Freethought & Rationalism Archive

GakuseiDon · 10-06-2008, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Student of Sophia

So presumably Satan created his forgeries after being ejected from the The Divine Council?

At one point, didn't the God at the head of that Council rule among other gods (elohim) in the council, and didn't these other god serve certain roles in the Council? And weren't those gods and goddesses demoted to angels and demons after a war in the Council?

Is that when Satan and his legion plagiarized elements from the OT? As part of a strategy against the God who ejected them from the Divine Council of El and cast them down to Earth?

Just to be clear: I have an amateur's interest in how people thought back then (note that I have no relevant training or language skills). I don't regard the Bible as literally or even necessarily metaphorically true. So I'm afraid I'll need to leave your latest questions for someone else to address.

Toto · 10-06-2008, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

How is that idea even arguably true? Does it not just show up Justin as a lying apologist?

I was making a hilariously funny comment that would leave the readers in stitches of laughter and amazement at my command of irony.

It would be an ironic comment if you were making fun of Justin, but I thought you were on his side? :huh:

If you read the link to Mead's Orpheus which Andrew Criddle kindly gave above, you can see that his use of "plagiarism by anticipation" is highly ironic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by G.R.S.Mead

So clearly was it the case that the "Heathen " possessed in its fulness the idea of the "One God," that the Church fathers were put to great shifts to explain it away. For instance, Justin Martyr, in keeping with his absurd theory of "plagiarism by anticipation," asserts that Orpheus, Homer, and Solon, had visited Egypt and become saturated with the Mosaic books.

GakuseiDon · 10-06-2008, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

...
I was making a hilariously funny comment that would leave the readers in stitches of laughter and amazement at my command of irony.

It would be an ironic comment if you were making fun of Justin, but I thought you were on his side? :huh:

I was making fun of Justin.

lycanthrope · 10-07-2008, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by lycanthrope

possibly rubbish...but i used to think it was true because Emperor Constantine backed Eusebius into making the Literalist Roman Church into the more mainstream one. surely the 'loose ends' like those pagan/gnostic christians must be dealt with...

but of course if its unfounded i think we should let it rest...

The bit in bold is likewise not part of any history known to man...

All the best,

Roger Pearse

ah wait, i think i found it.

"One of the major players in this coverup operation was a character named Eusebius who, at the begining of the 4th century, compiled from legends, fabrications and his own imagination the only early history of christianity that still exists today. All subsequent histories have been forced to base themselves on Eusebius dubious claims because there has been little other info to draw on. All those with a diffferent perspective on Christianity were branded as heretics and eradicated. In this way falsehoods compiled inthe 4th century came down to us as established facts.

Eusebius was employed by the Roman Emperor Constatine who made Christianity the state religion of the Empiore and gave literalist christianity the power it needed to wipe out paganism and gnosticism. Constantine wanted 'one god, one religion' to consolidate his claims of 'one empire, one emperor'. He oversaw the creation of Nicene creed - the article of faith repeated in Churches today and Christians who refused to assent to this creed were banished from the Empire or silenced" - Jesus Mysteries (or via: amazon.co.uk) p13

Roger Pearse · 10-07-2008, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lycanthrope

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

The bit in bold is likewise not part of any history known to man...

ah wait, i think i found it.

"One of the major players in this coverup operation was a character named Eusebius who, at the begining of the 4th century, compiled from legends, fabrications and his own imagination the only early history of christianity that still exists today. All subsequent histories have been forced to base themselves on Eusebius dubious claims because there has been little other info to draw on. All those with a diffferent perspective on Christianity were branded as heretics and eradicated. In this way falsehoods compiled inthe 4th century came down to us as established facts.

Eusebius was employed by the Roman Emperor Constatine who made Christianity the state religion of the Empiore and gave literalist christianity the power it needed to wipe out paganism and gnosticism. Constantine wanted 'one god, one religion' to consolidate his claims of 'one empire, one emperor'. He oversaw the creation of Nicene creed - the article of faith repeated in Churches today and Christians who refused to assent to this creed were banished from the Empire or silenced" - Jesus Mysteries p13

Interesting to see that F&G is fully as bad as we thought it was. Still, they made money on it, and I expect it had no other function for its authors.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto · 10-07-2008, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lycanthrope

...

"One of the major players in this coverup operation was a character named Eusebius who, at the begining of the 4th century, compiled from legends, fabrications and his own imagination the only early history of christianity that still exists today. All subsequent histories have been forced to base themselves on Eusebius dubious claims because there has been little other info to draw on. All those with a diffferent perspective on Christianity were branded as heretics and eradicated. In this way falsehoods compiled inthe 4th century came down to us as established facts.

Eusebius was employed by the Roman Emperor Constatine who made Christianity the state religion of the Empiore and gave literalist christianity the power it needed to wipe out paganism and gnosticism. Constantine wanted 'one god, one religion' to consolidate his claims of 'one empire, one emperor'. He oversaw the creation of Nicene creed - the article of faith repeated in Churches today and Christians who refused to assent to this creed were banished from the Empire or silenced" - Jesus Mysteries (or via: amazon.co.uk) p13

Hi lycanthrope: It's best not to cite Freke and Gandy as your source unless you look behind what they wrote. There has been a lot of discussion of the book, and the authors have been a bit sloppy about some details.

They are not scholars working within a scholarly tradition of peer review and carefully qualified statements that recognize the nuances of what can be known. They are neo-gnostics promoting a new view of religion. If you read them with this realization, you may appreciate what they wrote, but you will find that you need to check on their claims.

There are elements of truth in the above quote, but also cartoonish caricatures. And IIRC if you read further in the book, you get a more nuanced version of the history of early Christianity, although still not one that Roger would approve of.

And if their motive were to make money, they would have done better to start an evangelical church and faith healing ministry and tell people to give them 10% of their income.

andrewcriddle · 10-07-2008, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

These placards seem to give slightly different explanations of what the bull-slaying represents which underline the fact that we don't really know.
.................................

I should have mentioned the inscription from the Santa Prisca Mithraeum
You saved us by shedding the ?eternal? blood
et nos servasti ?eternali? sanguine fuso.

It is suggestive and evocative, but unclear as to exactly what it means (or even says)

Andrew Criddle

Roger Pearse · 10-07-2008, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

And if their motive were to make money, they would have done better to start an evangelical church and faith healing ministry and tell people to give them 10% of their income.

Or sell porn books, perhaps.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 10-07-2008, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

These placards seem to give slightly different explanations of what the bull-slaying represents which underline the fact that we don't really know.
.................................

I should have mentioned the inscription from the Santa Prisca Mithraeum
You saved us by shedding the ?eternal? blood
et nos servasti ?eternali? sanguine fuso.

It is suggestive and evocative, but unclear as to exactly what it means (or even says)

It is very interesting.

A Google search came across this which suggests that eternali is a suggestion which 'cannot be right' (they do not say why).

spin · 10-08-2008, 12:15 AM

If we look at footnote 615 on p.207 here, we see a slightly different summary of the source (S. Panciera): "the word eternali is highly uncertain, and is best avoided." Vermaseren was responsible for the original reconstruction with "eternali".

spin

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

10-08-2008, 12:15 AM	#120
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	If we look at footnote 615 on p.207 here, we see a slightly different summary of the source (S. Panciera): "the word eternali is highly uncertain, and is best avoided." Vermaseren was responsible for the original reconstruction with "eternali". spin

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.