Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
View Poll Results: How close to the historical truth was Eusebius' Christian "Church History"? | |||
(1) 100% authentic - absolute "historical truth" | 1 | 9.09% | |
(2) 75% authentic - 25% fabricated | 3 | 27.27% | |
(3) 50% authentic - 50% fabricated | 2 | 18.18% | |
(4) 25% authentic - 75% fabricated | 4 | 36.36% | |
(5) 0% authentic - 100% fabricated | 1 | 9.09% | |
Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
01-20-2010, 06:46 AM | #31 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
|
|
01-20-2010, 02:28 PM | #32 |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
|
Well keep up the good work and try not to allow "Christian parsimoniousness" effect the balance of the scales in weighing the evidence, since the roots of Christian parsimony, persecution and intolerance are evidenced to have appeared after Constantine trotted out his codex in the 4th century, and no earlier.
|
01-20-2010, 11:24 PM | #33 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
|
|
01-21-2010, 11:40 AM | #34 |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
Reading the account about Diocletian, I would propose Eusebius was not closer to the truth, but for a different reason.
This non sacrificing cult of atheists - they did not believe in the true gods - were understood as being anti social and causing real problems in the body politic. The entrails and muses can be understood as expressions of this real disquiet about people not sacrificing. As a social order issue it is therefore then logical to do something - expulsion from your job - well they are corrupting the empire aren't they - or major surgery against this cancer. Eusebius's problem is that he is taking his propaganda as true - he is on a mission to impose his new god, and therefore interprets a logical reaction by a threatened empire as persecution when it is a control move. Which raises an interesting question - maybe xianity saved the religious mind set - the pagans were slowly becoming secular and sacrificing was dying out as old fashioned. Rationality was growing. We moved from the superstitio of many gods to the more dangerous superstitio of one god with a clear hierarchy and empire behind it. |
01-21-2010, 02:35 PM | #35 | ||||||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We need to examine the trinity of Plotinus as it was espoused by the Greek civilisation in the 4th century: The CHRESTOS (the all) and the SPIRIT and the SOUL. In order to understand this we need to understand the notion of Nondualism The literature of Porphyry, one of the twelve disciples of Plotinus, and who preserved Plotinus and Euclid, was BURNT! The literature of Arius was BURNT! The literature of Emperor Julian was BURNT! The literature of "christian dissent" was BURNT! The literature of Alexandria was BURNT! It was very dangerous to oppose the bright and burning christian majesty of the emperor! There were heretics who asserted shortly after the council of Nicaea that the father and the son and the holy ghost were three separate gods. Not only that but between Nicaea and the end of the 5th century these was an explosion of (quite obviously fraudulent) "Christian Hagiography" and highly revered Christian Saints and Martrys crawled out of every pile of bones in the empire. These new many many many Saints attracted basilicas. Quote:
|
||||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|