals of the judges, by intercourse with silly and disorderly women, whom they have led into error; at another time they cast opprobrium and infamy upon the Christian religion, their young maidens disgracefully wandering about every village and street. Nay, even Christ's indivisible tunic, which His executioners were unwilling to divide, these wretches have dared to rend.

And this pairing continues throughout the letter:

Quote:

For you yourselves are taught of God, nor are you ignorant that this doctrine, which has lately raised its head against the piety of the Church, is that of Ebion and Artemas; nor is it anything else but an imitation of Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, who, by the judgment and counsel of all the bishops, and in every place, was separated from the Church. To whom Lucian succeeding, remained for many years separate from the communion of three bishops. And now lately having drained the dregs of their impiety, there have arisen among us those who teach this doctrine of a creation from things which are not, their hidden sprouts, Arius and Achilles, and the gathering of those who join in their wickedness. And three bishops in Syria, having been, in some manner, consecrated on account of their agreement with them, incite them to worse things. [9]

and again:

Quote:

These are the apostolic doctrines of the Church, for which also we die, esteeming those but little who would compel us to forswear them, even if they would force us by tortures, and not casting away our hope in them. To these Arius and Achilles opposing themselves, and those who with them are the enemies of the truth, have been expelled from the Church, as being aliens from our holy doctrine [13]

So much for the references to Arius in the first letter.

stephan huller · 03-15-2013, 01:02 PM

The second epistle of Alexander seems to make Eusebius of Nicomedia the ringleader not Arius. Again the first mention of Arius in the list that follows can be imagined to be added to list:

Quote:

Since the body of the Catholic Church is one, and it is commanded in Holy Scripture that we should keep the bond of unanimity and peace, it follows that we should write and signify to one another the things which are done by each of us; that whether one member suffer or rejoice we may all either suffer or rejoice with one another. In our diocese, then, not so long ago, there have gone forth lawless men, and adversaries of Christ, teaching men to apostatize; which thing, with good right, one might suspect and call the precursor of Antichrist. I indeed wished to cover the matter up in silence, that so perhaps the evil might spend itself in the leaders of the heresy alone, and that it might not spread to other places and defile the ears of any of the more simple-minded. But since Eusebius, the present bishop of Nicomedia, imagining that with him rest all ecclesiastical matters, because, having left Berytus and cast his eyes upon the church of the Nicomedians, and no punishment has been inflicted upon him, he is set over these apostates, and has undertaken to write everywhere, commending them, if by any means he may draw aside some who are ignorant to this most disgraceful and Ant; christian heresy; it became necessary for me, as knowing what is written in the law, no longer to remain silent, but to announce to you all, that you may know both those who have become apostates, and also the wretched words of their heresy; and if Eusebius write, not to give heed to him.

2. For he, desiring by their assistance to renew that ancient wickedness of his mind, with respect to which he has for a time been silent, pretends that he is writing in their behalf, but he proves by his deed that he is exerting himself to do this on his own account. Now the apostates from the Church are these: Arius, Achilles, Aithales, Carpones, the other Arius, Sarmates, who were formerly priests; Euzoius, Lucius, Julius, Menas, Helladius, and Gains, formerly deacons; and with them Secundus and Theonas, who were once called bishops. And the words invented by them, and spoken contrary to the mind of Scripture, are as follows

Strangely, even though the letter begins by opposing Eusebius of Nicomedia after this section the name 'Arius' seems to be inserted into the text to make it about this heretic rather than Eusebius of Nicomedia:

Quote:

Since those about Arius speak these things and shamelessly maintain them, we, coming together with the Bishops of Egypt and the Libyas, nearly a hundred in number, have anathematized them, together with their followers. But those about Eusebius have received them, earnestly endeavouring to mix up falsehood with truth, impiety with piety. But they will not prevail; for the truth prevails

The conclusion of the letter seems to make 'Arius' the center of the controversy but it is difficult to square this with 'Eusebius of Nicomedia' being the focus of the beginning of the letter. The words after 'Those who are with me salute you' - i.e. 'Presbyters of Alexandria' were obviously not part of the original address - so too its mention of 'Arius':

Quote:

Salute the brethren who are with you. Those who are with me salute you. Presbyters of Alexandria.

I, Colluthus, presbyter, give my suffrage to the things which are written, and also for the deposition of Arius, and those who are guilty of impiety with him.

Alexander, presbyter
Arpocration, presbyter
Dioscorus, presbyter
Agathus, presbyter
Nemesius, presbyter
Dionysius, presbyter
Longus, presbyter
Silvanus, presbyter
Eusebius, presbyter
Perous, presbyter
Apis, presbyter
Alexander, presbyter
Proterius, presbyter
Paulus, presbyter
Nilaras, presbyter
Cyrus, presbyter
Ammonius, deacon
Ambytianus, deacon
Gaius, deacon
Macarius, deacon
Pistus, deacon
Alexander, deacon
Dionysius, deacon
Athanasius, deacon
Agathon, deacon
Eumenes, deacon
Polybius, deacon
Apollonius, deacon
Olympius, deacon
Theonas, deacon
Aphthonius, deacon
Marcus, deacon
Athanasius, deacon.
Commodus, deacon
Macarius, deacon
Serapion, deacon
Nilus, deacon
Paulus, deacon
Romanus, deacon
Petrus, deacon

Presbyters of Mareotis.

I, Apollonius, presbyter, give my suffrage to the things which are written, and also for the deposition of Arius, and of those who are guilty of impiety with him.

Ingenius, presbyter
Dioscorus, presbyter
Sostras, presbyter
Ammonius, presbyter
Theon, presbyter
Tyrannus, presbyter
Boccon, presbyter
Copres, presbyter
Agathus, presbyter
Ammonas, presbyter
Achilles, presbyter
Orion, presbyter
Paulus, presbyter
Serenus, presbyter
Thalelaeus, presbyter
Didymus, presbyter
Dionysius, presbyter
Heracles, presbyter
Sarapion, deacon
Didymus, deacon
Ptollarion, deacon
Justus, deacon
Seras, deacon
Gaius, deacon
Didymus, deacon
Hierax, deacon
Demetrius, deacon
Marcus, deacon
Maurus, deacon
Theonas, deacon
Alexander, deacon
Sarmaton, deacon
Marcus, deacon
Carpon, deacon
Comon, deacon
Zoilus, deacon
Tryphon, deacon
Ammonius, deacon

stephan huller · 03-15-2013, 01:10 PM

It is by the only by the third letter that the identity of 'Arius' is firmly established:

Quote:

Alexander, to the priests and deacons, Alexandria and Mareotis, being present to them present, brethren beloved in the Lord, sends greeting:

Although you have been forward to subscribe the letters that I sent to those about Arius, urging them to abjure their impiety, and to obey the wholesome and Catholic faith; and in this manner have shown your orthodox purpose, and your agreement in the doctrines of the Catholic Church; yet because I have also sent letters to all our fellow-ministers in every place with respect to the things which concern Arius and his companions; I have thought it necessary to call together you the clergy of the city, and to summon you also of Mareotis; especially since of your number Chares and Pistus, the priests; Sarapion, Parammon, Zosimus, and Irenaeus, the deacons, have gone over to the party of Arius, and have preferred to be deposed with them; that you may know what is now written, and that you should declare your consent in these matters, and give your suffrage for the deposition of those about Arius and Pistus. For it is fight that you should know what I have written, and that you should each one, as if he had written it himself retain it in his heart.

But this represents also the last of the mentions of Arius in the writings of Alexander.

stephan huller · 03-15-2013, 01:13 PM

By the time of Alexander's successor Athanasius the identity of 'Arius' and 'the Arians' becomes just another stock 'heretical group' much like the others:

Quote:

Yes surely; while all of us are and are called Christians after Christ, Marcion broached a heresy a long time since and was cast out; and those who continued with him who ejected him remained Christians; but those who followed Marcion were called Christians no more, but henceforth Marcionites. Thus Valentinus also, and Basilides, and Manichæus, and Simon Magus, have imparted their own name to their followers; and some are accosted as Valentinians, or as Basilidians, or as Manichees, or as Simonians; and other, Cataphrygians from Phrygia, and from Novatus Novatians. So too Meletius, when ejected by Peter the Bishop and Martyr, called his party no longer Christians, but Meletians , and so in consequence when Alexander of blessed memory had cast out Arius, those who remained with Alexander, remained Christians; but those who went out with Arius, left the Saviour's Name to us who were with Alexander, and as to them they were hence-forward denominated Arians. Behold then, after Alexander's death too, those who communicate with his successor Athanasius, and those with whom the said Athanasius communicates, are instances of the same rule; none of them bear his name, nor is he named from them, but all in like manner, and as is usual, are called Christians. For though we have a succession of teachers and become their disciples, yet, because we are taught by them the things of Christ, we both are, and are called, Christians all the same. But those who follow the heretics, though they have innumerable successors in their heresy, yet anyhow bear the name of him who devised it. Thus, though Arius be dead, and many of his party have succeeded him, yet those who think with him, as being known from Arius, are called Arians. And, what is a remarkable evidence of this, those of the Greeks who even at this time come into the Church, on giving up the superstition of idols, take the name, not of their catechists, but of the Saviour, and begin to be called Christians instead of Greeks: while those of them who go off to the heretics, and again all who from the Church change to this heresy, abandon Christ's name, and henceforth are called Arians, as no longer holding Christ's faith, but having inherited Arius's madness.

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

03-15-2013, 11:46 AM	#15
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	this is where Pete's theory breaks down. If Eusebius did not write In Praise of Constantine I don't see any other references to Arius

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.