Freethought & Rationalism Archive

la70119 · 01-13-2012, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

You've not demonstrated that the chresimon originated with Caesar only that the Romans used or adapted it

I didn't intend to demonstrate that the chresimon originated with Caesar, only that the Caesarians adopted it as the star of Julius Caesar.

stephan huller · 01-13-2012, 04:24 PM

I think we make a good team together. Here's something else I just noticed - Clement's gospel doesn't reference 'the sign of the cross' but merely 'the sign':

Quote:

ἐὰν μὴ μισήσητε τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα, πρὸς ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν ἰδίαν ψυχήν, καὶ ἐὰν μὴ τὸ σημεῖον βαστάσητε. τάς τε γὰρ προσπαθείας τὰς σαρκικὰς πολὺ τῆς ἡδονῆς τὸ φίλτρον ἐχούσας μεμίσηκεν καὶ καταμεγαλοφρονεῖ πάντων τῶν εἰς δημιουργίαν καὶ τροφὴν τῆς σαρκὸς οἰκείων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς σωματικῆς ψυχῆς κατεξανίσταται, στόμιον ἐμβαλὼν ἀφηνιάζοντι τῷ ἀλόγῳ πνεύματι, ὅτι ἡ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος. τὸ σημεῖον δὲ βαστάσαι τὸν θάνατόν ἐστιν περιφέρειν, ἔτι ζῶντα πᾶσιν ἀποταξάμενον, ἐπεὶ μὴ ἴση ἐστὶν ἀγάπη τοῦ σπείραντος τὴν σάρκα καὶ τοῦ τὴν ψυχὴν εἰς ἐπιστήμην κτίσαντος [Strom 7.12.79]

He knows accurately the declaration, "Unless ye hate father and mother, and besides your own life, and unless ye bear the sign." For he hates the inordinate affection: of the flesh, which possess the powerful spell of pleasure; and entertains a noble contempt for all that belongs to the creation and nutriment of the flesh. He also withstands the corporeal soul, putting a bridle-bit on the restive irrational spirit: "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit." And "to bear the sign" is to bear about death, by taking farewell of all things while still alive; since there is not equal love in "having sown the flesh," and in having formed the soul for knowledge.

la70119 · 01-13-2012, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

For what it is worth the Hebrew phrase “THE lamp” (of the temple) ha menorah = 300. You can tell I have too much time on my hands

Bingo! ha menorah = 300 = T = stauros. For the last equation you need Barnabas or Lucian.

Lucian, In the Court of the Vowels 12

In this dramatic fiction, the letter Sigma is prosecuting the letter Tau.

Quote:

Such are his verbal offences against man; his offences in deed remain. Men weep, and bewail their lot, and curse Cadmus with many curses for introducing Tau into the family of letters; they say it was his body that tyrants took for a model, his shape that they imitated, when they set up the erections on which men are crucified impaled.* Σταυρός the vile engine is called, and it derives its vile name from him. Now, with all these crimes upon him, does he not deserve death, nay, many deaths? For my part I know none bad enough but that supplied by his own shape--that shape which he gave to the gibbet named σταυρός after him by men.

*[Ed-M: Original Greek verb is a conjugate of anaskolopizw, meaning "impale".]

And according to this ancient magical amulet from Gaza, Syria-Palestina in the 200s or 300s CE, the Romans knew how to make a star out of a man using a "T".

The poor guy's legs are painfully splayed as if he's been impaled on something that was very stout. The gemstone identifies him as Jesus Christ. But it's non-Christian since it invokes the names of Egyptian pagan names as well.

Nota bene: the non-Christians who crafted this stone didn't care about Christians' sensibilities. They even portrayed the crucified Jesus Christ with an erection!

la70119 · 01-13-2012, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I think we make a good team together. Here's something else I just noticed - Clement's gospel doesn't reference 'the sign of the cross' but merely 'the sign':

Quote:

ἐὰν μὴ μισήσητε τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα, πρὸς ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν ἰδίαν ψυχήν, καὶ ἐὰν μὴ τὸ σημεῖον βαστάσητε. τάς τε γὰρ προσπαθείας τὰς σαρκικὰς πολὺ τῆς ἡδονῆς τὸ φίλτρον ἐχούσας μεμίσηκεν καὶ καταμεγαλοφρονεῖ πάντων τῶν εἰς δημιουργίαν καὶ τροφὴν τῆς σαρκὸς οἰκείων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς σωματικῆς ψυχῆς κατεξανίσταται, στόμιον ἐμβαλὼν ἀφηνιάζοντι τῷ ἀλόγῳ πνεύματι, ὅτι ἡ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος. τὸ σημεῖον δὲ βαστάσαι τὸν θάνατόν ἐστιν περιφέρειν, ἔτι ζῶντα πᾶσιν ἀποταξάμενον, ἐπεὶ μὴ ἴση ἐστὶν ἀγάπη τοῦ σπείραντος τὴν σάρκα καὶ τοῦ τὴν ψυχὴν εἰς ἐπιστήμην κτίσαντος [Strom 7.12.79]

He knows accurately the declaration, "Unless ye hate father and mother, and besides your own life, and unless ye bear the sign." For he hates the inordinate affection: of the flesh, which possess the powerful spell of pleasure; and entertains a noble contempt for all that belongs to the creation and nutriment of the flesh. He also withstands the corporeal soul, putting a bridle-bit on the restive irrational spirit: "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit." And "to bear the sign" is to bear about death, by taking farewell of all things while still alive; since there is not equal love in "having sown the flesh," and in having formed the soul for knowledge.

"The sign" if you remember what Jesus said in gLuke, IS the cross.

Luke 14:26-27

Quote:

²⁶If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple. ²⁷And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

Remember everything that Paul said about being crucified with Christ? Remembering my Xian fundamentalist Boston Church of Christ indoctrination, it meant killing the desires of the flesh. (Except here in the United States of America, it doesn't quite work!)

stephan huller · 01-13-2012, 05:10 PM

But the reference in Clement is different. It goes together with the heretics who held that the Christian sacraments were not the real flesh and blood of God or Christ but “signs” or “symbols” of them. Now we havbe an Alexandrian gospel referencing bearing about “the sign.” Maybe its the sign of the cross or maybe better yet it is the thing being represented by the crucifixion which happens to have a value of 300. But what is it?

stephan huller · 01-13-2012, 07:01 PM

And now we must ask whether Galatians 6:17 originally read τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Κυρίου or τὸ σημεῖον τοῦ Χριστοῦ. The phraseology of Clement's gospel AND the original Marcionite recension of Galatians being deliberately altered so the Paul wouldn't be seen as referencing a written gospel which was already known to him.

stephan huller · 01-13-2012, 07:17 PM

I think I found something of note:

Quote:

Jacob fed the sheep of Laban that were left in his charge, having as a royal sign (σημεῖον ἔχων βασιλικὸν) "rod of storax (ῥάβδον στυρακίνην)," which aimed by its wood to change and improve nature. [Paed 3.10]

Clement's point then is to interpret the crucifixion according to the narrative of Genesis 30 which in the LXX reads:

And God remembered Rachel, and God hearkened to her, and he opened her womb.

Quote:

30:23 And she conceived, and bore Jacob a son; and Rachel said, God has taken away my reproach.

30:24 And she called his name Joseph, saying, Let God add to me another son.

30:25 And it came to pass when Rache had born Joseph, Jacob said to Laban, Send me away, that I may go to my place and to my land.

30:26 Restore my wives and my children, for whom I have served thee, that I may depart, for thou knowest the service wherewith I have served thee.

30:27 And Laban said to him, If I have found grace in thy sight, I would augur [well], for the Lord has blessed me at thy coming in.

30:28 Appoint me thy wages, and I will give [them].

30:29 And Jacob said, Thou knowest in what things I have served thee, and how many cattle of thine are with me.

30:30 For it was little thou hadst before my time, and it is increased to a multitude, and the Lord God has blessed thee since my coming; now then, when shall I set up also my own house?

30:31 And Laban said to him, What shall I give thee? and Jacob said to him, Thou shalt not give me anything; if thou wilt do this thing for me, I will again tend thy flocks and keep them.

30:32 Let all thy sheep pass by to-day, and separate thence every grey sheep among the rams, and every one that is speckled and spotted among the goats-- [this] shall be my reward.

30:33 And my righteousness shall answer for me on the morrow, for it is my reward before thee: whatever shall not be spotted and speckled among the goats, and grey among the rams, shall be stolen with me.

30:34 And Laban said to him, Let it be according to thy word.

30:35 And he separated in that day the spotted and speckled he-goats, and all the spotted and speckled she-goats, and all that was grey among the rams, and every one that was white among them, and he gave them into the hand of his sons.

30:36 And he set a distance of a three days' journey between them and Jacob. And Jacob tended the cattle of Laban that were left behind.

30:37 And Jacob took to himself green rods of storax tree (ῥάβδον στυρακίνην) and walnut and plane-tree; and Jacob peeled in them white stripes; and as he drew off the green, the white stripe which he had made appeared alternate on the rods.

30:38 And he laid the rods which he had peeled, in the hollows of the watering-troughs, that whensoever the cattle should come to drink, as they should have come to drink before the rods, the cattle might conceive at the rods.

30:39 So the cattle conceived at the rods, and the cattle brought forth [young] speckled, and streaked and spotted with ash-coloured [spots].

30:40 And Jacob separated the lambs, and set before the sheep a speckled ram, and every variegated one among the lambs, and he separated flocks for himself alone, and did not mingle them with the sheep of Laban.

30:41 And it came to pass in the time wherein the cattle became pregnant, conceiving in the belly, Jacob put the rods before the cattle in the troughs, that they might conceive by the rods.

30:42 But he did not put them in [indiscriminately] whenever the cattle happened to bring forth, but the unmarked ones were Laban's, and the marked ones were Jacob's.

30:43 And the man became very rich, and he had many cattle, and oxen, and servants, and maid-servants, and camels, and asses.

Of course this is scientifically impossible. Having a certain kind of wood in front of sheep will not change their nature. But Clement's point is that this is a prefiguring of the wood of the cross which changes the nature of men.

stephan huller · 01-13-2012, 08:39 PM

Now most people don't know this but Irenaeus reports that the heretics (the followers of Mark) identified themselves as 'the white':

Quote:

For they falsely hold, that the Creator was seen by the prophets. But this passage, "No man shall see God and live," they would interpret as spoken of His greatness unseen and unknown by all; and indeed that these words, "No man shall see God," are spoken concerning the invisible Father, the Maker of the universe, is evident to us all; but that they are not used concerning that Bythus whom they conjure into existence, but concerning the Creator (and He is the invisible God), shall be shown as we proceed. They maintain that Daniel also set forth the same thing when he begged of the angels explanations of the parables, as being himself ignorant of them. But the angel, hiding from him the great mystery of Bythus, said unto him, "Go thy way quickly, Daniel, for these sayings are closed up until those who have understanding do understand them, and those who are white be made white." Moreover, they vaunt themselves as being the white and the men of good understanding. [AH 1.19.3]

In kabbalah the masters still identify themselves as 'the men of good understanding' (maskilim). Yet notice that in Daniel chapter 12 the 'white' (= wə·yiṯ·lab·bə·nū) derives from laban which also happens to be the name of Jacob's uncle. In other words, the sheep becoming 'white' is mystically connected with the name Laban.

stephan huller · 01-13-2012, 08:50 PM

So Clement intimates a connection between the 'gnostics' (maskilim) who receive the 'sign of royalty' from the cross and the sheep made white from wood in Genesis 30 (why else bring in the reference to σημεῖον ἔχων βασιλικὸν? it is totally out of place in the shepherd's narrative).

The idea has to be that the chresimon was originally connected with royalty (la is more right than I was here). Not only did Julius Caesar have this symbol and Herod but also Ptolemy coins from 3rd century BCE (you can see the symbol in between the eagles feet):

So was the chi-rho a symbol of divine kingship? The symbol seems to be connected with a series of kings. The cross then shaped like a chi-rho 'purified' and 'whitened' some person in the crowd watching Jesus appear crucified?

stephan huller · 01-13-2012, 08:51 PM

Not surprisingly Clement says a few lines after the whitening of the sheep reference in Genesis that:

Quote:

The Instructor permits us, then, to use simple clothing, and of a white colour, as we said before. So that, accommodating ourselves not to variegated art, but to nature as it is produced, and pushing away whatever is deceptive and belies the truth, we may embrace the uniformity and simplicity of the truth. Sophocles, reproaching a youth, says:- "Decked in women's clothes." For, as in the case of the soldier, the sailor, and the ruler, so also the proper dress of the temperate man is what is plain, becoming, and clean. Whence also in the law, the law enacted by Moses about leprousy rejects what has many colours and spots, like the various scales of the snake. He therefore wishes man, no longer decking himself gaudily in a variety of colours, but white all over from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot, to be clean; so that, by a transition from the body, we may lay aside the varied and versatile passions of the man, land love the unvaried, and unambiguous, and simple colour of truth. And he who also in this emulates Moses--Plato best of all--approves of that texture on which not more than a chaste woman's work has been employed. And white colours well become gravity. And elsewhere he says, "Nor apply dyes or weaving, except for warlike decorations." To men of peace and of light, therefore, white is appropriate. As, then, signs (τὰ σημεῖα), which are very closely allied to causes, by their presence indicate (τῶν αἰτίων παρόντα σημαίνει), or rather demonstrate, the existence of the result (ὕπαρξιν = 'substance'); as smoke is the sign of fire, and a good complexion (εὔχροια) and a regular pulse of health (εὐσφυξία ὑγίειαν); so also clothing of this description shows the character of our habits (τὴν κατάστασιν ἐνδείκνυται).

I think hidden somewhere in this example is the idea that the 'sign of the Lord' (= the chi-rho cross) caused the whiteness of those transformed by the presence of God. Why would a chi-rho be understood to make people white? The answer must be that it is an image of the star or of a star in heaven (which gives light). I have been thinking about the messianic name of the last great Jewish revolutionary from the period 'bar khochba' = son of the star. Is there some connection here too?

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

01-13-2012, 05:10 PM	#115
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	But the reference in Clement is different. It goes together with the heretics who held that the Christian sacraments were not the real flesh and blood of God or Christ but “signs” or “symbols” of them. Now we havbe an Alexandrian gospel referencing bearing about “the sign.” Maybe its the sign of the cross or maybe better yet it is the thing being represented by the crucifixion which happens to have a value of 300. But what is it?

01-13-2012, 07:01 PM	#116
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	And now we must ask whether Galatians 6:17 originally read τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Κυρίου or τὸ σημεῖον τοῦ Χριστοῦ. The phraseology of Clement's gospel AND the original Marcionite recension of Galatians being deliberately altered so the Paul wouldn't be seen as referencing a written gospel which was already known to him.

01-13-2012, 08:50 PM	#119
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	So Clement intimates a connection between the 'gnostics' (maskilim) who receive the 'sign of royalty' from the cross and the sheep made white from wood in Genesis 30 (why else bring in the reference to σημεῖον ἔχων βασιλικὸν? it is totally out of place in the shepherd's narrative). The idea has to be that the chresimon was originally connected with royalty (la is more right than I was here). Not only did Julius Caesar have this symbol and Herod but also Ptolemy coins from 3rd century BCE (you can see the symbol in between the eagles feet): So was the chi-rho a symbol of divine kingship? The symbol seems to be connected with a series of kings. The cross then shaped like a chi-rho 'purified' and 'whitened' some person in the crowd watching Jesus appear crucified?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.