| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Roger Pearse" |
| Date: |
01 Apr 2004 01:09:06 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message news:<n3jm6096rjuj73p37ocsv1jgs0cqp30ul9@4ax.com>...
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote
Elroy Willis wrote:
<snip>
Have you read much about the Roman flamines? If so, what do
you think happened to them? Did they simply turn into bishops?
===>If they converted.
Nonsense.
They were part of the Roman hierarchy of religious affairs and I
doubt they'd be forced to "convert" to anything, since they were
already in on the whole thing to begin with.
I'm afraid this too is nonsense -- sorry.
One idea I read a while ago about the council of Nicea involved the
presence of the flamines, who each were responsible for different gods
of the time getting together to try to simplify things, along with
other priests and religious people of the time, by order of
Constantine.
There is no doubt at all that there were flamines responsible for
keeping up with the worship of such planetary deities as Jupiter,
Mercury, Venus, and Mars. The so-called "pagans" of the time were
worshipping those gods, and you can't just stamp out a god or god
worship overnight, so better to slowly absorb them.
===>That is pretty much what happened.
It is unabashed rubbish, I'm afraid. Nothing of the kind happened at
Nicaea.
Holidays, pagan god-statues, places of worship such as healing centers,
even the Sibylline Oracles, were "Christianized".
This is not a good representation of what happened. The real story is
very well expressed in the letter of Pope Gregory preserved in Bede,
dealing with how Augustine of Canterbury was to deal with paganism.
I think you must have some misconceptions about "paganism."
You're welcome to think so.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
01 Apr 2004 08:47:29 AM |
|
|
(Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
(Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote
Elroy Willis wrote:
<snip>
Have you read much about the Roman flamines? If so, what do
you think happened to them? Did they simply turn into bishops?
===>If they converted.
Nonsense.
They were part of the Roman hierarchy of religious affairs and I
doubt they'd be forced to "convert" to anything, since they were
already in on the whole thing to begin with.
I'm afraid this too is nonsense -- sorry.
*****.
From:
http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/311_Flamines.html
"The flamines (sing: flamen) were the members of the pontifical
college. They were also known as the pontiffs. The leader of the
college was the pontifex maximus.
Each of the 15 priests in the college was in charge of the cult of one
god. There were three major priests, the flamines maiores, who had to
be patrician:
* Flamen Dialis (Jupiter)
* Flamen Martialis (Mars)
* Flamen Quirinalis (Quirinus)
The minor priests, the flamines minores, were twelve and they could be
plebeians:
* Flamen Carmentalis (Carmentis)
* Flamen Cerialis (Ceres)
* Flamen Falacer (Falacer)
* Flamen Floralis (Flora)
* Flamen Furrinalis (Furrina)
* Flamen Palatualis (Palatua)
* Flamen Pomonalis (Pomona)
* Flamen Portunalis (Portunus)
* Flamen Volcanalis (Vulcan)
* Flamen Volturnalis (Volturnus)
Two flamines served gods that are unknown to us. Some of the gods
served are very obscure, so the priesthoods are probably very
ancient."
I suppose you'll just ignore the above.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Pearse" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
02 Apr 2004 01:45:02 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message news:<9jao605ocs25o1ts9tsacnpvb8a2usu5f5@4ax.com>...
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote
Elroy Willis wrote:
<snip>
Have you read much about the Roman flamines? If so, what do
you think happened to them? Did they simply turn into bishops?
===>If they converted.
Nonsense.
They were part of the Roman hierarchy of religious affairs and I
doubt they'd be forced to "convert" to anything, since they were
already in on the whole thing to begin with.
I'm afraid this too is nonsense -- sorry.
*****.
Language.
From:
http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/311_Flamines.html
"The flamines (sing: flamen) were the members of the pontifical
college. They were also known as the pontiffs. The leader of the
college was the pontifex maximus.
Each of the 15 priests in the college was in charge of the cult of one
god. There were three major priests, the flamines maiores, who had to
be patrician:
* Flamen Dialis (Jupiter)
* Flamen Martialis (Mars)
* Flamen Quirinalis (Quirinus)
The minor priests, the flamines minores, were twelve and they could be
plebeians:
* Flamen Carmentalis (Carmentis)
* Flamen Cerialis (Ceres)
* Flamen Falacer (Falacer)
* Flamen Floralis (Flora)
* Flamen Furrinalis (Furrina)
* Flamen Palatualis (Palatua)
* Flamen Pomonalis (Pomona)
* Flamen Portunalis (Portunus)
* Flamen Volcanalis (Vulcan)
* Flamen Volturnalis (Volturnus)
Two flamines served gods that are unknown to us. Some of the gods
served are very obscure, so the priesthoods are probably very
ancient."
While this page is no authority, the raw facts are correct. But what
has this to do with your assertions?
I suppose you'll just ignore the above.
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of demonstration that
Christianity was based around these pagan priests.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 04:26:27 AM |
|
|
(Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
(Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
(Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote
Elroy Willis wrote:
<snip>
Have you read much about the Roman flamines? If so, what do
you think happened to them? Did they simply turn into bishops?
===>If they converted.
Nonsense.
They were part of the Roman hierarchy of religious affairs and I
doubt they'd be forced to "convert" to anything, since they were
already in on the whole thing to begin with.
I'm afraid this too is nonsense -- sorry.
*****.
Language.
Eh?
From:
http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/311_Flamines.html
"The flamines (sing: flamen) were the members of the pontifical
college. They were also known as the pontiffs. The leader of the
college was the pontifex maximus.
Each of the 15 priests in the college was in charge of the cult of one
god. There were three major priests, the flamines maiores, who had to
be patrician:
* Flamen Dialis (Jupiter)
* Flamen Martialis (Mars)
* Flamen Quirinalis (Quirinus)
The minor priests, the flamines minores, were twelve and they could be
plebeians:
* Flamen Carmentalis (Carmentis)
* Flamen Cerialis (Ceres)
* Flamen Falacer (Falacer)
* Flamen Floralis (Flora)
* Flamen Furrinalis (Furrina)
* Flamen Palatualis (Palatua)
* Flamen Pomonalis (Pomona)
* Flamen Portunalis (Portunus)
* Flamen Volcanalis (Vulcan)
* Flamen Volturnalis (Volturnus)
Two flamines served gods that are unknown to us. Some of the
gods served are very obscure, so the priesthoods are probably very
ancient."
While this page is no authority, the raw facts are correct. But what
has this to do with your assertions?
My assertions have been that there was a long-existing structure
of Roman religious institutions/positions. The pontifical college as
described above.
In general, the Romans were pretty open to dealing with other gods and
their worshippers, at least in the period between 200BCE and 300~CE,
from what I've read so far. The second Jewish temple was financed
mostly by Rome from what I can tell.
I suppose you'll just ignore the above.
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of demonstration that
Christianity was based around these pagan priests.
Maybe you have a different definition of "pagan" than I do?
Once the Jewish temple was destroyed ~70CE, how do you think
all the people who were used to bringing animals to the temple, or
buying them at the gates of the temple would react?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
02 Apr 2004 02:28:43 PM |
|
|
Roger Pearse wrote:
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message news:<9jao605ocs25o1ts9tsacnpvb8a2usu5f5@4ax.com>...
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote
Elroy Willis wrote:
<snip>
Have you read much about the Roman flamines? If so, what do
you think happened to them? Did they simply turn into bishops?
===>If they converted.
Nonsense.
They were part of the Roman hierarchy of religious affairs and I
doubt they'd be forced to "convert" to anything, since they were
already in on the whole thing to begin with.
I'm afraid this too is nonsense -- sorry.
*****.
Language.
From:
http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/311_Flamines.html
"The flamines (sing: flamen) were the members of the pontifical
college. They were also known as the pontiffs. The leader of the
college was the pontifex maximus.
Each of the 15 priests in the college was in charge of the cult of one
god. There were three major priests, the flamines maiores, who had to
be patrician:
* Flamen Dialis (Jupiter)
* Flamen Martialis (Mars)
* Flamen Quirinalis (Quirinus)
The minor priests, the flamines minores, were twelve and they could be
plebeians:
* Flamen Carmentalis (Carmentis)
* Flamen Cerialis (Ceres)
* Flamen Falacer (Falacer)
* Flamen Floralis (Flora)
* Flamen Furrinalis (Furrina)
* Flamen Palatualis (Palatua)
* Flamen Pomonalis (Pomona)
* Flamen Portunalis (Portunus)
* Flamen Volcanalis (Vulcan)
* Flamen Volturnalis (Volturnus)
Two flamines served gods that are unknown to us. Some of the gods
served are very obscure, so the priesthoods are probably very
ancient."
While this page is no authority, the raw facts are correct. But what
has this to do with your assertions?
I suppose you'll just ignore the above.
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of demonstration that
Christianity was based around these pagan priests.
===>Did someone claim that?
If so, it was false.
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Weatherwax" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
02 Apr 2004 05:08:06 PM |
|
|
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
Roger Pearse wrote:
< CLIP >
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of
demonstration that Christianity was based around
these pagan priests.
===>Did someone claim that?
If so, it was false.
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Some of them might have converted. Others would have found new
jobs. There were probably a few martyrs. And most of them would
have just died of natural causes.
In the 1st century the old Roman state religion was dieing out
anyway. New religions were moving in, such as Mithraism and the
cult of Isis.
The Roman Senate declared Julius Caesar a god, allowing Augustus
to call himself: "the Son of God." Later emperors called
themselves "God" and encouraged the worship. The Emperor Cult
took away state support for the flamens.
Most of the of the new religions did not permit women.
Constantine was converted to Christianity by his mother.
--
Wax
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Pearse" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 12:00:10 PM |
|
|
"Weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.net> wrote in message news:<qnmbc.13799$vo5.418648@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
Roger Pearse wrote:
< CLIP >
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of
demonstration that Christianity was based around
these pagan priests.
===>Did someone claim that?
If so, it was false.
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Some of them might have converted. Others would have found new
jobs. There were probably a few martyrs. And most of them would
have just died of natural causes.
Most likely so.
In the 1st century the old Roman state religion was dieing out
anyway. New religions were moving in, such as Mithraism and the
cult of Isis.
True.
The Roman Senate declared Julius Caesar a god, allowing Augustus
to call himself: "the Son of God." Later emperors called
themselves "God" and encouraged the worship. The Emperor Cult
took away state support for the flamens.
Are you sure about the last point? I've never heard this, I must say.
Most of the of the new religions did not permit women.
Not sure about 'most', or that the distinction of the mystery cults
from earlier cults is right. (How many female flamines were there?)
I think of Isis, surely the most distinctive of the mystery religions.
Constantine was converted to Christianity by his mother.
Probably.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 04:46:10 AM |
|
|
Weatherwax <weatherwax@worldnet.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in
Roger Pearse wrote:
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of
demonstration that Christianity was based around
these pagan priests.
===>Did someone claim that?
If so, it was false.
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Some of them might have converted. Others would have found new
jobs. There were probably a few martyrs. And most of them would
have just died of natural causes.
In the 1st century the old Roman state religion
Which was?
was dieing out anyway. New religions were moving in, such as
Mithraism and the cult of Isis.
Mithraism seems to have been popular with the Roman soldiers,
but it seems to have excluded women. The cult of Isis, however,
was popular with women. I don't see much persecution going on
until after the Council of Nicea, do you?
The Roman Senate declared Julius Caesar a god, allowing Augustus
to call himself: "the Son of God." Later emperors called
themselves "God" and encouraged the worship. The Emperor Cult
took away state support for the flamens.
Most of the of the new religions did not permit women.
That's a big drawback, if you're trying to convert everybody on
earth to the same religion, don't you think?
Constantine was converted to Christianity by his mother.
I read a story about Constantine seeing a cross up in the sky during
or before some battle. Probably just made up to bolster the faith.
If not for his mother, the tomb of Jesus might have never been
officially prescribed. As it stands, there are two places in
Jerusalem which claim to have been the tomb of Jesus. I have
to wonder if the Protestants prefer the garden tomb, and the
Catholics prefer the one in the Church of the Holy Seplucre.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Weatherwax" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
04 Apr 2004 04:42:20 PM |
|
|
"Elroy Willis" <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
news:2o4t60tt8m7q026pu872df7ah2jj7mlkhe@4ax.com...
Weatherwax <weatherwax@worldnet.net> wrote in >
< CLIP >
In the 1st century the old Roman state religion
Which was?
As has been mentioned elsewhere, the official Roman state
religion was well organized with a pontifical colloge consisting
of up to sixteen flamens, or pontiffs. It was the job of this
body to oversee all public rites and religious ceremonies, and to
determine the will of the gods through divination and
interpretation of the Sybelline books.
The body was presided over by the Pontiff Maximus. Julius
Caesar was Pontiff Maximus when he began gaining political and
military power in Rome.
Julius
was dieing out anyway. New religions were moving in,
such as Mithraism and the cult of Isis.
Mithraism seems to have been popular with the Roman
soldiers,
but it seems to have excluded women. The cult of Isis,
however, was popular with women. I don't see much
persecution going on until after the Council of Nicea, do
you?
There was, but not as much as some like to make believe. Nero
did prosecute Christians for starting the fire at Rome, and
Domitian took measures against both Christians and Jews.
--
Wax
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
02 Apr 2004 02:48:13 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Roger Pearse wrote:
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
From:
http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/311_Flamines.html
"The flamines (sing: flamen) were the members of the pontifical
college. They were also known as the pontiffs. The leader of the
college was the pontifex maximus.
Each of the 15 priests in the college was in charge of the cult of one
god. There were three major priests, the flamines maiores, who had to
be patrician:
* Flamen Dialis (Jupiter)
* Flamen Martialis (Mars)
* Flamen Quirinalis (Quirinus)
The minor priests, the flamines minores, were twelve and they could
be plebeians:
* Flamen Carmentalis (Carmentis)
* Flamen Cerialis (Ceres)
* Flamen Falacer (Falacer)
* Flamen Floralis (Flora)
* Flamen Furrinalis (Furrina)
* Flamen Palatualis (Palatua)
* Flamen Pomonalis (Pomona)
* Flamen Portunalis (Portunus)
* Flamen Volcanalis (Vulcan)
* Flamen Volturnalis (Volturnus)
Two flamines served gods that are unknown to us. Some of the gods
served are very obscure, so the priesthoods are probably very
ancient."
While this page is no authority, the raw facts are correct. But what
has this to do with your assertions?
I suppose you'll just ignore the above.
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of demonstration that
Christianity was based around these pagan priests.
===>Did someone claim that?
I did! Haven't you been paying attention?
If so, it was false.
I disagree. Let's talk about it, shall we?
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Or else what? Off with their heads? What is your definition of
pagan before Constantine declared Christianity as the new national
religion? Everything was pagan, right?
Maybe you haven't thought very much about the whole
Roman religious structure from 200BCE to 325CE as a whole
before?
I'm going to try to do some more reading about what happened
to the "Flamen Dialis" who was in charge of the temples and worship
of the planet Jupiter to see what I can find out.
Maybe he turned into the Pope and got the biggest hat?
Maybe you could do some research on what happened to the
"Flamen Martialis" pontiff, and we can compare notes...
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
02 Apr 2004 05:55:52 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Roger Pearse wrote:
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
From:
http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/311_Flamines.html
"The flamines (sing: flamen) were the members of the pontifical
college. They were also known as the pontiffs. The leader of the
college was the pontifex maximus.
Each of the 15 priests in the college was in charge of the cult of one
god. There were three major priests, the flamines maiores, who had to
be patrician:
* Flamen Dialis (Jupiter)
* Flamen Martialis (Mars)
* Flamen Quirinalis (Quirinus)
The minor priests, the flamines minores, were twelve and they could
be plebeians:
* Flamen Carmentalis (Carmentis)
* Flamen Cerialis (Ceres)
* Flamen Falacer (Falacer)
* Flamen Floralis (Flora)
* Flamen Furrinalis (Furrina)
* Flamen Palatualis (Palatua)
* Flamen Pomonalis (Pomona)
* Flamen Portunalis (Portunus)
* Flamen Volcanalis (Vulcan)
* Flamen Volturnalis (Volturnus)
Two flamines served gods that are unknown to us. Some of the gods
served are very obscure, so the priesthoods are probably very
ancient."
While this page is no authority, the raw facts are correct. But what
has this to do with your assertions?
I suppose you'll just ignore the above.
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of demonstration that
Christianity was based around these pagan priests.
===>Did someone claim that?
I did! Haven't you been paying attention?
If so, it was false.
I disagree. Let's talk about it, shall we?
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Or else what? Off with their heads? What is your definition of
pagan before Constantine declared Christianity as the new national
religion? Everything was pagan, right?
Maybe you haven't thought very much about the whole
Roman religious structure from 200BCE to 325CE as a whole
before?
I'm going to try to do some more reading about what happened
to the "Flamen Dialis" who was in charge of the temples and worship
of the planet Jupiter to see what I can find out.
Maybe he turned into the Pope and got the biggest hat?
Maybe you could do some research on what happened to the
"Flamen Martialis" pontiff, and we can compare notes...
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
===>Very true.
My point was that SOME pagan priests probably converted,
but that means neither that all of them did, nor that all Christian
priests were prior Pagan priests. -- L.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 04:58:19 AM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
<snip>
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
===>Very true.
My point was that SOME pagan priests probably converted,
but that means neither that all of them did, nor that all Christian
priests were prior Pagan priests. -- L.
One point I've been trying to make is that EVERY religion seems to be
considered "pagan" by Christians who don't realize that their own
religion is "pagan" in nature. Maybe you agree, maybe not...
Declaring some specific cult or religion as "holy" or adopting it
as a state religion doesn't make it any less "pagan" in nature,
don't you agree?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 12:52:00 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
<snip>
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
===>Very true.
My point was that SOME pagan priests probably converted,
but that means neither that all of them did, nor that all Christian
priests were prior Pagan priests. -- L.
One point I've been trying to make is that EVERY religion seems to be
considered "pagan" by Christians who don't realize that their own
religion is "pagan" in nature. Maybe you agree, maybe not...
===>In the sense that "Pagan" means "Gentile-based", I agree.
Declaring some specific cult or religion as "holy" or adopting it
as a state religion doesn't make it any less "pagan" in nature,
don't you agree?
===>Of course I agree.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 09:49:10 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
<snip>
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
===>Very true.
My point was that SOME pagan priests probably converted,
but that means neither that all of them did, nor that all Christian
priests were prior Pagan priests. -- L.
One point I've been trying to make is that EVERY religion seems to be
considered "pagan" by Christians who don't realize that their own
religion is "pagan" in nature. Maybe you agree, maybe not...
===>In the sense that "Pagan" means "Gentile-based", I agree.
Why do you think it means Gentile-based? The root of the word
simply means "country dweller" from what I understand. It seems
to have taken on a negative connotation, just like the word "cult"
has over time.
Declaring some specific cult or religion as "holy" or adopting it
as a state religion doesn't make it any less "pagan" in nature,
don't you agree?
===>Of course I agree.
I'm curious why you attach "pagan" to "gentile-based."
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 10:32:43 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
<snip>
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
===>Very true.
My point was that SOME pagan priests probably converted,
but that means neither that all of them did, nor that all Christian
priests were prior Pagan priests. -- L.
One point I've been trying to make is that EVERY religion seems to be
considered "pagan" by Christians who don't realize that their own
religion is "pagan" in nature. Maybe you agree, maybe not...
===>In the sense that "Pagan" means "Gentile-based", I agree.
Why do you think it means Gentile-based? The root of the word
simply means "country dweller" from what I understand. It seems
to have taken on a negative connotation, just like the word "cult"
has over time.
Declaring some specific cult or religion as "holy" or adopting it
as a state religion doesn't make it any less "pagan" in nature,
don't you agree?
===>Of course I agree.
I'm curious why you attach "pagan" to "gentile-based."
===>It is the Christian equivalent of what the Hebrews
called "GOY" (Gentile), designating those who are neither
Jews nor Christian.
Islam may or may not be considered "pagan". -- L.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Not-easily-duped" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
04 Apr 2004 03:01:42 PM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<406F8FEB.2CFBF90F@Nothing_But_The.Truth>...
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
<snip>
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
===>Very true.
My point was that SOME pagan priests probably converted,
but that means neither that all of them did, nor that all Christian
priests were prior Pagan priests. -- L.
One point I've been trying to make is that EVERY religion seems to be
considered "pagan" by Christians who don't realize that their own
religion is "pagan" in nature. Maybe you agree, maybe not...
===>In the sense that "Pagan" means "Gentile-based", I agree.
Why do you think it means Gentile-based? The root of the word
simply means "country dweller" from what I understand. It seems
to have taken on a negative connotation, just like the word "cult"
has over time.
Declaring some specific cult or religion as "holy" or adopting it
as a state religion doesn't make it any less "pagan" in nature,
don't you agree?
===>Of course I agree.
I'm curious why you attach "pagan" to "gentile-based."
===>It is the Christian equivalent of what the Hebrews
called "GOY" (Gentile), designating those who are neither
GOYIM EVERYBODY ELSE EXCEPT JEWS. The word is a pre-christian word
Jews nor Christian.
Islam may or may not be considered "pagan". -- L.
Any doctrine aknowledging the MESSIAH/CHRIST is not pagan. It has been
purified and brought to the family of the ONE GOD of Israel, fool.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Pearse" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 12:38:09 AM |
|
|
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<406DFD88.89A7E976@Nothing_But_The.Truth>...
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Roger Pearse wrote:
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
From:
http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/311_Flamines.html
"The flamines (sing: flamen) were the members of the pontifical
college. They were also known as the pontiffs. The leader of the
college was the pontifex maximus.
Each of the 15 priests in the college was in charge of the cult of one
god. There were three major priests, the flamines maiores, who had to
be patrician:
* Flamen Dialis (Jupiter)
* Flamen Martialis (Mars)
* Flamen Quirinalis (Quirinus)
The minor priests, the flamines minores, were twelve and they could
be plebeians:
* Flamen Carmentalis (Carmentis)
* Flamen Cerialis (Ceres)
* Flamen Falacer (Falacer)
* Flamen Floralis (Flora)
* Flamen Furrinalis (Furrina)
* Flamen Palatualis (Palatua)
* Flamen Pomonalis (Pomona)
* Flamen Portunalis (Portunus)
* Flamen Volcanalis (Vulcan)
* Flamen Volturnalis (Volturnus)
Two flamines served gods that are unknown to us. Some of the gods
served are very obscure, so the priesthoods are probably very
ancient."
While this page is no authority, the raw facts are correct. But what
has this to do with your assertions?
I suppose you'll just ignore the above.
On the contrary, I look forward to some kind of demonstration that
Christianity was based around these pagan priests.
===>Did someone claim that?
I did! Haven't you been paying attention?
If so, it was false.
I disagree. Let's talk about it, shall we?
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Or else what? Off with their heads? What is your definition of
pagan before Constantine declared Christianity as the new national
religion? Everything was pagan, right?
Sensible points, of course. NB: Constantine did NOT make Christianity
the national religion -- that was Theodosius, 50 years later.
Constantine *legalised* Christianity (313AD). His legislation was
very favourable to Christians, also. But of course state paganism
remained completely intact, and he remained ex officio pontifex
maximus, etc -- to do otherwise would have been unthinkable.
T.D.Barnes, in his study 'Constantine and Eusebius' (Oxford, 1980)
states that Constantine was considerably more pro-Christian in the
East, which he had conquered and therefore could use with a free hand,
than in the West, from which he drew his political support.
Christianity became very fashionable during his reign, in one of those
inexplicable swings of public mood that we see in history. By the
time of Julian the Apostate, paganism was dead, and even an emperor
could not revive it.
Maybe you haven't thought very much about the whole
Roman religious structure from 200BCE to 325CE as a whole
before?
I'm going to try to do some more reading about what happened
to the "Flamen Dialis" who was in charge of the temples and worship
of the planet Jupiter to see what I can find out.
This I do not know. I do know that the temple of Vesta was closed
down under Theodosius (although our only information on the subject
comes from Zosimus, writing 150 years after that).
Maybe he turned into the Pope and got the biggest hat?
<smile>
The papal office predates the abolition of paganism by many centuries,
of course.
Maybe you could do some research on what happened to the
"Flamen Martialis" pontiff, and we can compare notes...
My main point is that Christianity didn't just pop out of the woodwork
one day, and suddenly there was some new Christian church.
No, because it was a Jewish sub-group. But every movement must start
somewhere...
Heck, nobody even cared when Jesus was supposedly born until
at least 400 years after he was born, and Constantine conveniently
made Christianity the state religion, in order to attract armies of
superstitious slaves and peasants who were willing to die for some
national cause, and in return, promised some heavenly reward.
===>Very true.
I don't think the ancient testimony supports this view, tho.
My point was that SOME pagan priests probably converted,
but that means neither that all of them did, nor that all Christian
priests were prior Pagan priests. -- L.
A moment of sanity -- I agree entirely.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
03 Apr 2004 05:11:45 AM |
|
|
(Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Roger Pearse wrote:
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Or else what? Off with their heads? What is your definition of
pagan before Constantine declared Christianity as the new national
religion? Everything was pagan, right?
Sensible points, of course. NB: Constantine did NOT make Christianity
the national religion -- that was Theodosius, 50 years later.
Maybe you're right, I don't know, but Constantine, and the claim that
he saw a "cross in heaven" one day, and his mother supposedly visiting
Jerusalem and declaring a few places "holy," had a lot to do with the
eventual widespread acceptance or conversion to Christianity, in my
opinion.
Constantine *legalised* Christianity (313AD). His legislation was
very favourable to Christians, also. But of course state paganism
remained completely intact, and he remained ex officio pontifex
maximus, etc --
That's the same thing as the Pope. Pontifus Maximus...
He wanted to be his own "Pope" I guess, and moved east and
created Constantinople...
to do otherwise would have been unthinkable.
T.D.Barnes, in his study 'Constantine and Eusebius' (Oxford, 1980)
states that Constantine was considerably more pro-Christian in the
East, which he had conquered and therefore could use with a free hand,
than in the West, from which he drew his political support.
I would imagine that any emperor or leader would like to have a bunch
of people who were willing to die in battle, if they were promised a
better care-free life in heaven...
Christianity became very fashionable during his reign, in one of those
inexplicable swings of public mood that we see in history.
It was very popular among the weary and enslaved and poor people,
as can be seen in the sermon on the mount speeches.
By the time of Julian the Apostate, paganism was dead, and even an
emperor could not revive it.
Paganism is still alive today, it's just cloaked under a new name.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Pearse" |
|
| Title: Re: Does jesus exist? -- DELUSION |
06 Apr 2004 12:35:27 PM |
|
|
My apologies -- I nearly didn't see this.
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message news:<5b6t60hrhb24v253hbcr86nuun421m40vl@4ax.com>...
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in alt.atheism
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message
Elroy Willis wrote:
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in alt.atheism
Roger Pearse wrote:
But pagan priest, as anyone else, had to convert or else!
Or else what? Off with their heads? What is your definition of
pagan before Constantine declared Christianity as the new national
religion? Everything was pagan, right?
Sensible points, of course. NB: Constantine did NOT make Christianity
the national religion -- that was Theodosius, 50 years later.
Maybe you're right, I don't know, but Constantine, and the claim that
he saw a "cross in heaven" one day, and his mother supposedly visiting
Jerusalem and declaring a few places "holy," had a lot to do with the
eventual widespread acceptance or conversion to Christianity, in my
opinion.
Undoubtedly, in my opinion also.
Constantine *legalised* Christianity (313AD). His legislation was
very favourable to Christians, also. But of course state paganism
remained completely intact, and he remained ex officio pontifex
maximus, etc --
That's the same thing as the Pope. Pontifus Maximus...
I'm not sure when the popes started to use that title, but I think
much later. In Constantine's day, as for centuries before, it was
simply the title head of the official (pagan) religion.
He wanted to be his own "Pope" I guess, and moved east and
created Constantinople...
to do otherwise would have been unthinkable.
T.D.Barnes, in his study 'Constantine and Eusebius' (Oxford, 1980)
states that Constantine was considerably more pro-Christian in the
East, which he had conquered and therefore could use with a free hand,
than in the West, from which he drew his political support.
I would imagine that any emperor or leader would like to have a bunch
of people who were willing to die in battle, if they were promised a
better care-free life in heaven...
Possibly, although this would not apply here. IIRC the history of the
crusader kingdom of Outremer suggests that such people are a two-edged
sword in most states.
Christianity became very fashionable during his reign, in one of those
inexplicable swings of public mood that we see in history.
It was very popular among the weary and enslaved and poor people,
as can be seen in the sermon on the mount speeches.
Perhaps, but it was also very popular at that time among the Roman
aristocracy, which it had not been earlier.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
