"Libertarius" <Libertarius@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:46d2070e$0$8569$88260bb3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Suzanne wrote:
>
>> "Libertarius" <Libertarius@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:46cb6110$0$12513$88260bb3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>>Suzanne wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Libertarius" <Libertarius@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>news:46c914ba$0$5559$88260bb3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Suzanne wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"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.
>>>>>
>>>>>===>It is definitely not "wrong", just unknown and
>>>>>unacceptable to fundamentalist bible wore****pers. -- L.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>To the reader that is reading this, Lib. is trying
>>>>to confer a label upon me so that he can sway
>>>>anyone from trusting anything that I am saying.
>>>>It is a favorite label to apply to someone that
>>>>believes the Bible: "a fundamentalist." Often
>>>>they will shorten it to the derrogatory "fundie."
>>>>If they are somewhat not sure that this term will
>>>>carry enough contempt, they will add that the
>>>>Christian is a "bible wor****pper," being sure to
>>>>spell bible with a little "b."
>>>
>>>===>One should spell "Holy Bible" with captals,
>>>but "bible" is just a word.
>>>
>>>But Christians don't
>>>
>>>>wor****p the Bible, they wor****p the one that
>>>>taught us to read and study God's word.
>>>
>>>===>By accepting the BIG LIE that it is "God's word",
>>>you become a "bible wor****per".
>>>By declaring it "inerrant", you become a "bible wor****per". -- L.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I suppose you would just have to prove
>> that the Bible is not the truth, Lib., and you
>> can't do that.
>
> ===>It has been done over and over again, Suzie.
> You are just describing the way your imagination works. -- L.
>
You are very confused. And insulting people
gets you no where.
>
Suzanne
|
