FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-17-2012, 09:55 PM   #31
Moderator -
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 4,639
Default

Constantine wasn't afraid of the Bible, he was afraid of his mom.
Diogenes the Cynic is offline  
Old 06-18-2012, 09:26 AM   #32
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
It is more than possible that the Bible has had a shaming and civilising effect on most of the world.
I think that's a matter of opinion.

I still prefer "The Hobbit" to the official conquerors' codex .

Quote:
It was Constantine, for instance, obviously afraid of the Bible, who brought crucifixion to an end.

Constantine introduced laws to burn people alive. Why was Consantine afraid of the Bible? He published it far and wide for Christ's sake and for the sake of his centralised monotheistic state cult. Was Chairman Mao afraid of his "Little Red Book"? Was Moses afraid of the Hebrew Bible? Was Muhammad afraid of the Quran?


Quote:
It is more than possible that many monarchs have been forced to lay similar claim to Christian belief, because to do otherwise looked bad, and have been forced to limit or refrain from brutalities and atrocities that went untrammelled, BC.

It is the perceived authority of the artisan from Galilee that makes the difference.

Tell that to Ashoka.
mountainman is offline  
Old 06-18-2012, 10:08 AM   #33
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
It is more than possible that the Bible has had a shaming and civilising effect on most of the world.
I think that's a matter of opinion.
Not entirely. The concept of Christian monarchy, crystallised in 'Christian' oaths, sworn by monarchs at coronation services, under the authority of mitred 'bishops', is a very long-standing one that has not entirely vanished, even now.

Quote:
It was Constantine, for instance, obviously afraid of the Bible, who brought crucifixion to an end.
Quote:
Constantine introduced laws to burn people alive.
Because of his fear of Christianity. He was not a very rational man. Few emperors were, the job being a high-risk one. Though his law against auspices was probably never put into practice.

Quote:
Why was Consantine afraid of the Bible?
It contradicted his paymasters, the Roman patricians. They had contrasting views on morality, doncha know.

Quote:
He published it far and wide for Christ's sake
Bob Hope lives.

Quote:
Was Chairman Mao afraid of his "Little Red Book"?
He was lucky. He wrote it himself, so it's hardly likely. He was afraid of democracy, just as Constantine was. And afraid of the Bible too, as the Chinese govt. is now.

Quote:
Was Moses afraid of the Hebrew Bible?
Moses was no monarch. In fact, he got quite fed up with his own people.

Quote:
Was Muhammad afraid of the Quran?
He was afraid it wouldn't take off without cold steel as persuasion, and he was right. But again, he was terrified of the Bible. That's why he (or someone) concocted that absurd caricature, the Qur'an.

As is so very obvious.

Quote:
It is more than possible that many monarchs have been forced to lay similar claim to Christian belief, because to do otherwise looked bad, and have been forced to limit or refrain from brutalities and atrocities that went untrammelled, BC.

It is the perceived authority of the artisan from Galilee that makes the difference.
Quote:
Tell that to Ashoka.
Surely not Ashoka, the mighty military leader? Why?
sotto voce is offline  
Old 06-18-2012, 10:37 AM   #34
Moderator -
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 4,639
Default

Moses never existed, dude. Just FYI.
Diogenes the Cynic is offline  
Old 06-18-2012, 10:49 AM   #35
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Moses never existed, dude. Just FYI.
There was an Historical Moses, DUDE!!!!

Moses was NOT described as the Son of a Ghost like Jesus and you believe Jesus was a figure of history.

The Historical Moses is far more likely than an historical Jesus the Son of a Ghost, Dude!!!
aa5874 is offline  
Old 06-18-2012, 11:37 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bronx, NY
Posts: 945
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
It is more than possible that the Bible has had a shaming and civilising effect on most of the world. It was Constantine, for instance, obviously afraid of the Bible, who brought crucifixion to an end. It is more than possible that many monarchs have been forced to lay similar claim to Christian belief, because to do otherwise looked bad, and have been forced to limit or refrain from brutalities and atrocities that went untrammelled, BC. It is the perceived authority of the artisan from Galilee that makes the difference.
Perhaps this one:

Quote:
The Son of Man shall send forth his His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Horatio Parker is offline  
Old 06-18-2012, 12:48 PM   #37
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Parker View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
It is more than possible that the Bible has had a shaming and civilising effect on most of the world. It was Constantine, for instance, obviously afraid of the Bible, who brought crucifixion to an end. It is more than possible that many monarchs have been forced to lay similar claim to Christian belief, because to do otherwise looked bad, and have been forced to limit or refrain from brutalities and atrocities that went untrammelled, BC. It is the perceived authority of the artisan from Galilee that makes the difference.
Perhaps this one:

Quote:
The Son of Man shall send forth his His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
This is a good example of the way the artisan from Galilee is formally recognised, but kept at arm's length, because he is not perceived as just an artisan from Galilee. It's lip service.
sotto voce is offline  
Old 06-18-2012, 09:36 PM   #38
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
It is more than possible that the Bible has had a shaming and civilising effect on most of the world.
I think that's a matter of opinion.
Not entirely.
Entirely a matter of opinion.

Quote:
The concept of Christian monarchy, crystallised in 'Christian' oaths, sworn by monarchs at coronation services, under the authority of mitred 'bishops', is a very long-standing one that has not entirely vanished, even now.
There have been discussions about the hegemony of the christian conceptual framework.



Quote:
Quote:
Was Chairman Mao afraid of his "Little Red Book"?
He was lucky. He wrote it himself, so it's hardly likely.

And because of non peer-reviewed publications under Constantine's 4th century propaganda machine that explicitly infer that Constantine did not commission his Imperial Codex, you believe that Constantine did not indulge in rat-cunning fabrication.

One codex was worth a legion.
mountainman is offline  
Old 06-19-2012, 02:26 AM   #39
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
It is more than possible that the Bible has had a shaming and civilising effect on most of the world.
I think that's a matter of opinion.
Not entirely.
Entirely a matter of opinion.
Among the uninformed, yes.

Quote:
The concept of Christian monarchy, crystallised in 'Christian' oaths, sworn by monarchs at coronation services, under the authority of mitred 'bishops', is a very long-standing one that has not entirely vanished, even now.
Quote:
There have been discussions about the hegemony of the christian conceptual framework.
There have been discussions about hegemony of a 'Christian' conceptual framework. Which fact of course means that this cannot be a matter of opinion.

Quote:
Quote:
Was Chairman Mao afraid of his "Little Red Book"?
He was lucky. He wrote it himself, so it's hardly likely.
Now where the Bible was already established, writing one's own thoughts and making them 'divine' wasn't going to cut any ice. So one had to recognise the Bible, but do whatever was needed to invert meaning via false teachers supported by coercion. In the case of Rome this 'necessitated' the restoration of terrorist rights to the imperium, as represented by the title Pontifex Maximus, passed on indeed to a 'Christian' terrorist.

Quote:
And because of non peer-reviewed publications under Constantine's 4th century propaganda machine that explicitly infer that Constantine did not commission his Imperial Codex
How silly. Those who must corrupt expertly must be experts.

Quote:
One codex was worth a legion.
Well put.
sotto voce is offline  
Old 06-19-2012, 02:45 AM   #40
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
It is more than possible that the Bible has had a shaming and civilising effect on most of the world.
I think that's a matter of opinion.
Not entirely.
Entirely a matter of opinion.
Among the uninformed, yes.

Well this reverts to the classification of the biblical historians and the ancient historians as insiders and outsiders. The biblical historians have the inside information on the mysterious historical origins of their church.


Quote:
There have been discussions about hegemony of a 'Christian' conceptual framework. Which fact of course means that this cannot be a matter of opinion.
It may not be a matter of opinion from within the hegemony of the framework, but quite certainly from outside this framework, if your mind is capable of such objectivity, the entire framework and its glossy glittering hegemony is a distinctly matter of opinion.



Quote:
Quote:
One codex was worth a legion.
Well put.
Such were the compelling logistics of imperially sponsored centralised state monotheistic holy writs in antiquity. How to efficiently control the feudal diocesian populace one basilica and one codex at a time.
mountainman is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:03 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.