Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 08-02-2010, 03:16 AM

The nephilim may be further evidence. These are the offspring of naughty angels who know the daughters of Eve.

Solo · 08-02-2010, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charles

If I am to understand you correctly you are saying that you not only believe that Secret Mark is a real historical gospel text but in fact that it is the gospel of the Marcionite sect and the basis for their self-castration rituals. But all the Church Fathers make clear that the Marcionites used the Gospel of Luke. A corrupt version of that text admittedly. But this would seem to make it impossible for Secret Mark to be the gospel of the Marcionites.

Forget it, charles, Secret Mark is a modern fake - no gospeller, least of all Mark, would have ever dreamed up something like 'ο δε νεανισκος εμβλεψας αυτω (τω Ιησου) ηγαπησεν αυτον' (and the youngster, looking at him, loved him). The phrasing, in the mind of the forger, simply reverses roles in the canonical Mk 10:21 (ο δε Ιησους εμβλεψας αυτω ηγαπησεν αυτον). However, the reciprocity between Jesus and the young man is forced and at odds with Mark's mystery idiom of Jesus possessed by the Holy Spirit.

Jiri

aa5874 · 08-02-2010, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

AA,

You really should read the references IN THEIR ORIGINAL LANGUAGE. It is a shortcoming which leads you to make frequent errors (cf. your claims that the 'disciples of Marcion' rather than Marcion). Why don't you look up ANY commentary on Tertullian's discussion in De Monogamia? You will see that it is UNIVERSALLY understood - "He [Tertullian] is the only writer to use the term eunuch about Jesus, using the Latin word spado, a common word for a castrated or impotent man."

The text of De Monogamia is replete with references to the high place of spadones in the Church:

Quote:

Sed an onerosa monogamia, viderit adhuc impudens infirmitas carnis; an autem nova, de hoc interim constet. Illud enim amplius dicimus: etiamsi totam et solidam virginitatem sive continentiam paraclitus hodie determinasset, ut ne unis quidem nuptiis fervorem carnis despumare permitteret, sic quoque nihil novi inducere videretur, ipso domino spadonibus aperiente regna caelorum ut et ipso spadone, quem spectans et apostolus, propterea et ipse castratus,
continentiam mavult. [De Monogamia 3]

Sed donato infirmitati tuae carnis suae exemplo perfectior Adam, id est Christus, eo quoque nomine perfectior qua integrior, volenti quidem tibi spado occurrit in carne; si vero non sufficis, monogamus incurrit in spiritu, unam habens ecclesiam sponsam secundum figuram, quam apostolus <in> illud magnum sacramentum interpretatur, in Christum et ecclesiam, competentes carnali monogamiae per spiritalem [ibid 5]

Necessario succedendum erat in matrimonium fratris sine liberis defuncti, primum, quia adhuc vetus illa benedictio decurrere habebat: Crescite et redundate, dehinc, quoniam patrum delicta etiam de filiis exigebantur, tertio, quoniam spadones et steriles ignominiosi habebantur. Itaque ne proinde maledicti iudicarentur, qui non naturae reatu, sed mortis praeventu orbi decessissent, ideo illis ex suo genere vicaria et quasi postuma suboles supparabatur. At ubi et crescite et redundate evacuavit extremitas temporum inducente apostolo: Superest, ut et qui habent uxores sic sint, ac si non habeant, quia tempus in collectum est, et desinit uva acerba a patribus manducata filiorum dentes obstupefacere ---- unusquisque enim in suo delicto morietur ---- et spadones non tantum ignominia caruerunt, verum et gratiam meruerunt invitati in regna caelorum, sepulta lege succedendi in matrimonium fratris contrarium eius obtinuit non succedendi in matrimoniam fratris. [ibid 7]

Petrum solum invenio maritum per socrum, monogamum praesumo per ecclesiam, qua super illum omnem gradum ordinis sui de monogamis erat collocatura. Ceteros cum maritos non invenio, aut spadones intelligam necesse est aut continentes. [ibid 8]

cum in revelatione gloriae suae de tot sanctis et prophetis Moysen et Heliam secum mavult, alterum monogamum, alterum spadonem ---- non enim aliud fuit Helias quam Iohannes, qui in virtute et spiritu venit Heliae ----, cum ille vorator et potator homo, prandiorum et cenarum cum publicanis et peccatoribus frequentator semel apud unas nuptias cenat multis utique
nubentibus; totiens enim voluit celebrare eas, quotiens et esse. [ibid]

Sed hanc iudicabunt iam non Isaac monogamus pater noster nec Iohannes aliqui Christi spado [alt. 'spadone'] nec Iudith [nec] filia Merari nec tot alia [ibid 17]

There can be no question that the translators UNDERESTIMATED and UNDERREPRESENTED Tertullian's understanding (or that of his source) that Jesus and the first disciples (beside Peter) were all spadones or eunuchs. It was a relic from Christianity's 'crazy past' (like Danny Bonaduce and Eddie Murphy's 'wild nights' with transgendered 'companions').

Please show an English translation of the passage of what appears to be Latin. And one that was done by professional translators. In English, it would CLEARLY be seen if it can be found that Jesus was castrated.

I do not see even in Latin where it is written Jesus was castrated.

You see it? Tell us where exactly. You don't know Latin?

And, you must KNOW that the book " On Monogamy" by "Tertullian" is not a book "On Castration".

Now, in the NT Canon, Jesus was circumcised but there is no reference to any castration.

Once you are claimIng that Tertullian preached that Jesus was castrated then Tertullian was a HERETIC. I can't find any Church writer that claimed Jesus was castrated.

Chili · 08-02-2010, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I don't know how much this 'eunuch according to nature' really corresponds to the modern concept of 'gay.' I tend to think it means more of a physical deformity (i.e. gynomorphic males and andromorphic females) and that such a category was so rare that it had no place in Christian practice - except for "John" who seems to be so identified (i.e. a eunuch from birth).

John was 'the Christ' of Jesus's dual nauture set free when Jesus died. This is made known to us with "mother there is your son, son there is your mother" and who so was enuch by nature in the androgyne image of God.

Remember here that our sexual-ity is an illusion that nonetheless drives our sex identity (our dick) in 'essence precedes existence', so now, if the driver is nuetered in the convergence of the twain (our left and right hemispheres) there is only a floppy left to pee with.

In Catholicism this is where the seventh sacrament of priesthood represents the 'seventh day' of creation on which evening did not follow the day wherefore then the 'called and chosen' by God are enuchs by nature and so it is a natural consequence and necessary condition of being a priest living in the freedom of the seventh day, . . . where the illusion of our temporal condition as human is no longer.

If you go to Rev. 21:1 you will see that the sea is no longer to say that 'dry land' is no more and we are back to 'formless' but now without chaos and purpose other than linger in the everlasting light.

This condidtion is actually paired with infallible and to deny either one is to deny the existence of heaven on earth.

It has nothing to do with gay but is purely about the annihilation of opposites in the human mind wherein the lymbic system has been vacated and subsequently the kundalini was raised from the crotch to the mind now fully in charge of destiny.

Chili · 08-02-2010, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I am not the first to suggest that Jacob was castrated by the angel. What others have failed to realize is that there must have been a tradition which connected this neutering with his transformation into an angel. It became the basis to the early Christian ritual (Origen = Adamantius = Adam in the state of grace before the fall i.e. whose skin originally had an adamantine shell).

On the idea of Jacob wrestling with an angel.

When Jacob wrestled with the angel, and held his own, wrestling right through the night, the angel gave him the name Yisra’el, which is in form the name of an angel. The homiletic root of Israel - yashar - was translated into Greek as chrestos (I can demonstrate all of this if anyone would like).

There is an ancient text called The Ladder of Jacob preserved only in part, from the second c. B.C. that expands on the concept of Jacob as an angel. The same concept is prominent in mediaeval Jewish texts. I take it that Jacob was not quite equal to the angel he wrestled with. As that angel was the Angel of the Presence (read the passage carefully and you will see it) then Jacob-Yisra’el was the angel embodying the world, as opposed to the angel containing the germ of the world, the Angel of the Presence. Otherwise, Jacob-Yisra’el was the earthly reflection of the Angel of the Presence. The two explanations are compatible with each other.
.

Nice work but he really was emancipated from his dick wherein he lost the germ of the world but gained the world as his world.

Chili · 08-02-2010, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

[ Now, in the NT Canon, Jesus was circumcised but there is no reference to any castration.

Once you are claimIng that Tertullian preached that Jesus was castrated then Tertullian was a HERETIC. I can't find any Church writer that claimed Jesus was castrated.

Yes but the circumcision of Jesus is that which Jewish circumcision is a foreshadow of in the same way as water baptism is a foreshadow of being reborn of water [and spirit] which now means that it must be Catholic water [after all] wherein the reign of God is contained.

I should add that it foreshadows circumcision by natural law instead of religion .

Chili · 08-02-2010, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Indeed there must have been a great number of sensory appeals made to the 'fuckers' on the other side. There was the sound of the angelic choir i.e. the chorus of sweet sounding castrati singing behind the veil, the smell of the incense its smoke, perhaps even colored lighting (see Irenaeus's description of the Marcionite rites and the Anonymous Treatise on Baptism).

As baffling as it might now seem to modern sensibility, there was a real appeal made to attract catechumen through this sensory experience. The one clue that was apparent to all that participated was that the presbyters themselves were emasculated ascetics and were identified as living embodiments of angelic perfection (see Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus dispute this key understanding of the 'gnostics').

They were called "begijntje's" in Catholic Belgium and Netherland and that was, or was part of the evangelistic side of the Church ("hands off" altar calls). The name is still popular today but now more as a specialty outlet for exotic things.

stephan huller · 08-02-2010, 09:45 AM

Chili. So reasonable. So intelligent. So interesting. You must be Canadian (lol). I have noted your information and found everything quite useful. I just want to stress I acknowledge that Jesus must have been cockless from the beginning because he was an angel. Hence the stressing - in Clement especially (hint, hint, hint Charles) that we are all supposed to be 'like angels' or 'like the choir of angels.'

Whenever you hear an early Church Father starting talking about humanity being refashioned like angels they are talking about castration rituals.

An example that might be interesting to some one out there. Jesus is told "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him." But Jesus says that in the world to come "people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."

Chop!

It is all part of a system which argues that what Moses received was 'good' but imperfect. The followers of Christ would receive a more perfect Law which make them 'like the angels' (i.e. to be returned to the state of grace that Adam had when he was androgynous before the fall).

Chili · 08-02-2010, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Chili. So reasonable. So intelligent. So interesting. You must be Canadian (lol). I have noted your information and found everything quite useful. I just want to stress I acknowledge that Jesus must have been cockless from the beginning because he was an angel. Hence the stressing - in Clement especially (hint, hint, hint Charles) that we are all supposed to be 'like angels' or 'like the choir of angels.'

Whenever you hear an early Church Father starting talking about humanity being refashioned like angels they are talking about castration rituals.

An example that might be interesting to some one out there. Jesus is told "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him." But Jesus says that in the world to come "people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."

Chop!

It is all part of a system which argues that what Moses received was 'good' but imperfect. The followers of Christ would receive a more perfect Law which make them 'like the angels' (i.e. to be returned to the state of grace that Adam had when he was androgynous before the fall).

Thanks, just trying to support your dear wife who dares to 'argue' with you [despite the odds].

I found your tread very interesting and wanted to add my thoughts on this. I was born and raised in Catholic Netherland and am somewhat familiar with what we knew as a "Begijntjeshof" where the 'lost sheep' were always welcome and were treated like royalty by the 'show' these uncloistered nuns put on.

Of course Jesus was an angel but Joseph was the guy with dick and it was not untill his senses were pierced that he effectively (by way of efficient cause) got totally rid of the urge . . . which then was confirmed at the foot of the cross as I sugested (all metaphor, of course).

Moses was a forerunner of Billy Graham. Good but imperfect with his eyes only half opened, . . . and I should note that Man was perfect until 'the fall' and was called Adam after that with "Adam where are you" in Gen.3, no longer 'man' but now seen as 'the man.'

stephan huller · 08-02-2010, 10:19 AM

My wife doesn't argue with me. She has inherited that Catholic certainty that she knows the truth even if the evidence doesn't seem to support her (lol).

BTW that's NOT me and wife in the avatar. My wife isn't Japanese. It's just in keeping with my new image as a 'nice guy' who doesn't argue with people.

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

08-02-2010, 03:16 AM	#21
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	The nephilim may be further evidence. These are the offspring of naughty angels who know the daughters of Eve.

08-02-2010, 09:45 AM	#28
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Chili. So reasonable. So intelligent. So interesting. You must be Canadian (lol). I have noted your information and found everything quite useful. I just want to stress I acknowledge that Jesus must have been cockless from the beginning because he was an angel. Hence the stressing - in Clement especially (hint, hint, hint Charles) that we are all supposed to be 'like angels' or 'like the choir of angels.' Whenever you hear an early Church Father starting talking about humanity being refashioned like angels they are talking about castration rituals. An example that might be interesting to some one out there. Jesus is told "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him." But Jesus says that in the world to come "people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven." Chop! It is all part of a system which argues that what Moses received was 'good' but imperfect. The followers of Christ would receive a more perfect Law which make them 'like the angels' (i.e. to be returned to the state of grace that Adam had when he was androgynous before the fall).

08-02-2010, 10:19 AM	#30
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	My wife doesn't argue with me. She has inherited that Catholic certainty that she knows the truth even if the evidence doesn't seem to support her (lol). BTW that's NOT me and wife in the avatar. My wife isn't Japanese. It's just in keeping with my new image as a 'nice guy' who doesn't argue with people.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.