Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 06-02-2012, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

horrendous thought. Theology!

The kings of Rome, the 'republic' of Rome, the empire of Rome, had no use for such a commodity, at any time.

The Emperor Galienus sponsored the Platonic theologian Plotinus in the later 3rd century. Admittedly Constantine reversed that decision and burnt the books preserving Plotinus. Socrates critical questioning was seen as a menace to the 4th century monotheistic state Biblical Criticism & History industry.

Ammianus mentions theologians:

Quote:

Originally Posted by AM

3. For the theologians maintain that there are associated
with all men at their birth, but without interference with
the established course of destiny, certain divinities
of that sort, as directors of their conduct; but they
have been seen by only a very few, whom their
manifold merits have raised to eminence.

4. And this oracles and writers of distinction have shown;
among the latter is also the comic poet Menander,
in whom we read these two searii:

"A daemon is assigned to every man
At birth, to be the leader of his life".

5. Likewise from the immortal poems of Homer
we are given to understand that it was not the gods
of heaven that spoke with brave men, and stood by
them or aided them as they fought. bu that guardians
spirits attended them; and through reliance upon
their special support, it is said, that Pythagoras,
Socrates, and Numa Pompilius became famous; also
the earlier Scipio, and (as some believe) Marius and
Octavianus, who first had the title of Augustus
conferred upon him, and Hermes Trismegistus,
Apollonius of Tyana, and Plotinus, who ventured to
discourse on this mystic theme, and to present
a profound discussion on the question by what
elements these spirits are linked with men's souls,
and taking them to their bosoms, as it were,
protect them (as long as possible) and give them
higher instruction, if they perceive that they are
pure and kept from the pollution of sin through
association with an immaculate body.

sotto voce · 06-02-2012, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

horrendous thought. Theology!

The kings of Rome, the 'republic' of Rome, the empire of Rome, had no use for such a commodity, at any time.

The Emperor Galienus sponsored the Platonic theologian Plotinus in the later 3rd century.

What did Plotinus think about the death of Jesus?

Duvduv · 06-02-2012, 07:42 PM

Notice also in Judges 13 where the mother of Samson is told to refrain from "impure food" which refers in this case not to non-kosher meat but to the foods forbidden to a Nazarite (see Numbers 6:3-4), i.e. grape/wine products and fermented drinks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-...-the-full-text

What is interesting about the very first chapter of this Gospel of Barnabas is the fact that Mary is alone, with no Joseph in the picture, exactly as the similar story about her appears in the Quran. But what is most intriguing about this is not that the Quran does away with Mary's betrothed husband Joseph, but that Barnabas does the same thing despite being similar to GLuke in other ways.

Furthermore she is warned to stay away from "unclean meat" which means the same thing as it does to Peter in Acts during his vision about eating, i.e. unclean meat does not refer to non-kosher meat but to meat from an animal slaughtered for non-sacrificial purposes.

Barnabas deals with the genealogy problem by assuming Mary has Davidic descent rather of the tribe of Levi as is understood in Sura Imran in the Quran, which probably goes back to the lineage of her cousin Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist as ironically also found in GLuke.

mountainman · 06-02-2012, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

What did Plotinus think about the death of Jesus?

The extant literary evidence indicates that Plotinus did not mention Jesus at all. If you're asking me to explain this evidence, then my explanation is that the Jesus story was not published on planet Earth until after Plotinus died.

sotto voce · 06-03-2012, 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

What did Plotinus think about the death of Jesus?

The extant literary evidence indicates that Plotinus did not mention Jesus at all.

Ah. So, like many, like Mani, Muhammad and Mormons; like vox populi , like 'popes' and Porphyry, Plotinus could not assimilate the meaning of the death of Jesus into his world view.

Quote:

If you're asking me to explain this evidence, then my explanation is that the Jesus story was not published on planet Earth until after Plotinus died.

A dead horse, forsooth. Find a nag that will run; with a credibly short price.

stephan huller · 06-03-2012, 05:40 PM

Anyway, back from the dementia of mountainman. Here is the latest claim of translating the text from alarabiya's english edition.

Quote:

This week, translated quotes from the document – originally written in Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic – reportedly state that Jesus said: “I confess before heaven, and call to witness everything that dwells upon the earth, that I am a stranger to all that men have said of me, that I am more than man. For I am a man, born of a woman, subject to the judgment of God; that live here like as other men, subject to the common miseries,” the Y-Jesus U.S.-based online magazine reported in an analysis of the Gospel of Barnabas.

stephan huller · 06-03-2012, 05:44 PM

And (tongue and cheek) the weekly world news take:

sotto voce · 06-03-2012, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Anyway, back from the dementia of mountainman. Here is the latest claim of translating the text from alarabiya's english edition.

Quote:

This week, translated quotes from the document – originally written in Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic – reportedly state that Jesus said: “I confess before heaven, and call to witness everything that dwells upon the earth, that I am a stranger to all that men have said of me, that I am more than man. For I am a man, born of a woman, subject to the judgment of God; that live here like as other men, subject to the common miseries,” the Y-Jesus U.S.-based online magazine reported in an analysis of the Gospel of Barnabas.

'I am a man, born of a woman, subject to the judgment of God; that live here like as other men, subject to the common miseries'

This part is more or less lifted straight out of the Bible. But obviously, had Jesus been no more than that, he would never have been the object of attention that he has been for 2000 years. The reason for this is that Jesus was perceived to have been tempted in every way as we are, but to have never succumbed to temptation. This of course, if true, made him perfect, and, if there is only one perfect, thereby God; or the God, Allah.

So Islam has to provide a reason for insistence that Jesus never did an evil deed, or said an evil word. If there is no reason to doubt his perfection, one is bound to ask, why turn down that perfection if it can be credited to those who have done evil deeds, and said evil words? Because this, the salving of conscience, is pretty well the sum total of Christianity. The only real distinctive of Islam is to deny this accreditation. The only real distinctive of Islam is to contradict another faith.

Although Islam rarely fails to misrepresent Christianity by alleging that it teaches 'trinitarianism', as do many others, also with notable stubbornness. It's the polytheism invented by antichrists that antichrists love to pretend is genuine Christianity, presumably because they have no genuine arguments.

So, with this persistent lie in the mouths of Muslims, why would anyone, Christian or not, pay them heed?

Sheshbazzar · 06-03-2012, 06:35 PM

Perhaps because Muslim lies are no stupider sounding than the lies of the Christians that we are continually exposed to?

sotto voce · 06-04-2012, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Perhaps because Muslim lies are no stupider sounding than the lies of the Christians that we are continually exposed to?

Skeptics, Mormons and Jews never lie.

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

06-03-2012, 05:44 PM	#47
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	And (tongue and cheek) the weekly world news take:

06-03-2012, 06:35 PM	#49
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Perhaps because Muslim lies are no stupider sounding than the lies of the Christians that we are continually exposed to?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.