Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 06-24-2009, 12:35 PM

Quote:

And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was the Son of God!"

Mark 15.39

But the Centurion knew the Emperor was the Son of God! Naughty centurion - crucify him for sedition and treason and blasphemy and give the audience at the play a guffaw.

arnoldo · 06-24-2009, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

On the other hand, there is evidence that non-christians were satirizing the christians during this general time frame. . .

April DeConick

Gnostic texts use parody and satire quite frequently.
This is found, for instance, in the Testimony of Truth,
the Apocalypse of Peter, the Second Treatise of the Great Seth,
the Acts of John, which take aim at apostolic Christians
and their practices and beliefs.

The Sethians were particularly good at making fun of
traditional biblical beliefs, especially when it came
to the Genesis story and their use of traditional verses like
"Besides me there is no god" by applying it to Ialdabaoth
and implying that this is the god that other Christians
ignorantly are worshiping.

This "Why are you asking Me?" in The Letter of Peter which he sent to Philip (NHC 8.2) is by no means isolated to this text. The invective is arguably discernible in all of the new testament apocryphal acts and gospels. Some clever pagan (ie: a non christian) in the fourth century has done a royal number on the One True Canon, Clark Jesos Kent, and the Twemendous Twelve Boneheads. This one simple conjecture fits the evidence, and explains why this non canonical literature output attracted the wrath of Constantine and all christians who followed his regime in the 4th century.

The new testament non canonical literature corpus is known as the apocrypha because these books had to be hidden. Lists and compendiums of these anti-apostolic books were complied commencing with that provided in the Ecclesiatistcal History of Eusebius. The church councils of the 4th century concerned themselves with the followers of the heretical books, and the practice of not reading the uncanonical books.

We need to see the political and social context of the fourth century without wearing any "Christian Glasses". It can be simplified as follows:

Stages of Implementation of State Christianity

1) Constantine embraces a low-profile cult called "Christianity".
2) Constantine declares this cult as his preferred Pontifex-Maximus cult.
3) Constantine becomes supreme and decrees Christianity the state mono-thing.
4) The huge melting pot of Hellenistic religious cults finds itself in serious trouble. Constantine starts destroying the temples and shrines. At Antioch
he tortures key people in the city to confess against "Hellenism".
5) The New Testament canon is declared the Holy Writ of the Roman Empire 325 CE.
6) Shortly thereafter the New Testament non canonical corpus (ie: all the "Hidden Books" = The NT Apocrypha) were authored.
7) The preservation of the "Hidden Books" mandated Coptic and Syriac, out of the probing eyes of the state monotheistic christian regime of Constantine and his successors.
8) The "Hit List" of Hidden Books is present in all centuries after the fourth.
There is a direct ancient historical link between the fourth century list compiled by Eusebius and the Index Librorum Prohibitorum which operated continuously until 1966.

The author of the NT apocryphal books (including at least some of the Nag Hammadi Codices) has a consistent cleverly engineered satire running against the authority of the NT Canon.

OPEN CHALLENGE

I openly challenge anyone to name a NT apocryphal act or gospel
in which there is not present - in the text - when we are able to
take off our "Christian Glasses" - evidence of satire, or of some
form of humor directed against the Bountiful Boneheads and their
Slave Master, or Master-Sorceror, Mr. JEE SAYS.

Exceptions: Lists of sayings (eg: gThomas) are not included.
I am dealing with all the Hellenistic narrative accounts called
by the names of gospels and/or acts. Any of the following.

Consistence evidence of satire, etc in ......

The Act of Peter
The Acts and Martyrdom of Andrew
The Acts and Martyrdom of Matthew
The Acts of Andrew and John (*H)
The Acts of Andrew and Matthew (*H)
The Acts of Barnabas
The Acts of Bartholomew
The Acts of John the Theologian
The Acts of Luke
The Acts of Mark
The Acts of Matthew
The Acts of Peter and Andrew
The Acts of Peter and Paul
The Acts of Philip
The Acts of Pilate
The Acts of Timothy
The Acts of Titus
The Death of Pilate
The History of John
The History of Joseph the Carpenter
The Acts of Andrew (*H)
The Acts of John (*H)
The Acts of Paul (*R)
The Acts of Peter
The Acts of Thomas
The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles <<<==== 11, 12 or 13 BoneHeads?
The Letter of Peter to Philip
An Arabic Infancy Gospel
The Gospel of Bartholomew
The Gospel of James (Infancy)
The Gospel of Judas
The Gospel of Mary [Magdalene]
The Gospel of Nicodemus
The Gospel of Peter
The Gospel of Philip
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew
The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas [Greek Text A]
The Prayer of the Apostle Paul
The Treatise on the Resurrection
The Prayer of the Apostle Paul
The Gospel of Thomas
The Gospel of Philip

How effective was satire to discredit christianity if that in fact was it's aim?

Clivedurdle · 06-24-2009, 12:45 PM

In Britain there was in the sixties and later a very interesting comedic tradition of farce - the Carry on Films and similar, completely over the top stuff - Round the Horne, and Satire - That was the week that was.

I am wondering if the Gospel of Mark is actually the beginning of this tradition of knockabout, surrealism and making fun of the powerful.

I strongly recommend a close study of British comedy and the Gospels.

I actually pity you foreigners! You were not brought up with PetenDud. Very sad.

Spike Miligan was a gunner in North Africa and he dropped his gun off its carriage down a ravine into the middle of a British troop convoy, causing chaos. He runs down and asks a driver if anyone has seen the gun. The driver responds - what colour was it?

And Milligan and Secombe met. This is how the world works - serendipity.

semiopen · 06-24-2009, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

And what exactly is wrong with their arguments?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Minimalism

Arguments are ok, however archaelogy is better.

On the Reliability of the Old Testament: Kitchen (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Hi Arnoldo,

The link doesn't work.

Kitchen seems to be respected in the field, but he is also a maximalist and known to be nasty when discussing the views of those who do not agree with him. I've also heard the criticism that he tends to ignore evidence that does not support his prior opinions. Admittedly these comments are secondhand, but why would I spend money on a book that will annoy me?

Would it be more for accurate for your comment to say... "Maximalist archaeology is better."

Toto · 06-24-2009, 03:05 PM

Fixed the link.

Kitchen's book can be previewed on google books.

Reed Business Info review:

Quote:

While the book seems aimed at a general audience, which would find its arguments insightful, it may be too technical; on the other hand, its polemical editorializing may offend scholarly researchers. Not recommended.-Charlie Murray, C.S.S., Fordham Univ., New York

mountainman · 06-24-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

On the other hand, there is evidence that non-christians were satirizing the christians during this general time frame. . .

...

Emperor Julian .... who is not in this "general time frame."

325 CE - The Council of the State Boneheads
348 CE - midpoint C14 dating of Nag Hammadi Codices
362 CE - The Satire of Emperor Julian

Toto, I think you are scrambling for responses.
The fourth century is the "general time frame"
and the period immediately following 324/325 CE
is pivotal. Emperor Julian's satire against both
Constantine and the BeJesus Character is clear.

Toto · 06-24-2009, 05:12 PM

Julian was not a gnostic.

You are the only one who tries to date the gnostic literature to the 4th century.

mountainman · 06-24-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

April DeConick

Gnostic texts use parody and satire quite frequently. This is found, for instance, in the Testimony of Truth, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Second Treatise of the Great Seth, the Acts of John, which take aim at apostolic Christians and their practices and beliefs.

...

DeConick and others see the satire as directed by one faction of Christianity against another faction, not as pagan satire of Christianity.

Yes I understand that DeConick and all the other commentators
are in fact wearing the latest and modern "Christian Glasses".
The history that they present is all "Christian". One type and
another type - of "Christianity".

My suggestion is take off the christian glasses. These allow us
to see "Christian things everywhere". And then ask, with a loose
reference to statistical demographics about the year c.324/325 CE
whether we might expect literature to have been preserved by
academic authors which were not, I repeat not, "Christian".

The Nag Hammadi Codices are key in this question.

Quote:

The satirists were not worshippers of Zeus or another pagan god.

The satirists were custodians of the Hellenic religious milieu of cults - a huge melting pot - mixing pot of religions which included the temple networks of Asclepius, Apollo, Diana, etc, etc, etc, etc. They are decribed as "the pagans" by the fiurth century christian state monotheistic regime.

The satirists reverred Hermes and Asclepius.
The Pleroma and the Aeons of the Hellenistic civilisation.

Quote:

They had a different view of Jesus, but they considered themselves Christians and came fairly close to winning dominance in the early Church.

They satired Jesus.
They put Jesus on the cross of satire.
They ridiculed the Apostles with outlandish fictional narratives.

They - the "pagans" - were the majority 324/325 CE. (95%???)
But Constantine had the power and the will and the army.
His "Christianity cult" destroyed the ancient temples.
His "Christianity cult" destroyed the ancient shrines.
His "Christianity cult" destroyed the ancient libraries.

Quote:

They ended up losing, but they are still part of the Christian tradition.

Their heretical books were decreed to be anathema.
Only the canon was to be glorified for ever and ever ahmen.
The "Hidden Books" were proscribed to the fire.
Or in preservation - to the earth itself.

The key to the Nag Hammadi Codices is Pachomius.
Do you know the story of Pachomius?
He "HAD A VISION" c.324 CE to get out of town.
Why do we think he was a "Christian desert monk"?
Because Jerome (or was it Augustine) tells us that
"He was Baptised".

Paul baptised a lion too.

We have yet to look at the ancient history of the 4th century
without "Christian glasses". The Christian regime rewrote their
history to suit their own victory. This is a suggestion for those
who think of themselves as researchers ....

"What evidence is there that Pachomius was "Christian"?

NB: Pachomius is the name of the founder of the monastic
phenomenom in the deserts of Egypt after 324 CE. He was
described as "A prophet". The monastery at which
the Nag Hammadi Codices were actually prepared was one
of his own monasteries. The question needs to be asked,
in all humility .... was he really a "state christian" or one
of the Hellenistic milieu who sought refuge in the desert.

mountainman · 06-24-2009, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Julian was not a gnostic.

Julian was a Hellenistic academic and considered himself Pontifex Maximus.
As such he was the head coordinator for the gnostic cults and all other
Hellenistic cults which had survived the rule of Constantine and his son Constantius (ie: the temples which survived the period 324 to 360 CE). And there were not many left by then.

Quote:

You are the only one who tries to date the gnostic literature to the 4th century.

Mainstream chronology suggests that the following
literature was authored in the fourth century or later.
To this we need to add the 52 books of the NHC
which are carbon dated to 348 CE.

Books presumed 4th century or later ...

The Acts of John the Theologian
The Acts of the Martyrs
The Death of Pilate
The History of Joseph the Carpenter
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew
The Gospel of Nicodemus
The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary
The Correspondence of Paul and Seneca
The Correspondence of Jesus and Abgar
The Acts of Polyeuctes
The Gospel of Gamaliel
The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles
The Acts of Pilate
The Acts of Xanthippe, Polyxena, and Rebecca
The Acts of Thaddaeus
The Acts of Peter and Paul
The Gospel of Bartholomew
The Acts of Philip
The Acts of Simon and Jude
The Acts of Luke
The History of John
The Acts of Mark
The Act of Peter
The Acts of Bartholomew
An Arabic Infancy Gospel
The Gospel of Thomas - A 5th Century Compilation
The Acts of Barnabas
The Acts and Martyrdom of Andrew
The Acts and Martyrdom of Matthew
The Acts of Timothy
The Acts of Titus
The Acts of Matthew
The Secret Gospel of Mark

All these Acts and Gospels are thought to be authored
in the 4th century or later. This is not my opinion - it
is the opinion of the mainstream academics. Please have
a look at the details if you disagree.

Here is a list:

List of New Testament Apocryhal Books according to MAINSTREAM CHRONOLOGY

mountainman · 06-24-2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Quote:

I openly challenge anyone to name a NT apocryphal act or gospel
in which there is not present - in the text - when we are able to
take off our "Christian Glasses" - evidence of satire, or of some
form of humor directed against the Bountiful Boneheads and their
Slave Master, or Master-Sorceror, Mr. JEE SAYS.

Paul - "Glass darkly" (Pagels - Gnostic Paul and myriad more examples).

Are you arguing the gnostic bits of the Epistles of Paul are satire?

NO. Paul supposedly authored books in the NT Canon.
I am examining the non canonical books.
FOr the moment I am ignoring the canon.
I am allowing it to have had existed as early as you please.
But that it was popularised by Constantine.
And that the non canonical books were authored by satirists
writing against the official religion of Constantine's choice.

Quote:

Or are you ignoring them for some reason to create a too tidy theory?

I am pointing out the contrast between the canon and the non canon.
I am trying to ask people to refrain from wearing "Christian Glasses".
The canonical NT and the non canonical NT are the full set.
The canon is visible - consistent of the "Visible Books".
In contrast the NT Apocrypha (NTAp) are "Hidden". (Buried!)
There is a political reason for this polarity.

I think it is derived from this sequence of events:

1) Constantine promotes the NT Canon. (NOTE: The origins of the canon are not in this instance relevant. It is its promotion I am examining.)

2) Hellenistic academic authors satire the NT Canon in writings which
were immediately and thereafter proscribed as "Heretical". I am suggesting that the NT Apocrypha literature may be considered to be simply a satirical reaction to the authority with which the NT canon was implemented.

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

06-24-2009, 12:45 PM	#33
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	In Britain there was in the sixties and later a very interesting comedic tradition of farce - the Carry on Films and similar, completely over the top stuff - Round the Horne, and Satire - That was the week that was. I am wondering if the Gospel of Mark is actually the beginning of this tradition of knockabout, surrealism and making fun of the powerful. I strongly recommend a close study of British comedy and the Gospels. I actually pity you foreigners! You were not brought up with PetenDud. Very sad. Spike Miligan was a gunner in North Africa and he dropped his gun off its carriage down a ravine into the middle of a British troop convoy, causing chaos. He runs down and asks a driver if anyone has seen the gun. The driver responds - what colour was it? And Milligan and Secombe met. This is how the world works - serendipity.

06-24-2009, 05:12 PM	#37
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Julian was not a gnostic. You are the only one who tries to date the gnostic literature to the 4th century.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.