"Libertarius" <Libertarius@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:46bba2b5$0$16274$88260bb3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Suzanne wrote:
>
>> "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 "contem****ary" or "more contem****ary" 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
>>>>>>>>TA****H 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 wor****pers and their priests were STILL accepting ANATH,
>>>>>>the FEMALE deity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>She is also the Queen of Heaven about whose wor****p 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 *** 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 im****tant [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.
>
> ===>You are still keeping yourself in
> ignorance of the historical facts. -- L.
>
I don't agree with your idea of the history of the
Bible. It is just plain wrong.
>
Suzanne
|
