Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Duvduv · 10-29-2012, 12:38 PM

Why do we have to change the focus of this thread? Last I looked this thread wasn't about that subject.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

What did Israel use in 700 BC?

mountainman · 10-30-2012, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

So here the BOTTOM LINE is that only an authoritative body could establish a CANON of texts equivalent to the Old Testament rendering the NT texts sacred writ alongside the sacred writ of the Old Testament. This could ONLY have been done through the authority of the Byzantinian regime after Constantine.

Repeating this does not make it true.

Its an inference from the evidence and was probably repeated for discussion purposes.

The attestation in Ammianus of imperial religious inquisitions of the pagans c.359 CE at Scythopolis suggest that the imperial religion was being protected by means of the sword and the rack and the torture of civilians. What was at stake here was the MAJESTY of the emperor. The majesty of the emperor and the majesty of Jesus Chrest or Christ were intermingled and were being protected by death, persecution and intollerance.

The Nicaean orthodoxy was established by the Emperor Theodosius 381 CE and not the church. See Freeman's book AD 381.

The whole point here being that a political history of the 4th century has yet to be written. Freeman has presented a political history of the epoch around 381 CE. The political history from N|icaea to this time has yet to be written.

Of course there are "Church Histories" written in the 5th century about this period 325 to 381 CE, but these are not the same animal as political histories.

Duvduv · 10-31-2012, 07:06 PM

Mountsinman, if Freeman is correct, how does he explain the regime canonizing writings so different from one another if they all originated from a common source?

mountainman · 10-31-2012, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Mountsinman, if Freeman is correct, how does he explain the regime canonizing writings so different from one another if they all originated from a common source?

2008: AD 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Christian State - Charles Freeman

Quote:

Description: 'We authorise followers of this law to assume the title of orthodox Christians; but as for the others since, in our judgement, they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious names of heretics.' - Emperor Theodosius.

In AD 381, Theodosius, emperor of the eastern Roman empire, issued a decree in which all his subjects were required to subscribe to a belief in the Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This edict defined Christian orthodoxy and brought to an end a lively and wide-ranging debate about the nature of the Godhead; all other interpretations were now declared heretical.

Moreover, for the first time in a thousand years of Greco-Roman civilization free thought was unambiguously suppressed. Not since the attempt of the pharaoh Akhenaten to impose his god Aten on his Egyptian subjects in the fourteenth century BC had there been such a widesweeping programme of religious coercion.Yet surprisingly this political revolution, intended to bring inner cohesion to an empire under threat from the outside, has been airbrushed from the historical record. Instead, it has been claimed that the Christian Church had reached a consensus on the Trinity which was promulgated at the Council of Constantinople in AD 381. In this groundbreaking new book, acclaimed historian Charles Freeman shows that the council was in fact a shambolic affair, which only took place after Theodosius' decree had become law. In short, the Church was acquiescing in the overwhelming power of the emperor. Freeman argues that Theodosius' edict and the subsequent suppression of paganism not only brought an end to the diversity of religious and philosophical beliefs throughout the empire but created numerous theological problems for the Church, which have remained unsolved. The year AD 381, Freeman concludes, marked 'a turning point which time forgot'.

From my own notes

Quote:

Notes

p.196

CONCLUSION

"We must not see the fact of usurpation;
law was once introduced without reason,
and has become reasonable. We must make
it regarded as authoritative, eternal, and
conceal its origin, if we do not wish that
it should soon come to an end."

~ Blaise Pascal, Pensees

p.204

Concluding statement ....
"What is certain is that, in the west,
the historical reality, that the Nicene Trinity
was imposed from above on the church,
by an emperor, disappeared from the record.

A harmonised version of what happened at the Council of Constantinople,
highlighting a consensus for which there is little historical evidence,
concealed the enforcement of the Nicene Trinity through the medium of
imperial legislation.

The aim of this book has been to reveal what has been concealed.

Arguably the year AD 381 deserves to be seen as one of the most
important moments in the history of European thought."

The answer to your question is essentially the Emperor instructed or ordered HIS regime. This historical reality was concealed by the later regime(s). The church of the 4th century appears as an instrument of the (Christian)Emperors - an extension of their power which was made possible by Bullneck 324/325 CE when he had the empire by the throat.

Duvduv · 11-01-2012, 12:15 AM

Are you suggesting that the regime INTENTIONALLY sponsored the composition of texts with contradictions among each other, and if so, why?

outhouse · 11-01-2012, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Why do we have to change the focus of this thread? Last I looked this thread wasn't about that subject.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

What did Israel use in 700 BC?

the point is

scripture evolves, even in a movement that has been active for 500 years, there was no canon in 700 BC

so its no supprise it took a few hundred years [roughly 400] for the NT to be cannonized.

Iskander · 11-01-2012, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Why do we have to change the focus of this thread? Last I looked this thread wasn't about that subject.

the point is

scripture evolves, even in a movement that has been active for 500 years, there was no canon in 700 BC

so its no supprise it took a few hundred years [roughly 400] for the NT to be cannonized.

There is little to be gained in answering the questions of people who are only pretending to be asking a question.

Besides, most posters here know already the answer to every question: the right answer is either horse hit or bull shit.

sotto voce · 11-01-2012, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

most posters here know already the answer to every question

How very true.

Iskander · 11-01-2012, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

The answer to your question is essentially the Emperor instructed or ordered HIS regime. This historical reality was concealed by the later regime(s). The church of the 4th century appears as an instrument of the (Christian)Emperors - an extension of their power which was made possible by Bullneck 324/325 CE when he had the empire by the throat.

You answer has been rejected by the Sphinx, but you deserve our gratitude for trying.

sotto voce · 11-01-2012, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

The answer to your question is essentially the Emperor instructed or ordered HIS regime. This historical reality was concealed by the later regime(s). The church of the 4th century appears as an instrument of the (Christian)Emperors - an extension of their power which was made possible by Bullneck 324/325 CE when he had the empire by the throat.

You answer has been rejected by the Sphinx, but you deserve our gratitude for trying.

Yes, mountainman. Improving, but not there yet.

Next time, use quote marks instead of brackets.

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

10-31-2012, 07:06 PM	#343
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Mountsinman, if Freeman is correct, how does he explain the regime canonizing writings so different from one another if they all originated from a common source?

11-01-2012, 12:15 AM	#345
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Are you suggesting that the regime INTENTIONALLY sponsored the composition of texts with contradictions among each other, and if so, why?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.