mountainman

YES. I could not find Cyril's native text untranslated.

Not with the word "fabrication" (See above) however the other
relevant words "fiction", "fable", "tale" out of the opening para
have attracted some research, specifically the word "fiction".

Eusebius' title of Chapter 31 of Book 12 of HE:
"How far it may be proper to use falsehood
as a medium for the benefit of those
who require to be deceived;"

However, because I dont have any non-English of Cyril's text,
I cannot be sure of what exact words are being used by Julian.

JGibson000,

I have checked whatever is freely available on the net.
I do not have subscription to JSTOR (or any other journals)
but have read all the first pages of many articles related
to this issue at JSTOR and other similar repositories.

I have not noted any particular commentator as offering any
unique perspectives on the issue behind Julian's Invectives.

Julian's Invective's, as far as I have been able to ascertain,
are not generally explicable in accordance to mainstream
opinion, except as some form of "sour grapes" publication
(this from christian apologists, to explain the invectives,
which I reject, due to his other 2 major publications).

The invectives out of the opening paragraph:

fabrication
fiction
wickedness
fable
monstrous tale

point to Julian's assessment of the new testament as being
similar to a modern JMyther when put in a nice and
politically correct terminology.

Although the work "myth" is used by Julian many times in "ATG"
but the word "fiction" is specifically used in the opening para.
This suggests --- and I do agree with you, we must try and get
back to the origina words used (via Cyril) --- Julian has
specifically distinguished between the terminological use of
"fiction" as distinct from "myth".

I have spent the last 12 months (?) here trying to engage in dialogue
anyone at all in regard to the terminological difference between
JESUS MYTH and JESUS FICTION here in BC&H in the 21st century.

Myth is the PC term.
Fiction is not spoken about.

Yet it appears to me that Julian uses enough synonyms (which
are listed and bolded above) for us to be pretty sure he is speaking
about the latter term --- the FICTION. That is, to respond to
your "call for reference to the source terms", we do have not
just the one word "fabrication", but we a plurality of terms,
which all point the one direction, like a set of compass needles.

Just as to why dialogue is not entertained in regard to the new
testament being a fictive narrative, fabricated out of the
whole cloth by some --- as yet unknown --- wicked men,
I have not properly determined.

Thanks for your response.
And best wishes,



Pete

No Robots

This forum does little but entertain dialogue about the NT as a fictive narrative. Are you complaining that those of us who do not subscribe to that position have not yet crumbled under the weight of your scholarship and argumentation? Or are you moaning that academics have paid no heed? Haven't you accepted the fact that these academics are the Pharisees of our time, that they have no interests other than to maintain their own egos? The fact is that even stooping to criticize your claims would be a slight to the ego for these, our tele-dons. Your challenge is to somehow convince them that there is an ego-stroke in embracing your position. But how can you do that when you can't even make progress here?

spin

Rubbish. Your reading has been very selective indeed.

No Robots

Just a little exaggeration to make my point. Relax, big fella.

mountainman

The NT is but one module of the PACKAGE of the
fabrication of the galilaeans. Other modules include
the following:

* Eusebius' Ecclesiatical History, In Preparatio, etc
* Writings of the "Early Church Fathers" refered to in the above.
* Interpolations into the books of roman and jewish historians
* Perversion of other literature and authors

This forum has not much been prepared to discuss the possibility
that the entire package (above) is a fictive narrative.

Ego does not concern me, and I would prefer to be known
as a stoic rather than a complainer. I am not trying to convert
anyone to think the way I do, because all am trying to do is to
answer a very simple question.

The question: "Did Constantine create christianity" seems simple.
It also appears as if it has a simple "NO" answer.
But things are not always as they seem.
And so the thick plottens.

Best wishes,



Pete

post tenebras lux

The below is the 'closest' I could find. Pete: are you aware of ongoing german efforts to retranslate the Contra Iulianum? (see here)

Roger Pearse

I have been in contact with Markus Vinzent about this new critical edition of the Contra Julianum, which will include a German translation and also a French translation in the Sources Chrétiennes series.

An English language link from the above offers more info on the project.

http://www.research-projects.unizh.ch/p498.htm

I was naturally interested in seeing if an English translation might be prepared, but there was little interest in this unless I could produce some unspecified amount of funding. I did indeed look into this, but I find that I am not well suited to the never-never land of state funding applications and little pointed heads.

I also translated one of the papers emerging from this project which might be of interest as it discusses just how long the work ever was in the first place (i.e. did Cyril write 30 books?):

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/ma...a_julianum.htm

A shorter and clearer list of manuscripts is here:

http://kyrill.ev-theol.uni-bonn.de/KyrillMssListe.htm

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse

Can I ask how you got to this link?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

post tenebras lux

First I'd googled for 'cyril of alexandria' and 'contra julianum/contra iulianum'. Then it was either on the second or third page of results or it was in a linky I found within one of these results.

Although I found various places where the (surviving parts of) other works by Cyril were available in the original, for some reason these same websites either cannot or will not provide copies of the surviving parts of Contra Iulianum.

post tenebras lux

PS: This is the webpage --> http://www.ub.unibas.ch/kadmos/gg/pi...24_005_tit.htm

It's one of a whole cycle of images. Unfortunately, only of the more 'interesting' pages of the books in question.