"althea" <althea@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:46b3bacc$0$27235$88260bb3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Ha SATAN [Sin Tet Nun] wrote:
>
>> Ha SATAN [Sin Tet Nun] napisal(a):
>>
>>>Libertarius skrev:
>>>
>>>>Ha SATAN [Sin Tet Nun] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Libertarius skrev:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>===>That is totally false.
>>>>>>NO ONE ever claimed that Isaiah was written by
>>>>>>any "contemporary" or "more contemporary" author.
>>>>>>You are totally misled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In fact there are THREE sections in that book:
>>>>>> SECTION 1: Proto-Isaiah (Chapters 1-39) oracles of
Jerusalem,
>>>>>>composed in the eight century BCE.
>>>>>> SECTION 2: Deutero-Isaiah (Chapters 40-55) words of a sixth
>>>>>>century BCE writer who was LIVING IN EXILE IN BABYLON.
>>>>>> SECTION 3: Trito-Isaiah (Chapters 56-66) writings of
>>>>>>post-Exilic author(s), most likely disciples of the Deutero-Isaiah,
>>>>>>who
>>>>>>continued
>>>>>>his work after the return from exile, possibly even quoting some of
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>sayings of Deutero-Isaiah.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>ALL OF THESE were long finished and compiled into the collection of
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>TANAKH long-long before the production of the DSS copies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>one interesting aspect is that the temple at Elephantine is LATER
than
>>>>>the events in yeshayahu.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>===>And the worshipers and their priests were STILL accepting ANATH,
>>>>the FEMALE deity.
>>>>
>>>>She is also the Queen of Heaven about whose worship Jeremiah and
>>>>the people are arguing, and she is the one who also appears disguised
>>>>as the goddess HOKHMA in the book of PROVERBS.
>>>>
>>>>Some of the Nag Hammadi material refers to her as SOPHIA, but the
"main
>>>>stream" Christian propagandists simply did a sex change on Hokhma and
>>>>used the statements about her as co-creator to refer to "Christos".
>>>>-- L.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Ah. in spite of my devotion to the sources this is an obvious hole
>>>in my knowledge and evidences that perhaps i lacked the intelligence
>>>to see the obvious.
>>>
>>>The "smoking gun" for such if you will .
>>>
>>>The implications to my other findings would be profound.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> well in lieu of your response i went and obtained [again] some copies
>> of Philo's discourses and actually had a hell of a time discerning the
>> essence of his writings.
>> i had read them years ago but when reading them afresh lo and behold i
>> see another aspect which i did not understand years and years ago when
>> i first "perused" them.
>>
>> i now think Philo is much more important [that is , a more significant
>> component] to Christianity as a whole.
>>
>> can you elaborate [would you please elaborate] before i comment ?
>>
> ===>To the extent there is any "Judaism" in Christianity, it is adaptad
> from this Hellenistic variety. Philo, an Platonist philospher from
> Alexandria who relied on the Septuagint, was attempting to reinterpret
> Judaism to harmonize with Platonic philosophy. His atetements about the
> "LOGOS" as a "second god", etc. became the foundation for the
> Christian idea of "Jesus" as the divine Christos.
> As the Wikipedia puts it:
> "Philo's works were enthusiastically received by the early Christians,
> some of whom saw in him a cryptic Christian. His concept of the Logos as
> God's creative principle apparently influenced early Christology." -- L.
>
No, you have been misled. There was no "idea"
about Jesus, there was Jesus and his teachings
and his events were recorded by people that
lived in his day. Also, the New Testament
books teach "If they say that Jesus is over
here, or 'lo there,' do not believe it." People
are warned against things like this notion
that someone has led you to believe.
>
Suzanne
|
