Freethought & Rationalism Archive

WVIncagold · 08-28-2008, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

Was that 28 days later? And tell me who is getting screwed royaly in this little gem

The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, THE DEAD ARE RAISED UP, and the poor have the gospel preached to them."

The poor really get the short end of the stick on this one don't they. Everyone else gets made whole but all the poor get is to sit and be preeched too. I mean he could of said and the poor would be no longer hungry or something like that but they get to still be poor and hungry but now instead of being able to go get or produce food they get to be preeched to.

Yeah, but as the story goes, those who were poor were richer than the rich. Remember the widows mite? What moral is there to this story? This poor woman may have starved to death for all we know. Her situation of poverty isn't remedied by Jesus or his disciples or any of the other Jewish people. He merely uses the widows mite as an example of sacrifice. In another passage elsewhere Jesus says "the poor you will always have with you", but he would be crucified, he would be dead but yet alive as a "comforter". Was this called Gnostic teaching?

To bad there were no coinage called mites in jesus's time though hugh?

storytime · 08-28-2008, 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Yeah, but as the story goes, those who were poor were richer than the rich. Remember the widows mite? What moral is there to this story? This poor woman may have starved to death for all we know. Her situation of poverty isn't remedied by Jesus or his disciples or any of the other Jewish people. He merely uses the widows mite as an example of sacrifice. In another passage elsewhere Jesus says "the poor you will always have with you", but he would be crucified, he would be dead but yet alive as a "comforter". Was this called Gnostic teaching?

To bad there were no coinage called mites in jesus's time though hugh?

But it was the lowest of the Herodian coinage, as I heard one Christian description of it's lesser value.

mountainman · 08-28-2008, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

To bad there were no coinage called mites in jesus's time though hugh?

It is a well recorded historical fact that not only did Constantine popularise Jesus by means of the most lavish building project (basilicas) in precious stone in known antiquity, and by means of the lavish publication of the new testament canonical literature (plus the Shepherd of Hermas in the Constantine Bible), but he also commissioned the gold solidus.

The gold solidus is associated with the same epoch as the implementation of christianity by Constantine. The rich got richer. The poor got poorer. He also introduced Poll Tax (per head) and by the year 350 CE is was recorded that Roman imperial land tax had tripled in living memory. The highways were covered with tax-exempt bishops. Hello? Hello? Anyone reading this channel? Over.

Who was Lithargoel in NHC 6.1?

Best wishes,

Pete

storytime · 08-30-2008, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

To bad there were no coinage called mites in jesus's time though hugh?

It is a well recorded historical fact that not only did Constantine popularise Jesus by means of the most lavish building project (basilicas) in precious stone in known antiquity, and by means of the lavish publication of the new testament canonical literature (plus the Shepherd of Hermas in the Constantine Bible), but he also commissioned the gold solidus.

The gold solidus is associated with the same epoch as the implementation of christianity by Constantine. The rich got richer. The poor got poorer. He also introduced Poll Tax (per head) and by the year 350 CE is was recorded that Roman imperial land tax had tripled in living memory. The highways were covered with tax-exempt bishops. Hello? Hello? Anyone reading this channel? Over.

Who was Lithargoel in NHC 6.1?

Best wishes,

Pete

I'm reading, but not sure what is what. I found a couple of links to coinage here:

http://www.newworldtreasures.com/byzantine.htm

http://www.gilai.com/coins/coins_index.html

mountainman · 09-01-2008, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

It is a well recorded historical fact that not only did Constantine popularise Jesus by means of the most lavish building project (basilicas) in precious stone in known antiquity, and by means of the lavish publication of the new testament canonical literature (plus the Shepherd of Hermas in the Constantine Bible), but he also commissioned the gold solidus.

The gold solidus is associated with the same epoch as the implementation of christianity by Constantine. The rich got richer. The poor got poorer. He also introduced Poll Tax (per head) and by the year 350 CE is was recorded that Roman imperial land tax had tripled in living memory. The highways were covered with tax-exempt bishops. Hello? Hello? Anyone reading this channel? Over.

Who was Lithargoel in NHC 6.1?

Best wishes,

Pete

I'm reading, but not sure what is what. I found a couple of links to coinage here:

http://www.newworldtreasures.com/byzantine.htm

http://www.gilai.com/coins/coins_index.html

The coinage of Roman emperors alone tells us that the healing god Asclepius and/or related names were a feature of the centuries one two and three. It is at he epoch of Constantine that this lineage on the coins is discontinued. This discontinuity is the implementation of an previously unmentioned religion called christianity by Constantine and Eusebius. It was essentially an emperor cult, which had presence in the emperors court from the beginning but where in fact was it sourced? We have only Eusebius to guide us here.

The question of course is "Do we trust Eusebius"?
Here is my assessment of the the integrity of Eusebius as an historian.

Quote:

"None ventured to go over the same ground again,
but left him sole possessor of the field
which he held by right of discovery and of conquest.
The most bitter of his theological adversaries
were forced to confess their obligations to him,
and to speak of his work with respect.

It is only necessary to reflect for a moment
what a blank would be left in our knowledge
of this most important chapter in all human history,
if the narrative of Eusebius were blotted out,
and we shall appreciate the enormous debt
of gratitude which we owe to him.

The little light which glimmered over the earliest
history of Christianity in medieval times
came ultimately from Eusebius alone,
coloured and distorted in its passage
through various media.

-- J.B. Lightfoot, Eusebius of Caesarea, (article. pp. 324-5),
Dictionary of Christian Biography: Literature, Sects and Doctrines,
ed. by William Smith and Henry Wace, Vol II.

In a very literal sense according to Lightfoot we do not believe in Jesus, but in fact we believe alone in the testimony of Eusebius in the epoch of Constantine.

This fact needs to be acknowledged by christians.

Best wishes,

Pete

storytime · 09-02-2008, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

I'm reading, but not sure what is what. I found a couple of links to coinage here:

http://www.newworldtreasures.com/byzantine.htm

http://www.gilai.com/coins/coins_index.html

The coinage of Roman emperors alone tells us that the healing god Asclepius and/or related names were a feature of the centuries one two and three. It is at he epoch of Constantine that this lineage on the coins is discontinued. This discontinuity is the implementation of an previously unmentioned religion called christianity by Constantine and Eusebius. It was essentially an emperor cult, which had presence in the emperors court from the beginning but where in fact was it sourced? We have only Eusebius to guide us here.

The question of course is "Do we trust Eusebius"?
Here is my assessment of the the integrity of Eusebius as an historian.

Quote:

"None ventured to go over the same ground again,
but left him sole possessor of the field
which he held by right of discovery and of conquest.
The most bitter of his theological adversaries
were forced to confess their obligations to him,
and to speak of his work with respect.

It is only necessary to reflect for a moment
what a blank would be left in our knowledge
of this most important chapter in all human history,
if the narrative of Eusebius were blotted out,
and we shall appreciate the enormous debt
of gratitude which we owe to him.

The little light which glimmered over the earliest
history of Christianity in medieval times
came ultimately from Eusebius alone,
coloured and distorted in its passage
through various media.

-- J.B. Lightfoot, Eusebius of Caesarea, (article. pp. 324-5),
Dictionary of Christian Biography: Literature, Sects and Doctrines,
ed. by William Smith and Henry Wace, Vol II.

In a very literal sense according to Lightfoot we do not believe in Jesus, but in fact we believe alone in the testimony of Eusebius in the epoch of Constantine.

This fact needs to be acknowledged by christians.

Best wishes,

Pete

Thank you Pete. However, getting Christians to study the material you and others have provided here is like pulling teeth without novicane

.. but we must continue giving it our best shot else we end up suffering the consequences.

Why do you think Eusebius and Constantine thought it necessary to hold onto a Jewish Messiah character instead of creating a wholy new non-Jewish idol for Rome? Was it all about taxation of Jews along with Roman citizens?

mountainman · 09-02-2008, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Why do you think Eusebius and Constantine thought it necessary to hold onto a Jewish Messiah character instead of creating a wholy new non-Jewish idol for Rome? Was it all about taxation of Jews along with Roman citizens?

I think that Constantine ordered Eusebius to create a Jewish Messiah character out of the whole cloth of the greek LXX available to him when he walked into Rome as Pontifex Maximus c.312 CE. It was all about denigrating the antiquity of the Greek and Egyptian sages (and their philosophy), and promoting a fraudulent and greater antiquity of the Hebrew Sages, who also wrote in hexameters according to Eusebius. Constantine destroyed the traditional academic temple culture of the Hellenics and he burnt the writings of the greatest neopythagorean academic of the time - Porphyry.

I think that Constantine is best described as a malevolent despot. Perhaps he formed a bad opinion of the Roman traditional worship of gods such as Apollo, such as Asclepius, and somehow abhored the Pythagorean philosophy and its encumbent hold on the empire ..... because he clearly set out to destroy it.

The new top-down-emperor cult which I believe he created was created as an imperial replacement for all that then existed. When he died 337 CE the new cult was in place out of the Nicaean Oath and the 318 attendees who had been coerced and under military duress had sworn their alleigance to the new ruler of the empire. They were not christians when they walked in to the military supremacy council, but they were made christians in person by Constantine, and they walked out of that council as christian bishops, with tax exemptions every last one of them except Arius and perhaps a few others who were banished.

They had walked through a wall of swords. They had seen their greatest architectural temples raised to the ground by the warlord Constantine, and the public execution of priests. This may not be a nice picture, but I think it best explains the evidence available to us.

The reason he chose the Hebrew sages to replace Pythagoras et al was that he had imperial possession texts such as the LXX already in the Greek, and perhaps the works of Origen (The Hexapla). Constantine fabricated the new testament IMO out of the ancient Hebrew Bible, to give this new story (by fraud) a semblance of authentic ancientness, for which he could be assured no people could be alive today. (ie: his story was set a few hundred years in the past).

Any questions?

Best wishes,

Pete

storytime · 09-02-2008, 06:24 PM

I'm sure I'll think of some later, but at the moment I can't think of a darn thing.

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

09-02-2008, 06:24 PM	#18
storytime Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 2,608	I'm sure I'll think of some later, but at the moment I can't think of a darn thing.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.