|
|
 | | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:39:42 GMT |
|
|
 | One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion with
regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus or
grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
That the difference between them is of such a magnitude that it is
dichotomic of State for our State Governor John Landy, who as a Roman
Catholic and despite giving a momentary pretense to the merit of a universal
piety by attendance at any other Christian Church, in swearing an oath of
allegiance to the British Monarchy by Almighty God--as the Roman Pontif to
the Vatican State claims the embodiment of that principle.
Likewise, as the Legal fraternity and Equal Opportunity/Human Rights
Commission is infested by individual's whose only experience of claims to
piety is Roman Catholicism as hymeneal cult, it is therefore singularly
impossible to obtain justice in matters of infractions of autonomous
religious and human rights--Despite the principles of Constitutional
protection requested by Seventh-day Sabbath observant Christians and enacted
by Section 116, they have no concept of it!
- dolf
"Qolon" wrote in message news:...
One final comment, given your Latin skills, you can hardly be so directed in
your demand for 'evidence from antiquity about the cult' without yourself
giving an explanation as to the Roman Catholic Church's failure as a
hymeneal cult, to give account for the gap within the Vatican Library of
historical records (ie. they were destroyed) as evidence of a singular
dependency by the ecclesiastics on astrological hermeneutical systems rather
than the alternate chronological basis to Judaeo-Christian belief which
survived annihiliation by the vassal states of Rome.
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105805918.724620.12960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
evidence from antiquity about the cult.
> it is illogical that Judaeo-Christians would deny the
> Seventh-day Sabbath as the basis of their Everlasting Covenant.
I'm not sure I understand.
> Clearly given you Latin skills ..., it would seem your comment
> below as an unacquintance with Mithraism as the historical
> basis to Roman Imperial/Papal Religion {ie. Pontif[ex] Maximus} is
> feigned piety:
Alternatively, given my Latin skills, perhaps my comment is based on
solid knowledge... ?
> The extension of Mithraism, was essentially a natural product of
social and
> political factors; ...
These comments are not of any interest to either of us, since they
consist of the speculation of a scholar more than a century ago. I
don't know about you, but I want to see facts, not empty verbose
theorising. What *facts* require that statement? Anyone can make
generalisations.
[snipped for context]
QOLON NOTE:
I didn't say I agreed with all that Cumont said.
Indeed, the reason I haven't quoted but only referenced him in this
instance, is that I disagreed with and modified several of his premises:
1) Like Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, Mithra was also considered an
intermediary between his celestial father and man, and like him he also was
one of a trinity {ie. nous, logos, psyche}.
2) The sectaries of the Persian god, like the Jewish-Christians, purified
themselves by baptism; received, by a species of confirmation, the power
necessary to combat the spirits of evil; and expected from a Lord's Supper
salvation of body and soul. Like the latter's [regard for the Sabbath, they
alternatively] held Sunday sacred, and celebrated as Sola Invictus.
However as it seems Judaeo-Christians were from 37CE systematically murdered
as tribute to the Pontifix Maximus of Roman State Religion {ie. A subsequent
Papal title as claim to God's representative on earth, thereby declaring the
pope to hold unlimited power. Now, back in the pagan days of Rome, Pontifex
Maximus was the title accorded to the Chief priest of the cult of Mithras
and also to the Roman Emperor} and thereafter following Titus' overthrow of
Jerusalem, subject to persecutions and death in the viscal sporting arena
dedicated to the Sola Invictus--the colusseum.
You say: "I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*."--The Apostle Paul,
leaves little to doubt the facts of his hand in such actions: "I verily
thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of
Jesus {He is saved/A savior; a deliverer} of Nazareth {one chosen or set
apart; separated; crowned; sanctified}. Which thing I also did in Jerusalem
{vision of peace}: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having
received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death,
I gave my voice against them. And I punished them oft in every synagogue,
and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I
persecuted them even unto strange cities. Whereupon as I went to Damascus {a
sack full of blood; the similitude of burning} with authority and commission
from the chief priests." [Acts 26:4-12]
The implication being, that the Apostle Paul "compelled them to blaspheme"
and "persecuted this way-hodos unto the death, binding and delivering into
prisons both men and women. As also the high priest does bear me witness,
and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters to the
brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there in chains to
Jerusalem, for to be punished." [Acts 22:4-5]
In that it had a metempirical consequence upon the loyalty shown by the Jews
towards Caesar {ie. as those Jews who allegedly had "...acted contrary to
the decrees of the Caesar, saying there is another-heteros king-Jesus."
[Acts 17:2-7]} as the past cultic recognition, in accordance to the tenets
of the State Religion of Rome, as regard for the deified Augustus {revered
one} as son of a god--the Pontifix Maximus. Whose past being {ie. he died in
14 CE) was regarded as the will (numen) or essence (genius) of the
eternal-aidios power-dunamis {ie. male personification of miraculous power}
and Godhead-theoites {ie. Divinity associated with the Sefirot (Number) of
the Kabbalah} [Romans 1:19-23]. In that Paul "reserved [his defence] for the
decision of Augustus" [Acts 25:21] and "he himself had appealed to Augustus"
[Acts 25:25].
Today the equivalent blasphemy for Judaeo-Christians, would be to accept the
Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus--little wonder they act obscurely towards
the history of 7th day Sabbath observant Judaeo-Christians persecuted with
the impetus given by Pontifex Maximus and Imperial Roman Emperor Nero..
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105806099.010737.80080@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
NOSPAM@NOSPAM.invalid.com wrote:
Well put. Does this mean only that Mithraism was spread by *people*
(since those categories cover almost all ancient society!)?
It's very bad, isn't it? But I'm not sure that Qolon is responsible.
His methods of citation are very bad, but it may be from Cumont's book,
in which case the verbose vagueness is partly Cumont's fault, and
partly that of his translator.
But even so, what I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*. How do
we know that what is actually said is true? (It may be -- but how do
we know?)
All the best,
Roger Pearse
|
|
| | From: | roger_pearse at yahoo.co.uk | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | 15 Jan 2005 14:40:43 -0800 |
|
|
| Qolon,
Thank you for these three notes. However, none of them seem to have
anything to do with Mithras, so I'm not sure that I have any special
comment to make about them.
I was interested in your comment about the Vatican library, with whom I
have had some dealings, but I didn't understand it. To what,
specifically, do you refer? The library is these days a very
well-known collection.
I note that you have massively cross-posted this. Please don't do
this.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
Qolon wrote:
> One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion
with
> regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus
or
> grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
>
> That the difference between them is of such a magnitude that it is
> dichotomic of State for our State Governor John Landy, who as a Roman
> Catholic and despite giving a momentary pretense to the merit of a
universal
> piety by attendance at any other Christian Church, in swearing an
oath of
> allegiance to the British Monarchy by Almighty God--as the Roman
Pontif to
> the Vatican State claims the embodiment of that principle.
>
> Likewise, as the Legal fraternity and Equal Opportunity/Human Rights
> Commission is infested by individual's whose only experience of
claims to
> piety is Roman Catholicism as hymeneal cult, it is therefore
singularly
> impossible to obtain justice in matters of infractions of autonomous
> religious and human rights--Despite the principles of Constitutional
> protection requested by Seventh-day Sabbath observant Christians and
enacted
> by Section 116, they have no concept of it!
>
> - dolf
>
> "Qolon" wrote in message news:...
> One final comment, given your Latin skills, you can hardly be so
directed in
> your demand for 'evidence from antiquity about the cult' without
yourself
> giving an explanation as to the Roman Catholic Church's failure as a
> hymeneal cult, to give account for the gap within the Vatican Library
of
> historical records (ie. they were destroyed) as evidence of a
singular
> dependency by the ecclesiastics on astrological hermeneutical systems
rather
> than the alternate chronological basis to Judaeo-Christian belief
which
> survived annihiliation by the vassal states of Rome.
>
> - dolf
>
> wrote in message
> news:1105805918.724620.12960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
> Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
> evidence from antiquity about the cult.
>
> > it is illogical that Judaeo-Christians would deny the
> > Seventh-day Sabbath as the basis of their Everlasting Covenant.
>
> I'm not sure I understand.
>
> > Clearly given you Latin skills ..., it would seem your comment
> > below as an unacquintance with Mithraism as the historical
> > basis to Roman Imperial/Papal Religion {ie. Pontif[ex] Maximus} is
> > feigned piety:
>
> Alternatively, given my Latin skills, perhaps my comment is based on
> solid knowledge... ?
>
> > The extension of Mithraism, was essentially a natural product of
> social and
> > political factors; ...
>
> These comments are not of any interest to either of us, since they
> consist of the speculation of a scholar more than a century ago. I
> don't know about you, but I want to see facts, not empty verbose
> theorising. What *facts* require that statement? Anyone can make
> generalisations.
>
> [snipped for context]
>
> QOLON NOTE:
> I didn't say I agreed with all that Cumont said.
>
> Indeed, the reason I haven't quoted but only referenced him in this
> instance, is that I disagreed with and modified several of his
premises:
>
> 1) Like Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, Mithra was also considered
an
> intermediary between his celestial father and man, and like him he
also was
> one of a trinity {ie. nous, logos, psyche}.
>
> 2) The sectaries of the Persian god, like the Jewish-Christians,
purified
> themselves by baptism; received, by a species of confirmation, the
power
> necessary to combat the spirits of evil; and expected from a Lord's
Supper
> salvation of body and soul. Like the latter's [regard for the
Sabbath, they
> alternatively] held Sunday sacred, and celebrated as Sola Invictus.
>
> However as it seems Judaeo-Christians were from 37CE systematically
murdered
> as tribute to the Pontif[e]x Maximus of Roman State Religion {ie. A
> subsequent Papal title as claim to God's representative on earth,
thereby
> declaring the pope to hold unlimited power. Now, back in the pagan
days of
> Rome, Pontifex Maximus was the title accorded to the Chief priest of
the
> cult of Mithras and also to the Roman Emperor} and thereafter
following
> Titus' overthrow of Jerusalem, subject to persecutions and death in
the
> viscal sporting arena dedicated to the Sola Invictus--the colusseum.
>
> You say: "I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*."--The
Apostle Paul,
> leaves little to doubt the facts of his hand in such actions: "I
verily
> thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the
name of
> Jesus {He is saved/A savior; a deliverer} of Nazareth {one chosen or
set
> apart; separated; crowned; sanctified}. Which thing I also did in
Jerusalem
> {vision of peace}: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison,
having
> received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to
death,
> I gave my voice against them. And I punished them oft in every
synagogue,
> and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against
them, I
> persecuted them even unto strange cities. Whereupon as I went to
Damascus {a
> sack full of blood; the similitude of burning} with authority and
commission
> from the chief priests." [Acts 26:4-12]
>
> The implication being, that the Apostle Paul "compelled them to
blaspheme"
> and "persecuted this way-hodos unto the death, binding and delivering
into
> prisons both men and women. As also the high priest does bear me
witness,
> and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters
to the
> brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there in
chains to
> Jerusalem, for to be punished." [Acts 22:4-5]
>
> In that it had a metempirical consequence upon the loyalty shown by
the Jews
> towards Caesar {ie. as those Jews who allegedly had "...acted
contrary to
> the decrees of the Caesar, saying there is another-heteros
king-Jesus."
> [Acts 17:2-7]} as the past cultic recognition, in accordance to the
tenets
> of the State Religion of Rome, as regard for the deified Augustus
{revered
> one} as son of a god--the Pontif[e]x Maximus. Whose past being {ie.
he died
> in 14 CE) was regarded as the will (numen) or essence (genius) of the
> eternal-aidios power-dunamis {ie. male personification of miraculous
power}
> and Godhead-theoites {ie. Divinity associated with the Sefirot
(Number) of
> the Kabbalah} [Romans 1:19-23]. In that Paul "reserved [his defence]
for the
> decision of Augustus" [Acts 25:21] and "he himself had appealed to
Augustus"
> [Acts 25:25].
>
> Today the equivalent blasphemy for Judaeo-Christians, would be to
accept the
> Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus--little wonder they act obscurely
towards
> the history of 7th day Sabbath observant Judaeo-Christians persecuted
with
> the impetus given by Pontifex Maximus and Imperial Roman Emperor
Nero..
>
> - dolf
>
> wrote in message
> news:1105806099.010737.80080@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> NOSPAM@NOSPAM.invalid.com wrote:
> Well put. Does this mean only that Mithraism was spread by *people*
> (since those categories cover almost all ancient society!)?
>
> It's very bad, isn't it? But I'm not sure that Qolon is responsible.
> His methods of citation are very bad, but it may be from Cumont's
book,
> in which case the verbose vagueness is partly Cumont's fault, and
> partly that of his translator.
>
> But even so, what I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*. How
do
> we know that what is actually said is true? (It may be -- but how do
> we know?)
>
> All the best,
>
> Roger Pearse
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 00:23:53 GMT |
|
|
| Your claim below is no different to the German Socialists systematically
machine-gunning 10,000 Jews at a time, as an attempted clean-sweep and
dismantling of Nazi conceptration camps and claim they never existed--But a
bar of soap labelled "Reines jüdisches Fett" {ie. Pure Jewish Fat}, suggests
otherwise.
Sufficient evidence has already been conveyed to establish your predilection
to psychopathy, feigned comprehension and a lack of accountability as
pretense to piety.
- dolf
-
wrote in message
news:1105828843.001225.4410@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Qolon,
Thank you for these three notes. However, none of them seem to have
anything to do with Mithras, so I'm not sure that I have any special
comment to make about them.
I was interested in your comment about the Vatican library, with whom I
have had some dealings, but I didn't understand it. To what,
specifically, do you refer? The library is these days a very
well-known collection.
I note that you have massively cross-posted this. Please don't do
this.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
QOLON NOTE:
One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion with
regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus or
grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
That the difference between them is of such a magnitude that it is
dichotomic of State for our State Governor John Landy, who as a Roman
Catholic and despite giving a momentary pretense to the merit of a universal
piety by attendance at any other Christian Church, in swearing an oath of
allegiance to the British Monarchy by Almighty God--as the Roman Pontif to
the Vatican State claims the embodiment of that principle.
Likewise, as the Legal fraternity and Equal Opportunity/Human Rights
Commission is infested by individual's whose only experience of claims to
piety is Roman Catholicism as hymeneal cult, it is therefore singularly
impossible to obtain justice in matters of infractions of autonomous
religious and human rights--Despite the principles of Constitutional
protection requested by Seventh-day Sabbath observant Christians and enacted
by Section 116, they have no concept of it!
One final comment, given your Latin skills, you can hardly be so directed in
your demand for 'evidence from antiquity about the cult' without yourself
giving an explanation as to the Roman Catholic Church's failure as a
hymeneal cult, to give account for the gap within the Vatican Library of
historical records (ie. they were destroyed) as evidence of a singular
dependency by the ecclesiastics on astrological hermeneutical systems rather
than the alternate chronological basis to Judaeo-Christian belief which
survived annihiliation by the vassal states of Rome.
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105805918.724620.12960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
evidence from antiquity about the cult.
> it is illogical that Judaeo-Christians would deny the
> Seventh-day Sabbath as the basis of their Everlasting Covenant.
I'm not sure I understand.
> Clearly given you Latin skills ..., it would seem your comment
> below as an unacquintance with Mithraism as the historical
> basis to Roman Imperial/Papal Religion {ie. Pontif[ex] Maximus} is
> feigned piety:
Alternatively, given my Latin skills, perhaps my comment is based on
solid knowledge... ?
> The extension of Mithraism, was essentially a natural product of
social and
> political factors; ...
These comments are not of any interest to either of us, since they
consist of the speculation of a scholar more than a century ago. I
don't know about you, but I want to see facts, not empty verbose
theorising. What *facts* require that statement? Anyone can make
generalisations.
[snipped for context]
QOLON NOTE:
I didn't say I agreed with all that Cumont said.
Indeed, the reason I haven't quoted but only referenced him in this
instance, is that I disagreed with and modified several of his premises:
1) Like Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, Mithra was also considered an
intermediary between his celestial father and man, and like him he also was
one of a trinity {ie. nous, logos, psyche}.
2) The sectaries of the Persian god, like the Jewish-Christians, purified
themselves by baptism; received, by a species of confirmation, the power
necessary to combat the spirits of evil; and expected from a Lord's Supper
salvation of body and soul. Like the latter's [regard for the Sabbath, they
alternatively] held Sunday sacred, and celebrated as Sola Invictus.
However as it seems Judaeo-Christians were from 37CE systematically murdered
as tribute to the Pontif[e]x Maximus of Roman State Religion {ie. A
subsequent Papal title as claim to God's representative on earth, thereby
declaring the pope to hold unlimited power. Now, back in the pagan days of
Rome, Pontifex Maximus was the title accorded to the Chief priest of the
cult of Mithras and also to the Roman Emperor} and thereafter following
Titus' overthrow of Jerusalem, subject to persecutions and death in the
viscal sporting arena dedicated to the Sola Invictus--the colusseum.
You say: "I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*."--The Apostle Paul,
leaves little to doubt the facts of his hand in such actions: "I verily
thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of
Jesus {He is saved/A savior; a deliverer} of Nazareth {one chosen or set
apart; separated; crowned; sanctified}. Which thing I also did in Jerusalem
{vision of peace}: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having
received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death,
I gave my voice against them. And I punished them oft in every synagogue,
and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I
persecuted them even unto strange cities. Whereupon as I went to Damascus {a
sack full of blood; the similitude of burning} with authority and commission
from the chief priests." [Acts 26:4-12]
The implication being, that the Apostle Paul "compelled them to blaspheme"
and "persecuted this way-hodos unto the death, binding and delivering into
prisons both men and women. As also the high priest does bear me witness,
and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters to the
brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there in chains to
Jerusalem, for to be punished." [Acts 22:4-5]
In that it had a metempirical consequence upon the loyalty shown by the Jews
towards Caesar {ie. as those Jews who allegedly had "...acted contrary to
the decrees of the Caesar, saying there is another-heteros king-Jesus."
[Acts 17:2-7]} as the past cultic recognition, in accordance to the tenets
of the State Religion of Rome, as regard for the deified Augustus {revered
one} as son of a god--the Pontif[e]x Maximus. Whose past being {ie. he died
in 14 CE) was regarded as the will (numen) or essence (genius) of the
eternal-aidios power-dunamis {ie. male personification of miraculous power}
and Godhead-theoites {ie. Divinity associated with the Sefirot (Number) of
the Kabbalah} [Romans 1:19-23]. In that Paul "reserved [his defence] for the
decision of Augustus" [Acts 25:21] and "he himself had appealed to Augustus"
[Acts 25:25].
Today the equivalent blasphemy for Judaeo-Christians, would be to accept the
Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus--little wonder they act obscurely towards
the history of 7th day Sabbath observant Judaeo-Christians persecuted with
the impetus given by Pontifex Maximus and Imperial Roman Emperor Nero..
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105806099.010737.80080@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
NOSPAM@NOSPAM.invalid.com wrote:
Well put. Does this mean only that Mithraism was spread by *people*
(since those categories cover almost all ancient society!)?
It's very bad, isn't it? But I'm not sure that Qolon is responsible.
His methods of citation are very bad, but it may be from Cumont's book,
in which case the verbose vagueness is partly Cumont's fault, and
partly that of his translator.
But even so, what I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*. How do
we know that what is actually said is true? (It may be -- but how do
we know?)
All the best,
Roger Pearse
|
|
| | From: | NOSPAM at NOSPAM.invalid.com | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:05:21 +1300 |
|
|
| On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 00:23:53 +0000, Qolon wrote:
> Your claim below is no different to the German Socialists systematically
> machine-gunning 10,000 Jews at a time, as an attempted clean-sweep and
> dismantling of Nazi conceptration camps and claim they never existed--But a
> bar of soap labelled "Reines jüdisches Fett" {ie. Pure Jewish Fat}, suggests
> otherwise.
Hmmm...
Godwin's law...
You loose!
Divine
--
The above reply is in response to a person who can be only described as a
knuckle-dragger.
|
|
| | From: | The Doctor | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:19:50 +0000 (UTC) |
|
|
| In article ,
NOSPAM@NOSPAM.invalid.com wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 00:23:53 +0000, Qolon wrote:
>
>> Your claim below is no different to the German Socialists systematically
>> machine-gunning 10,000 Jews at a time, as an attempted clean-sweep and
>> dismantling of Nazi conceptration camps and claim they never existed--But a
>> bar of soap labelled "Reines jüdisches Fett" {ie. Pure Jewish Fat}, suggests
>> otherwise.
>
>Hmmm...
>
>Godwin's law...
>
>You loose!
>
>
>Divine
>
How is this thread declared godwinned?
--
Member - Liberal International
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
Birthdate: 29 Jan 1969 Redhill, Surrey, England, UK
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 04:39:07 GMT |
|
|
| Actually not only was the comment relevant to aspects of the present
discussion as a notion dichotomy of State caused by an incommensurate
division of loyalty to State (ie. Monarchy, Head of State, Autonomy} v's
sub-ordination to the Roman Pontif as Vatican State (ie. a title acquired
from the Pontifex Maximus of Imperial Roman Caesars as Mithratic/Sol
Invicuts being an anthroconceptualisation of Godhead) .
But it was contemporaneous news conveyed within today's newspapers relating
to the 60th aniversary as the liberation of Jews from Auchwitz by Russia
soldiers on 27 January 1945. [cf: The Age Newspaper, 'And nothing will ever
go wrong', 16 January 2005
http://theage.com.au/articles/2005/01/15/1105582765091.html ]
Given the continuing evidence of your predilection to psychopathy and a lack
of accountability, it is more likely that you are simply grasping at the
most convenient sensualism--nothing that betrays your incapability to give a
reasoned substantiation of your otherwise mystical and mythical religious
belief.
- dolf
-
wrote in message
news:pan.2005.01.16.04.05.20.387787@TRACKER...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 00:23:53 +0000, Qolon wrote:
> Your claim below is no different to the German Socialists systematically
> machine-gunning 10,000 Jews at a time, as an attempted clean-sweep and
> dismantling of Nazi conceptration camps and claim they never existed--But
a
> bar of soap labelled "Reines jüdisches Fett" {ie. Pure Jewish Fat},
suggests
> otherwise.
Hmmm...
Godwin's law...
You loose!
QOLON NOTE:
All we have evidence of is your predilection to psychopathy and a lack of
accountability.
- dolf
-
wrote in message
news:pan.2005.01.15.23.02.15.147065@TRACKER...
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 20:46:53 +0000, Qolon wrote:
> It would seem without evidence to quantify your own religious belief, that
> it is presumptuous of you to comment further on another's substantiated
> belief.
You seem quite unable to read. I was commenting on your inability to write
terse English - not on your - or anybody else's - "substantiated belief"!
Divine
--
/'_/)
,/_ /
/ /
/'_'/' '/'__'7,
/'/ / / /" /_\
('( ' Yo,' _~/' ')
\ Fool ! ' /
'\' _.7'
\ (
\ \
wrote in message
news:pan.2005.01.15.14.19.47.955080@TRACKER...
I presume that the above means that:
[snipped for context]
|
|
| | From: | Athanasius | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:22:47 +1000 |
|
|
| On 15 Jan 2005 14:40:43 -0800, roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>Qolon,
>
>Thank you for these three notes. However, none of them seem to have
>anything to do with Mithras, so I'm not sure that I have any special
>comment to make about them.
>
>I was interested in your comment about the Vatican library, with whom I
>have had some dealings, but I didn't understand it. To what,
>specifically, do you refer? The library is these days a very
>well-known collection.
>
>I note that you have massively cross-posted this. Please don't do
>this.
>
>All the best,
>
>Roger Pearse
Roger,,
Qolon, aka Dolf, is extremely unstable,_by his own
posts_ he states he has been arrested for walking naked around his
city. He is suffering from the long term results of HIV/ AIDS which
includes the disconnected posts and thoughts (dementia?). he actually
was/is quite brilliant and at a time in the past he was able to be
interacted with in some level of normality, but that has since long
passed. Dolf asserts that he has commenced legal proceedings against
very many people from usenet with the human rights and has taken
various companies (particular his life insurance company which refused
a claim) to courts. He has posted copious copies of said legal
procceedings on the internet. I believe to date none of his actions
have been successful. Everybody on Dolf's home group,
aus.religion.christian in the past have tried to converse with him. It
is impossible, and especially now as the ravages of that horrible
disease get worse. We have learnt to accept Dolf is here and is unable
to be interacted with on a normal usenet level. Of course many of us
have and still do pray for Dolf and generally we do not debate with
him as it leads only to him becomming more disturbed in his emotions
and postings.
I write this to you as a courtesy and for your
knowledge, google will confirm all that I have said and none of it is
private and not declared publically by Dolf himself numerous times. I
will of course now be flamed for days for daring to bring you up to
speed regarding this individual. Prayer is the best we can do at this
time, many of us believe.
Peace and grace to you
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia, 4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world." St Athanasius.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 00:23:55 GMT |
|
|
| Your statement that I am 'extemely unstable' because of evidence of past
deliberate protest action as the exercise of autonomous volition undertaken
upon the Sabbath day of 21 August 1999 and due to your Egyptian Coptic vain
orthodox mystical and hymeneal cultic basis and otherwise insubstantial
claim to christianity, your further characterise my comments as
"disconnected posts and thoughts (dementia?), is a violation of my human,
religious and Constitutional rights.
Such arrest following a voluntary and purposeful protest action by me is at
variance to the failure by the Victoria Police to take action over a
similarly staged protest by Mr. Pitman of a group called Freedom
International which was contemporaneous to the quasi-industrial action
undertaken by the Victoria Police as a picnic day held in the Treasury
Gardens on Sunday 28 October 2001.
Those matters are now before the State Ombudsman as complaint of violation
of human, religious and Constitutional rights as systemic quasi-religious
values based persecution as anti-Semitism, a failure by both the Victoria
Police to amend erroneous records pursuant the Freedom of Information Act
(1982) and a subsequent failure by the Victoria Police to adequately
investigate a factitious and malicious complaint made by the Insurer AXA
(Australia) Global Group Insurance Pty Ltd.
Accordingly if no public apology and retraction of those untruthful
characterisations are forthcoming from you, a claim for restitution as
unspecified costs, expenses, loss, damages will be undertaken against you.
- dolf
"Athanasius" wrote in message
news:pn8ju059bln1sbhci90lcm9ed2ocang6u8@4ax.com...
Roger,,
Qolon, aka Dolf, is extremely unstable,_by his own
posts_ he states he has been arrested for walking naked around his
city. He is suffering from the long term results of HIV/ AIDS which
includes the disconnected posts and thoughts (dementia?). he actually
was/is quite brilliant and at a time in the past he was able to be
interacted with in some level of normality, but that has since long
passed. Dolf asserts that he has commenced legal proceedings against
very many people from usenet with the human rights and has taken
various companies (particular his life insurance company which refused
a claim) to courts. He has posted copious copies of said legal
procceedings on the internet. I believe to date none of his actions
have been successful. Everybody on Dolf's home group,
aus.religion.christian in the past have tried to converse with him. It
is impossible, and especially now as the ravages of that horrible
disease get worse. We have learnt to accept Dolf is here and is unable
to be interacted with on a normal usenet level. Of course many of us
have and still do pray for Dolf and generally we do not debate with
him as it leads only to him becomming more disturbed in his emotions
and postings.
I write this to you as a courtesy and for your
knowledge, google will confirm all that I have said and none of it is
private and not declared publically by Dolf himself numerous times. I
will of course now be flamed for days for daring to bring you up to
speed regarding this individual. Prayer is the best we can do at this
time, many of us believe.
Peace and grace to you
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia,
4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from
the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world."
St Athanasius.
Path:
news-server.bigpond.net.au!lon-transit.news.telstra.net!ken-in.news.telstra.
net!news.telstra.net!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!news.xtra.co.nz!news1.o
ptus.net.au!optus!newsfeeder.syd.optusnet.com.au!news.optusnet.com.au!not-fo
r-mail
From: Athanasius
Newsgroups:
alt.christnet.christianlife,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,aus.politi
cs,aus.religion,aus.religion.christian
Subject: Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:22:47 +1000
Message-ID:
References:
<1105828843.001225.4410@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 62
NNTP-Posting-Host: 211.29.201.11
X-Trace: 1105831369 29133 211.29.201.11
Xref: news-server.bigpond.net.au alt.christnet.christianlife:179738
alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic:235338 aus.politics:227747
aus.religion:8868 aus.religion.christian:42381
QOLON NOTE:
Your claim below is no different to the German Socialists systematically
machine-gunning 10,000 Jews at a time, as an attempted clean-sweep and
dismantling of Nazi conceptration camps and claim they never existed--But a
bar of soap labelled "Reines jüdisches Fett" {ie. Pure Jewish Fat}, suggests
otherwise.
Sufficient evidence has already been conveyed to establish your predilection
to psychopathy, feigned comprehension and a lack of accountability as
pretense to piety.
- dolf
-
wrote in message
news:1105828843.001225.4410@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Qolon,
Thank you for these three notes. However, none of them seem to have
anything to do with Mithras, so I'm not sure that I have any special
comment to make about them.
I was interested in your comment about the Vatican library, with whom I
have had some dealings, but I didn't understand it. To what,
specifically, do you refer? The library is these days a very
well-known collection.
I note that you have massively cross-posted this. Please don't do
this.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
QOLON NOTE:
One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion with
regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus or
grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
That the difference between them is of such a magnitude that it is
dichotomic of State for our State Governor John Landy, who as a Roman
Catholic and despite giving a momentary pretense to the merit of a universal
piety by attendance at any other Christian Church, in swearing an oath of
allegiance to the British Monarchy by Almighty God--as the Roman Pontif to
the Vatican State claims the embodiment of that principle.
Likewise, as the Legal fraternity and Equal Opportunity/Human Rights
Commission is infested by individual's whose only experience of claims to
piety is Roman Catholicism as hymeneal cult, it is therefore singularly
impossible to obtain justice in matters of infractions of autonomous
religious and human rights--Despite the principles of Constitutional
protection requested by Seventh-day Sabbath observant Christians and enacted
by Section 116, they have no concept of it!
One final comment, given your Latin skills, you can hardly be so directed in
your demand for 'evidence from antiquity about the cult' without yourself
giving an explanation as to the Roman Catholic Church's failure as a
hymeneal cult, to give account for the gap within the Vatican Library of
historical records (ie. they were destroyed) as evidence of a singular
dependency by the ecclesiastics on astrological hermeneutical systems rather
than the alternate chronological basis to Judaeo-Christian belief which
survived annihiliation by the vassal states of Rome.
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105805918.724620.12960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
evidence from antiquity about the cult.
> it is illogical that Judaeo-Christians would deny the
> Seventh-day Sabbath as the basis of their Everlasting Covenant.
I'm not sure I understand.
> Clearly given you Latin skills ..., it would seem your comment
> below as an unacquintance with Mithraism as the historical
> basis to Roman Imperial/Papal Religion {ie. Pontif[ex] Maximus} is
> feigned piety:
Alternatively, given my Latin skills, perhaps my comment is based on
solid knowledge... ?
> The extension of Mithraism, was essentially a natural product of
social and
> political factors; ...
These comments are not of any interest to either of us, since they
consist of the speculation of a scholar more than a century ago. I
don't know about you, but I want to see facts, not empty verbose
theorising. What *facts* require that statement? Anyone can make
generalisations.
[snipped for context]
QOLON NOTE:
I didn't say I agreed with all that Cumont said.
Indeed, the reason I haven't quoted but only referenced him in this
instance, is that I disagreed with and modified several of his premises:
1) Like Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, Mithra was also considered an
intermediary between his celestial father and man, and like him he also was
one of a trinity {ie. nous, logos, psyche}.
2) The sectaries of the Persian god, like the Jewish-Christians, purified
themselves by baptism; received, by a species of confirmation, the power
necessary to combat the spirits of evil; and expected from a Lord's Supper
salvation of body and soul. Like the latter's [regard for the Sabbath, they
alternatively] held Sunday sacred, and celebrated as Sola Invictus.
However as it seems Judaeo-Christians were from 37CE systematically murdered
as tribute to the Pontif[e]x Maximus of Roman State Religion {ie. A
subsequent Papal title as claim to God's representative on earth, thereby
declaring the pope to hold unlimited power. Now, back in the pagan days of
Rome, Pontifex Maximus was the title accorded to the Chief priest of the
cult of Mithras and also to the Roman Emperor} and thereafter following
Titus' overthrow of Jerusalem, subject to persecutions and death in the
viscal sporting arena dedicated to the Sola Invictus--the colusseum.
You say: "I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*."--The Apostle Paul,
leaves little to doubt the facts of his hand in such actions: "I verily
thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of
Jesus {He is saved/A savior; a deliverer} of Nazareth {one chosen or set
apart; separated; crowned; sanctified}. Which thing I also did in Jerusalem
{vision of peace}: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having
received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death,
I gave my voice against them. And I punished them oft in every synagogue,
and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I
persecuted them even unto strange cities. Whereupon as I went to Damascus {a
sack full of blood; the similitude of burning} with authority and commission
from the chief priests." [Acts 26:4-12]
The implication being, that the Apostle Paul "compelled them to blaspheme"
and "persecuted this way-hodos unto the death, binding and delivering into
prisons both men and women. As also the high priest does bear me witness,
and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters to the
brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there in chains to
Jerusalem, for to be punished." [Acts 22:4-5]
In that it had a metempirical consequence upon the loyalty shown by the Jews
towards Caesar {ie. as those Jews who allegedly had "...acted contrary to
the decrees of the Caesar, saying there is another-heteros king-Jesus."
[Acts 17:2-7]} as the past cultic recognition, in accordance to the tenets
of the State Religion of Rome, as regard for the deified Augustus {revered
one} as son of a god--the Pontif[e]x Maximus. Whose past being {ie. he died
in 14 CE) was regarded as the will (numen) or essence (genius) of the
eternal-aidios power-dunamis {ie. male personification of miraculous power}
and Godhead-theoites {ie. Divinity associated with the Sefirot (Number) of
the Kabbalah} [Romans 1:19-23]. In that Paul "reserved [his defence] for the
decision of Augustus" [Acts 25:21] and "he himself had appealed to Augustus"
[Acts 25:25].
Today the equivalent blasphemy for Judaeo-Christians, would be to accept the
Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus--little wonder they act obscurely towards
the history of 7th day Sabbath observant Judaeo-Christians persecuted with
the impetus given by Pontifex Maximus and Imperial Roman Emperor Nero..
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105806099.010737.80080@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
NOSPAM@NOSPAM.invalid.com wrote:
Well put. Does this mean only that Mithraism was spread by *people*
(since those categories cover almost all ancient society!)?
It's very bad, isn't it? But I'm not sure that Qolon is responsible.
His methods of citation are very bad, but it may be from Cumont's book,
in which case the verbose vagueness is partly Cumont's fault, and
partly that of his translator.
But even so, what I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*. How do
we know that what is actually said is true? (It may be -- but how do
we know?)
All the best,
Roger Pearse
|
|
| | From: | Athanasius | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:27:15 +1000 |
|
|
| On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 00:18:53 GMT, "Qolon" wrote:
>Dear Athanasius,
Dear Dolf Leendert Boek,
Perhaps it is God's will
that one day we will meet. I would very much like that, you have
intrigued me for years. I am thankful that God has granted you an
extended life showing His great grace and love towards you.
>
>It is my hope that in the absence of an unreserved for your past unprovoked
>slander
"unprovoked slander" mmm, your definition has changed Dolf in the
interim. At the time you called it:
>your further characterise my comments as
>"disconnected posts and thoughts (dementia?),violation of my human,
>religious and Constitutional rights.
So now I see my statement of "disconnected posts and thoughts" with
the bracketed question of (Dementia?), which never was a violation of
your religious or human rights to begin with has now changed from the
Religious Vilification Act and its amendments to the civil law charge
of slander? Why is this Dolf? Perhaps you have already received advice
and told that you were wrong again and no religious vilification was
meant nor intended and can -never- be understood by anyone as such.
So now you allege slander.tsk tsk.
>I encourage you to make your apology as retraction of your remarks as false
>characterisations within the relevant discussion thread before Australia Day
>26 January, 2005 following which a complaint of Relgious Vilification
>pursuant to the aforementioned act will be undertaken against you and the
>religious community you represent.
Dolf, you may not realise it brother but you cannot demand an apology
as a retraction. You -can- say, "I am offended please apologise" for
saying my posts and thoughts are disconnected" In which case I am more
than happy to apologise for offending you, But to retract that which
is obviously true and said in a spirit of love and grace in warning
the other party to treat you with gentleness, is not a matter that
needs retracting.
If the word (Dementia?) is the problem then sorry I retract that. :) I
am not a doctor of medicine and am not able to make such a call over
the internet anyway.
Peace and grace be with your spirit.
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia, 4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world." St Athanasius.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:30:30 GMT |
|
|
| Dear Athanasius,
It is my hope that in the absence of an unreserved apology for your past
unprovoked slander made at 16 Jan 2005 09:22:47 in discussion thread Roger
Pearse's feigned piety, that you would at least refrain from further
discourse concerning religious matters on the Internet until the claim of
religious vilification pursuant to Section 8 of Victoria's (Australia)
Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 Act No. 47/2001 is determined
against you and the Egyptian Coptic Church.
I encourage you to make your apology as retraction of your remarks as false
characterisations within the relevant discussion thread before Australia Day
26 January, 2005 following which a complaint of Relgious Vilification
pursuant to the aforementioned act will be undertaken against you and the
religious community you represent.
- dolf
- http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/telos/kitchen.html
"Athanasius" wrote in message
news:a42uu0ha4vqp5qetnmi5u4g71fvt982387@4ax.com...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 00:18:53 GMT, "Qolon" wrote:
>Dear Athanasius,
Dear Dolf Leendert Boek,
Perhaps it is God's will
that one day we will meet. I would very much like that, you have
intrigued me for years. I am thankful that God has granted you an
extended life showing His great grace and love towards you.
>
>It is my hope that in the absence of an unreserved for your past unprovoked
>slander
"unprovoked slander" mmm, your definition has changed Dolf in the
interim. At the time you called it:
>your further characterise my comments as
>"disconnected posts and thoughts (dementia?),violation of my human,
>religious and Constitutional rights.
So now I see my statement of "disconnected posts and thoughts" with
the bracketed question of (Dementia?), which never was a violation of
your religious or human rights to begin with has now changed from the
Religious Vilification Act and its amendments to the civil law charge
of slander? Why is this Dolf? Perhaps you have already received advice
and told that you were wrong again and no religious vilification was
meant nor intended and can -never- be understood by anyone as such.
So now you allege slander.tsk tsk.
>I encourage you to make your apology as retraction of your remarks as false
>characterisations within the relevant discussion thread before Australia
Day
>26 January, 2005 following which a complaint of Relgious Vilification
>pursuant to the aforementioned act will be undertaken against you and the
>religious community you represent.
Dolf, you may not realise it brother but you cannot demand an apology
as a retraction. You -can- say, "I am offended please apologise" for
saying my posts and thoughts are disconnected" In which case I am more
than happy to apologise for offending you, But to retract that which
is obviously true and said in a spirit of love and grace in warning
the other party to treat you with gentleness, is not a matter that
needs retracting.
If the word (Dementia?) is the problem then sorry I retract that. :) I
am not a doctor of medicine and am not able to make such a call over
the internet anyway.
Peace and grace be with your spirit.
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia,
4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from
the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world."
St Athanasius.
|
|
| | From: | Athanasius | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:34:18 +1000 |
|
|
| On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:30:30 GMT, "Qolon" wrote:
God bless you Dolf.
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia, 4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world." St Athanasius.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:38:20 GMT |
|
|
| Dear Athanasius Scully,
Thank-you for acknowledging my request, your response was not adequate as an
'unreserved apology'. It will need to at least be on official church
letterhead and signed by HG Bishop Daniel, Coptic Orthodox Bishop of Sydney
and Affiliated Regions.
It is my hope that in the absence of an unreserved apology for your past
unprovoked slander made at 16 Jan 2005 09:22:47 in discussion thread Roger
Pearse's feigned piety, that you would at least refrain from further
discourse concerning religious matters on the Internet until the claim of
religious vilification pursuant to Section 8 of Victoria's (Australia)
Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 Act No. 47/2001 is determined
against you and the Egyptian Coptic Church.
I encourage you to make your apology as retraction of your remarks as false
characterisations within the relevant discussion thread before Australia Day
26 January, 2005 following which a complaint of Relgious Vilification
pursuant to the aforementioned act will be undertaken against you and the
religious community you represent.
- dolf
- http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/telos/kitchen.html
"Athanasius" wrote in message
news:ek2uu09at12ra2rj4gsoqo918fhkeohlk6@4ax.com...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:30:30 GMT, "Qolon" wrote:
God bless you Dolf.
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia,
4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from
the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world."
St Athanasius.
|
|
| | From: | Athanasius | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:48:04 +1000 |
|
|
| On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:38:20 GMT, "Qolon" wrote:
>Dear Athanasius Scully,
>
>Thank-you for acknowledging my request,
You're welcome Dolf.
>your response was not adequate as an
>'unreserved apology'. It will need to at least be on official church
>letterhead and signed by HG Bishop Daniel, Coptic Orthodox Bishop of Sydney
>and Affiliated Regions.
You could always write to him and ask him brother Dolf.
God bless you.
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia, 4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world." St Athanasius.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:50:55 GMT |
|
|
| Dear Athanasius Scully,
Thank-you for acknowledging my request. Your response was not adequate as an
'unreserved apology'. It will need to at least be on official church
letterhead and signed by HG Bishop Daniel, Coptic Orthodox Bishop of Sydney
and Affiliated Regions.
I note you have only made further rationalisations and self justifications
within the relevant discussion thread where your slanderous
characterisations occurred.
It is my hope that in the absence of an unreserved apology for your past
unprovoked slander made at 16 Jan 2005 09:22:47 in discussion thread Roger
Pearse's feigned piety, that you would at least refrain from further
discourse concerning religious matters on the Internet until the claim of
religious vilification pursuant to Section 8 of Victoria's (Australia)
Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 Act No. 47/2001 is determined
against you and the Egyptian Coptic Church.
I encourage you to make your apology as retraction of your remarks as false
characterisations within the relevant discussion thread before Australia Day
26 January, 2005 following which a complaint of Relgious Vilification
pursuant to the aforementioned act will be undertaken against you and the
religious community you represent.
- dolf
- http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/telos/kitchen.html
"Athanasius" wrote in message
news:6d3uu09un7b2433mpfdmmg1g8b9i09bhtg@4ax.com...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:38:20 GMT, "Qolon" wrote:
>Dear Athanasius Scully,
>
>Thank-you for acknowledging my request,
You're welcome Dolf.
>your response was not adequate as an
>'unreserved apology'. It will need to at least be on official church
>letterhead and signed by HG Bishop Daniel, Coptic Orthodox Bishop of Sydney
>and Affiliated Regions.
You could always write to him and ask him brother Dolf.
God bless you.
Athanasius,servant.
The Chapel of the Four Living Creatures Coptic Orthodox Australian Mission.
Ningi, Bribie Island, Caboolture,South East Queensland,Australia,
4511.Telephone: 0407 969827
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
dcn_athanasius@REMOVEyahoo.com.au (REMOVE is spam trap-please remove it from
the email address).
"If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world."
St Athanasius.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sat, 15 Jan 2005 22:09:15 GMT |
|
|
| One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion with
regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus or
grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
That the difference between them is of such a magnitude that it is
dichotomic of State for our State Governor John Landy, who as a Roman
Catholic and despite giving a momentary pretense to the merit of a universal
piety by attendance at any other Christian Church, in swearing an oath of
allegiance to the British Monarchy by Almighty God--as the Roman Pontif to
the Vatican State claims the embodiment of that principle.
Likewise, as the Legal fraternity and Equal Opportunity/Human Rights
Commission is infested by individual's whose only experience of claims to
piety is Roman Catholicism as hymeneal cult, it is therefore singularly
impossible to obtain justice in matters of infractions of autonomous
religious and human rights--Despite the principles of Constitutional
protection requested by Seventh-day Sabbath observant Christians and enacted
by Section 116, they have no concept of it!
- dolf
"Qolon" wrote in message news:...
One final comment, given your Latin skills, you can hardly be so directed in
your demand for 'evidence from antiquity about the cult' without yourself
giving an explanation as to the Roman Catholic Church's failure as a
hymeneal cult, to give account for the gap within the Vatican Library of
historical records (ie. they were destroyed) as evidence of a singular
dependency by the ecclesiastics on astrological hermeneutical systems rather
than the alternate chronological basis to Judaeo-Christian belief which
survived annihiliation by the vassal states of Rome.
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105805918.724620.12960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
evidence from antiquity about the cult.
> it is illogical that Judaeo-Christians would deny the
> Seventh-day Sabbath as the basis of their Everlasting Covenant.
I'm not sure I understand.
> Clearly given you Latin skills ..., it would seem your comment
> below as an unacquintance with Mithraism as the historical
> basis to Roman Imperial/Papal Religion {ie. Pontif[ex] Maximus} is
> feigned piety:
Alternatively, given my Latin skills, perhaps my comment is based on
solid knowledge... ?
> The extension of Mithraism, was essentially a natural product of
social and
> political factors; ...
These comments are not of any interest to either of us, since they
consist of the speculation of a scholar more than a century ago. I
don't know about you, but I want to see facts, not empty verbose
theorising. What *facts* require that statement? Anyone can make
generalisations.
[snipped for context]
QOLON NOTE:
I didn't say I agreed with all that Cumont said.
Indeed, the reason I haven't quoted but only referenced him in this
instance, is that I disagreed with and modified several of his premises:
1) Like Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, Mithra was also considered an
intermediary between his celestial father and man, and like him he also was
one of a trinity {ie. nous, logos, psyche}.
2) The sectaries of the Persian god, like the Jewish-Christians, purified
themselves by baptism; received, by a species of confirmation, the power
necessary to combat the spirits of evil; and expected from a Lord's Supper
salvation of body and soul. Like the latter's [regard for the Sabbath, they
alternatively] held Sunday sacred, and celebrated as Sola Invictus.
However as it seems Judaeo-Christians were from 37CE systematically murdered
as tribute to the Pontif[e]x Maximus of Roman State Religion {ie. A
subsequent Papal title as claim to God's representative on earth, thereby
declaring the pope to hold unlimited power. Now, back in the pagan days of
Rome, Pontifex Maximus was the title accorded to the Chief priest of the
cult of Mithras and also to the Roman Emperor} and thereafter following
Titus' overthrow of Jerusalem, subject to persecutions and death in the
viscal sporting arena dedicated to the Sola Invictus--the colusseum.
You say: "I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*."--The Apostle Paul,
leaves little to doubt the facts of his hand in such actions: "I verily
thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of
Jesus {He is saved/A savior; a deliverer} of Nazareth {one chosen or set
apart; separated; crowned; sanctified}. Which thing I also did in Jerusalem
{vision of peace}: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having
received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death,
I gave my voice against them. And I punished them oft in every synagogue,
and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I
persecuted them even unto strange cities. Whereupon as I went to Damascus {a
sack full of blood; the similitude of burning} with authority and commission
from the chief priests." [Acts 26:4-12]
The implication being, that the Apostle Paul "compelled them to blaspheme"
and "persecuted this way-hodos unto the death, binding and delivering into
prisons both men and women. As also the high priest does bear me witness,
and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters to the
brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there in chains to
Jerusalem, for to be punished." [Acts 22:4-5]
In that it had a metempirical consequence upon the loyalty shown by the Jews
towards Caesar {ie. as those Jews who allegedly had "...acted contrary to
the decrees of the Caesar, saying there is another-heteros king-Jesus."
[Acts 17:2-7]} as the past cultic recognition, in accordance to the tenets
of the State Religion of Rome, as regard for the deified Augustus {revered
one} as son of a god--the Pontif[e]x Maximus. Whose past being {ie. he died
in 14 CE) was regarded as the will (numen) or essence (genius) of the
eternal-aidios power-dunamis {ie. male personification of miraculous power}
and Godhead-theoites {ie. Divinity associated with the Sefirot (Number) of
the Kabbalah} [Romans 1:19-23]. In that Paul "reserved [his defence] for the
decision of Augustus" [Acts 25:21] and "he himself had appealed to Augustus"
[Acts 25:25].
Today the equivalent blasphemy for Judaeo-Christians, would be to accept the
Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus--little wonder they act obscurely towards
the history of 7th day Sabbath observant Judaeo-Christians persecuted with
the impetus given by Pontifex Maximus and Imperial Roman Emperor Nero..
- dolf
wrote in message
news:1105806099.010737.80080@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
NOSPAM@NOSPAM.invalid.com wrote:
Well put. Does this mean only that Mithraism was spread by *people*
(since those categories cover almost all ancient society!)?
It's very bad, isn't it? But I'm not sure that Qolon is responsible.
His methods of citation are very bad, but it may be from Cumont's book,
in which case the verbose vagueness is partly Cumont's fault, and
partly that of his translator.
But even so, what I imagine we all want to see is some *facts*. How do
we know that what is actually said is true? (It may be -- but how do
we know?)
All the best,
Roger Pearse
|
|
| | From: | Heretic | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:41:49 -0500 |
|
|
| On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 22:09:15 +0000, Qolon wrote:
> One might
Or, one might not. In your case, I much prefer the latter.
|
|
| | From: | The New Prophets | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 02:25:52 GMT |
|
|
|
"Qolon" <> wrote in message
....
> One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion with
> regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus or
> grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
I see you have made the acquaintance of our famed Pseudo-scholar Roger.
Roger who yells ancient sources only please.
Pontifex Maxinus, brings to mind the recent post by Roger concerning the
Donation of Constantine.
Now, note from this data from Roger, how he twists things to suit his
preconcieved notions.
Just read what he has posted concerning the Donation of Constantine.
My summary of his ideas was:
"Coleman tells us in the preface that the Donation is probably to be
dated to the 8th century, when the last remains of Imperial Byzantine
authority were collapsing, and the Popes needed to act for their own
safety independently and with authority. The story of the Donation had
been circulating orally as a legend since the 6th century. Perhaps we
might speculate that someone - even a Pope - 'knowing' from hearsay
that some such donation had occurred but naturally unable to find the
paper proving it, ordered that the essentials be placed on paper in
order to safeguard the lives of everyone in Rome. With the later
abuse of the document we are not here concerned
What is Roger's source. Coleman?? Hardly an ancient source.
Then he says the Donation was probably dated to the 8th century, and the
dear old pope was concerned for his safety. But did you note the probably
earlier in the sentence.
But of course, no ancient source is noted.
Then how about this statement.
The donation had been circulating orally from the 6th century!!
Again no ancient source supplied.
Then how about this scholarly sounding statement.
Prehaps we might speculate that someone!!
Is this not the rank speculation that Roger screams about??
He really is a most amusing little man.
You really want to get him going?
Ask him about Plutarch's statement that the Pirates in Cilicia were
practicing the rites of Mithras in 67BC.
See Ulansey:
Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in
the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67
B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the
southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras.
The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the
first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the
third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult's membership included
significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded.
Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the
beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to
exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism.
Now ask Roger about there being rites of Mithras being practiced in Cilicia
100 years before Jesus is crucified, and therefore the religion of Mithras
was within the Roman Empire before Jesus.
Roger immediately goes into defense mode, and will tell you Plutarch must
have been wrong.
The pseudo scholar, with his mind made up before hand, tells us the ancient
scholar must have been mistaken.
And his source, some speculation by some current author.
But that is how Roger works.
Then when you point things like this out to him, he will immediately turn to
a personal attack. He actually thinks that he can yell you down in
cyberspace.
....
> Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
> Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
> evidence from antiquity about the cult.
See the above statement by Roger about Mithras.
Now ask him about the quote from Plutarch - That is actual evidence from
antiquity. And listen to Roger tell you how Plutarch was mistaken.
I'm telling you he is most amusing.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 03:03:56 GMT |
|
|
| Thanks for your excellent contribution to this discussion thread. From my
scant understanding of Constatine, other than the fact he was regarded, as
is demonstrated by his erecting a statue to Apollo as likewise claiming as
Pontifex Maximus, the embodiment of the will (numen) or essence (genius) of
the eternal-aidios power-dunamis and Godhead-theoites [Romans 1:19-23], thus
his near death conversion to Christianity is of extra-ordinary dubious
merit: "I
have eliminated all my opponents therefore I AM"
But the other issue relates to the Homoiotic substance of Godhead and its
relationship Jesus Christ which was supposedly considered at the Council of
Nicea in 325 CE: "Constantine the Great convened the council of Nicea to
settle the Arian dispute concerning the nature of Jesus Christ. It was there
that the doctrine of the Trinity was declared to be the orthodox Christian
belief. Literature on what happened at this council is scant.
The Arian controversy lead to much discussion in the early part of the
fourth century. Gregory of Nyssa writes:
'Every corner of Constantinople was full of their discussions: the streets,
the market place, the shops of the money changers, the victuallers. Ask a
tradesman how many obols he wants for some article in his shop, and he
replies with the disquisition on generated and ungenerated being. Ask the
price of bread today and the baker tells you: 'The son is subordinate to the
father.' Ask your servant if the bath is ready and he makes an answer:
'The son arose out of nothing.' 'Great is the only Begotten,' declared the
Catholics, and the Arians rejoined: 'But greater is He that begot.'"
[Firth, J.B., Constantine the Great, p. 206. (New York, 1971)]
Thus the information convey by both my and now your post is entirely in
keeping with the view, that the individual Roger Pearse is as a Roman
Catholic, engaging within cant {
ie. insincere statements, especially convential pretense of enthusiam for
high ideas; insincere expressions of goodness and piety; the special secret
or jargon spoken by thieves, gipsies--It is essentially a symbolic theology.
In his Lettera sopra L'opinione de' Pittagorici e del Copernico ('Letter
concerning the Opinion of the Pythagoreans and Copernicus about the Mobility
of the Earth and Stability of the Sun, and about the New Pythagorean System
of the World'), the Carmelite friar Paolo Antonio Foscarini who was also in
1615 CE the author of a 'Treatise on Natural Cosmological Divination', did
not introduce any new principles of biblical interpretation in his analysis;
rather, he sets out and applies the Roman Catholic Church's traditional
rules of Biblical interpretation, which he identifies as symbolic:
'When Holy Scripture attributes something to God or to any other creature
which would otherwise be improper and incommensurate, then it should be
interpreted and explained in one or more of the following ways.
First, it is said to pertain metaphorically and proportionately, or by
similitude.
Second, it is said...according to our mode of consideration, apprehension,
understanding, knowing, etc.
Thirdly, it is said according to vulgar opinion and the common way of
speaking.' [Alister E. McGrath, © 1999, Science & Religion - An
Introduction, p 12-13]
}, and my other comments within this discussion converning a homoiotic
noumenon (ie. a quadruple form neural linguistic vMeme / Moment 9(9²+1)/2 =
#369 mathematical Kabbalistic paradigm as space/time overlay} that claims to
Christian belief is not only a claim made that Jesus of Nazareth is the
manifested form and substance of Godhead as First Cause {ie. 22/7 as
chronological, mathematical, taxonomical and cosmological consideration
related to its embodiment or form} but an actual acquaintance with the
psyche and persona of Jesus of Nazareth.
"Beware lest anyone should cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit,
according to the tradition of men, according to the the basic
principles-stoicheion of the world-kosmos, and not according to Christ. For
in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete
in him, who is the head of all principality-ARCHE {
a Kabbalistic term - a commencement, or (concrete) chief (in various
applications of order, time, place or rank):-beginning, corner, (at the,
the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule [#60,
#72, #26, #16 - Being a Guide/ Returning to the Root, (#46, #36)]
That is 22/7 as chronological, mathematical, taxonomical and cosmological
consideration related to its embodiment or form:
"the image {Heb: KO INR; cf: IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDAEORVM as Jesus of
Nazareth, King of the Jews [Matthew 27:37; Mark 15:26; John 19:19; Luke
23:38] from the Latin: I (#9) N (#50) R (#80) = 139 % 81 = #58} of (Heb:
ADNI) with the three signs of the name. Speak (Heb. YHWH ADNI) is the name
of the host ... by 22 corresponding to (Heb. ADNI) and the one power [as
Shaddai the Almighty God]." [Raziel p 176, 191] By Isopsephy this #330 value
equates with the Greek word Ison(omia) - 'Equilibrium, equal distribution,
balance, equality of political rights'.
} and power-EXOUSIA {
a Kabbalistic term - (in the sense of ability); privilege, that is,
(subjectively) force, capacity, competency, freedom, or (objectively)
mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate, token of control),
delegated influence:-authority, jurisdiction, liberty, power, right,
strength [#47, #68, #67, #26 - Ambiguous Reversals/ The Virtue of Gravity,
(#55, #27)]}." [Colossians 2:8-10]
The Genesis view, is that all occurrence which can be measured in time comes
from the apeiron, and the relativity of the time sequence itself underlies
the religious statement that God is 'arch kai teles' {
ie. Telos ('achariyth) = Arch (re'shiyth) + c² : Genesis/Arch as (22/7) 3W1D
.... Jubilee & Torah @ Sinai as 50J + 12 x 6J as 'oth 294 year cycle + 3W1D =
6,000 (122J3W1D) years as Saturday 1 January 2000 + solar eclipse on 25
December 2000 + 6 days = Telos
}, which as the logos, penetrates and rules all being:
1. Begin/Arch/Genesis ... 22/7 = 3W1D [#13, #12, #29, #69 - Profound Use/
The Function of the Mysterious (#3, #79)]
2. Cata {-strophe} ... 26J5W [#79, #26, #30, #9 - The Inconstancy of
Achievement/ Practising Placidity (#13, #69)]
3. Generation ... 40J4W [#80, #53, #72, #32 - A Natural Guide/ The Virtue of
Holiness (#24, #58)]
4. Torah Law & Jubilee @ Sinai [50J] - 1550 BCE ... [#38, #38, #40, #20 -
Left without Language/ Different From the Vulgar (#31, #51)]
5. Artaxerxes' decree as Hebrew's return from Babylonian Exile & Pythagorean
use of YHWH Tetragrammation [72J] + 3(3?+1)/2=[2W1D]} #3 = 457 BCE ... #10 =
33 CE [#9, #31, #51, #61 - Virtuosity at Using 'Beneath'/ The Virtue of
Humility (#59, #23)]
6. Jesus of Nazareth in midst 69th Week = 30 CE as [10J] = 490 years - 33 CE
.... [#3, #20, #52, #73 - Employing Deeming/ Daring to Act (#69, #13)]
7. Telos [122J3W1D] - 6,000 years + {9(9?+1)/2=[52W5D]} ... [#71, #80, #45,
#35 - Great Guiding Signs?/ The Virtue of Benevolence (#81, #1)]
- dolf
- http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/telos/kabbalah/noumenon.html
"The New Prophets" wrote in message
news:QgkGd.100064$dv1.76104@edtnps89...
"Qolon" <> wrote in message
....
> One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion with
> regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus or
> grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
I see you have made the acquaintance of our famed Pseudo-scholar Roger.
Roger who yells ancient sources only please.
Pontifex Maxinus, brings to mind the recent post by Roger concerning the
Donation of Constantine.
Now, note from this data from Roger, how he twists things to suit his
preconcieved notions.
Just read what he has posted concerning the Donation of Constantine.
My summary of his ideas was:
"Coleman tells us in the preface that the Donation is probably to be
dated to the 8th century, when the last remains of Imperial Byzantine
authority were collapsing, and the Popes needed to act for their own
safety independently and with authority. The story of the Donation had
been circulating orally as a legend since the 6th century. Perhaps we
might speculate that someone - even a Pope - 'knowing' from hearsay
that some such donation had occurred but naturally unable to find the
paper proving it, ordered that the essentials be placed on paper in
order to safeguard the lives of everyone in Rome. With the later
abuse of the document we are not here concerned
What is Roger's source. Coleman?? Hardly an ancient source.
Then he says the Donation was probably dated to the 8th century, and the
dear old pope was concerned for his safety. But did you note the probably
earlier in the sentence.
But of course, no ancient source is noted.
Then how about this statement.
The donation had been circulating orally from the 6th century!!
Again no ancient source supplied.
Then how about this scholarly sounding statement.
Prehaps we might speculate that someone!!
Is this not the rank speculation that Roger screams about??
He really is a most amusing little man.
You really want to get him going?
Ask him about Plutarch's statement that the Pirates in Cilicia were
practicing the rites of Mithras in 67BC.
See Ulansey:
Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in
the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67
B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the
southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras.
The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the
first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the
third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult's membership included
significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded.
Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the
beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to
exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism.
Now ask Roger about there being rites of Mithras being practiced in Cilicia
100 years before Jesus is crucified, and therefore the religion of Mithras
was within the Roman Empire before Jesus.
Roger immediately goes into defense mode, and will tell you Plutarch must
have been wrong.
The pseudo scholar, with his mind made up before hand, tells us the ancient
scholar must have been mistaken.
And his source, some speculation by some current author.
But that is how Roger works.
Then when you point things like this out to him, he will immediately turn to
a personal attack. He actually thinks that he can yell you down in
cyberspace.
....
> Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
> Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
> evidence from antiquity about the cult.
See the above statement by Roger about Mithras.
Now ask him about the quote from Plutarch - That is actual evidence from
antiquity. And listen to Roger tell you how Plutarch was mistaken.
I'm telling you he is most amusing.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 06:35:29 GMT |
|
|
| Your comment from Plutarch concerning pirates within Cilicia {which rolls or
overturns} is really quite fascinating, "Our earliest evidence for the
Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first
century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of
pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia
Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. The earliest physical
remains of the cult date from around the end of the first century A.D., and
Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the third century. " ["The New
Prophets" ]
Particularly as it relates to a parallel history of the Jews as records of
the Dead Sea Scrolls and as freudian slip as false acolade subscribed to
Augustus Caesar made by Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BCE-50CE) within his "On
virtues and the office of ambassadore" as justification for his 39/40 CE
embassy to Caesar Emperor Gaius/Caligula.
Queen Salome Alexandra (Shelomziyon) subsequently reigned from 76 to 67 BCE
[cf: 4Q322]. During such time, her sons had social, religious and political
preeminence, with Aristobulus II being a Pharisee supporter and John
Hyrcanus II as a Sadducean supporter, initally ruling as High Priest {ie.
the Wicked Priest}. Following which, according to this prophetic timeline a
civil war began in 67 BCE: "For when they were unfaithful in forsaking him,
he hid his face from Israel and from his sanctuary, and delivered them up to
the sword. But when he remembered the covenant with the forefathers, he
saved a remnant for Israel and did not deliver them up to destruction. {cf:
[Acts 28:17-22]} At the moment of wrath, 390 years after {ie. 457 BCE + 390
years = 67 BCE} delivering them [from] the hand of Nebuchadnezzar {tears and
groans of judgment}, king of Babylon, he visited them and caused to sprout
from Israel and from Aaron a shoot of the planting, in order to possess this
land and to become fat with the good things of his soil. And they realised
their sin and knew that they were guilty; but they were like blind persons
and like those who grope for the path {ie. Heb. derek; Gk. hodos} over
twenty years {ie. 88-67 BCE}." [The Damascus Document - 4Q266]
The term 'path' [Gk. hodos & Heb. derek: Daleth (#4) Resh (#200) Final Kaf
(#500) = #504 % 81 = #18] used here, was readily understood as relating to a
form of governance and Divine Providence, of which Felix {happy, prosperous}
as governor of Caesarea had a 'more accurate knowledge' [Acts 24:22]. And is
an expression which characterizes the theology of the Old Testament [Isaiah
59:1-8], John the Baptist [Luke 1:67-80] and the Apostle Paul's [Romans
3:9-20] later usage of it: "Nor can they prove the things of which they now
accuse me, But this I confess to you, that according to the Way-hodos which
they call a sect [Acts 28:22], so I worship the God of my fathers, believing
all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets. I have hope in
God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a resurrection of
the dead, both of the just and the unjust." [Acts 24:13-15]
Philo in speaking of the nations of Asia and Europe contending for "chief
power and dominion" describes the one man and leader, Caesar and Pontifex
Maximus Augustus, by whose means they were brought to a better state, and
therefore we may justly call him the averter of evil. Philo's documentation
follows the Number Angel/Daemon of the Homoiotic noumenon as a quadruple
form neural linguistic vMeme / Moment 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 mathematical
Kabbalistic paradigm as space/time overlay.
I'll convey the noumenon entries associated to each of the relevant
paragraphs #145 to #148 from Philo's 'On Virtues and Office of Ambassadores"
so you may gain a gist or nuance of what the inner dimension as to what he
is implying:
145 % 81 = #64
Isopsephy: Lax - With the heel or foot
Amon - faithful; true
Latin: Fortis {Mover of all things} Alt: Nalekel {Unto Thee, God}] {Invoked
with [Psalms 93]
1. HELPS CONFOUND THE EVIL & THE PROUD
2. VEGETATION
3. EDUCATION}
[#24, #34, #74, #64 - Dealing with the Small/ Mind the Insignificant/ #52,
#30]
#24 - Important Distinctions/ Trouble from Indulgence
#14 - Metaphysical Issues/ Praising the Mysterious
#53 - Increasing Evidence/ Gaining Insight
#64 - Dealing with the Small/ Mind the Insignificant
#36 - Natural Reversals/ The 'Secret' Explanation
#46 - Guiding Contentment/ Moderation of Desire
(145) This is Caesar, who calmed the storms which were raging in every
direction, who healed the common diseases which were afflicting both Greeks
and barbarians, who descended from the south and from the east, and ran on
and penetrated as far as the north and the west, in such a way as to fill
all the neighbouring districts and waters with unexpected miseries.
146 % 81 = #65
Isopsephy: Dogma - Philosophical doctrines; Rhiza - Origin; root from which
things spring such as the eye or foundations of the earth;
JHS (Gk. Iota{10} Eta{8} Rho{100} [ = 118 (#6)) A monogram adopted by the
Jesuits in the Societies of Jesus.
The bind letters, or monogram, chi-rho (and occasionally chi-iota {10th})
became one
of the most prominent of Christian symbols and can still be seen in almost
any Roman Catholic church
Jehoshaphat - the Lord is judge
Latin: Sublevator {God, the hope of all the children of the earth} Alt:
Mabhel {Emptiness of Things Before God}] {
1. PROTECTS AGAINST LIGHTNING & INFERNAL SPIRITS OF RELIGIOUS CULTS
2. CREED
3. INFLUENCES & PROTECTS THOSE WHO SEEK THE TRUTH
4. Serucuth}
[#23, #25, #65, #65 - Unlearned Virtuosity/ The Virtue of Simplicity/ #44,
#38]
#74 - Controlling Feelings/ Overcome Delusion
#33 - Achievable Goals/ The Virtue of Discrimation
#65 - Unlearned Virtuosity/ The Virtue of Simplicity
#65 - Unlearned Virtuosity/ The Virtue of Simplicity
#38 - Consequences for Virtuosity/ Discourse of Virtue
#44 - Moderate Values/ Setting Up Precepts
(146) This is he who did not only loosen but utterly abolish the bonds in
which the whole of the habitable world was previously bound and weighed
down. This is he who destroyed both the evident and the unseen wars which
arose from the attacks of robbers. This is he who rendered the sea free from
the vessels of pirates, and filled it with Merchantmen.{10}{he is
attributing an honour to Augustus which does not belong to him. It was
Pompey who cleared the sea of pirates.}
147 % 81 = #66
Isopsephy: Aigle - Light of the sun or moon; splendour, glory brightness,
luster, daylight; Aima - Blood; life; Ana - Arise! Upwards; above; on high;
Kakia - Wickedness, vice, moral badness; Iama - Remedy, medicine, healing;
Maia - Good mother, midwife; Stele - Pillar, mark out boundary with, to be
so set up, stand firm; Kakai - Wicked women; Kala - Beautiful
Latin: Longanimis {Inspiring God} Alt: Akael {Weary of God}] {
1. SERVES TO CAST LIGHT ON ONE'S JOB
2. VEGETATION
3. ASTROLOGY
4. Tomi}
[#22, #74, #56, #66 - Strategic Reversal/ Putting Oneself Behind/ #36, #46]
#25 - What's behind it all?/ Imaging the Mysterious
#37 - Non-Deeming Action/ Administration of Government
#5 - Natural Guidance/ The Function of Emptiness
#66 - Strategic Reversal/ Putting Oneself Behind
#49 - Sage's Constancy/ Trust in Virtue
#33 - Achievable Goals/ The Virtue of Discrimation
(147) This is he who gave freedom to every city, who brought disorder into
order, who civilized and made obedient and harmonious, nations which before
his time were unsociable, hostile, and brutal. This is he who increased
Greece by many Greeces, and who Greecised the regions of the barbarians in
their most important divisions: the guardian of peace, the distributor to
every man of what was suited to him, the man who proffered to all the
citizens favours with the most ungrudging liberality, who never once in his
whole life concealed or reserved for himself any thing that was good or
excellent.
148 % 81 = #67
Angel/Daemon of Zaphkiel/Zakkiel
{The angel governing storms}
#3 - THRONES / SATURN
[#15, #7, #47, #67 - Three Treasures {kindness, frugality and no presumption
that one is first among all under Heaven}, (#19, #63)]
#15 - Mastering Guiding Discourse/ The Revealers of Virtue
#36 - Natural Reversals/ The 'Secret' Explanation
#26 - Ambiguous Reversals/ The Virtue of Gravity
#67 - Three Treasures
#60 - Skill at Ruling/ How to Maintain One's Place
#22 - The Point to Reversal?/ Humility's Increase
XXII. (148) Now this man who was so great a benefactor to them for the space
of three and forty years, during which he reigned over Egypt, they passed
over in silence and neglect, never erecting any thing in their synagogues
to do him honour; no image, no statue, no inscription.
Thus you might see according to the Kabbalistic noumenon as encyclical
archtiecture and basis to his writing, by slight of pen, he is simply
juxtasupposing the calming of seas and the Mithratic pirates by Imperial
Roman military incursion against the Kabbalistic notion "chief power and
dominion" {ie.
Powers (Gk. Arche - a commencement, or (concrete) chief (in various
applications of order, time, place or rank):-beginning, corner, (at the,
the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule) and
Dominions (Gk. Kuriotes - mastery, that is, (concretely and collectively)
rulers:-dominion, government)} as the claimed honors bestowed upon Caesar
and that such claimed honour resulted in the lack of any desecration to
their synagogues by image, statue, or inscription.
One soon gets the impression that his conduct was not praise at all, but
concealed sarcasm of the most pernicious and vitriolic kind. If such a
secret were thus published, it would upon becoming common knowledge to
Imperial Roman ears, be sufficient to bring such retribution as the
destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple
In 67 BC, two years after his consulship, Pompey was nominated commander of
a special naval task force to campaign against the pirates that controlled
the Mediterranean. This command, like everything else in Pompey's life, was
surrounded with polemic. The conservative faction of the senate was most
suspicious of his intentions and afraid of his power. The so-called
Optimates tried every means possible to avoid it. The nomination was then
proposed by a Plebeian Tribune (Aulus Gabinius) who proposed the law (Lex
Gabinia) giving Pompey command in the war against the Mediterranean pirates,
with extensive powers that gave him absolute control over the sea and the
coasts for 50 miles inland. It took Pompey only a few months to clear the
Mediterranean of the danger of pirates. The quickness of the campaign showed
that he was a talented general also at sea, with strong logistic abilities
too.
He did not return to Rome. Instead he went to the Asian provinces to
substitute Lucullus in the command of the war against king
Mithridates_VI_of_Pontus, a man who had caused trouble for the Republic for
more than 20 years. The results of his campaign of 66 to 61 BC were:
# the final defeat of Mithridates, Pontus becomes a Roman province
# the defeat of Tigranes, king of Armenia
# the defeat of Antiochus XIII, king of Syria, that becomes a Roman
province
# capture of Jerusalem
# circa 20,000 talents of gold of booty (Plutarch's figures) and two new
provinces for the treasury to tax." [cf: Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pompey]
- dolf
"Qolon" wrote in message
news:wQkGd.120263$K7.88992@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Thanks for your excellent contribution to this discussion thread. From my
scant understanding of Constatine, other than the fact he was regarded, as
is demonstrated by his erecting a statue to Apollo as likewise claiming as
Pontifex Maximus, the embodiment of the will (numen) or essence (genius) of
the eternal-aidios power-dunamis and Godhead-theoites [Romans 1:19-23], thus
his near death conversion to Christianity is of extra-ordinary dubious
merit: "I have eliminated all my opponents therefore I AM"
But the other issue relates to the Homoiotic substance of Godhead and its
relationship to Jesus Christ which was supposedly considered at the Council
of Nicea in 325 CE: "Constantine the Great convened the council of Nicea to
settle the Arian dispute concerning the nature of Jesus Christ. It was there
that the doctrine of the Trinity was declared to be the orthodox Christian
belief. Literature on what happened at this council is scant.
The Arian controversy lead to much discussion in the early part of the
fourth century. Gregory of Nyssa writes:
'Every corner of Constantinople was full of their discussions: the streets,
the market place, the shops of the money changers, the victuallers. Ask a
tradesman how many obols he wants for some article in his shop, and he
replies with the disquisition on generated and ungenerated being. Ask the
price of bread today and the baker tells you: 'The son is subordinate to the
father.' Ask your servant if the bath is ready and he makes an answer:
'The son arose out of nothing.' 'Great is the only Begotten,' declared the
Catholics, and the Arians rejoined: 'But greater is He that begot.'"
[Firth, J.B., Constantine the Great, p. 206. (New York, 1971)]
Thus the information convey by both my and now your post is entirely in
keeping with the view, that the individual Roger Pearse is as a Roman
Catholic, engaging within cant {
ie. insincere statements, especially convential pretense of enthusiam for
high ideas; insincere expressions of goodness and piety; the special secret
or jargon spoken by thieves, gipsies--It is essentially a symbolic theology.
In his Lettera sopra L'opinione de' Pittagorici e del Copernico ('Letter
concerning the Opinion of the Pythagoreans and Copernicus about the Mobility
of the Earth and Stability of the Sun, and about the New Pythagorean System
of the World'), the Carmelite friar Paolo Antonio Foscarini who was also in
1615 CE the author of a 'Treatise on Natural Cosmological Divination', did
not introduce any new principles of biblical interpretation in his analysis;
rather, he sets out and applies the Roman Catholic Church's traditional
rules of Biblical interpretation, which he identifies as symbolic:
'When Holy Scripture attributes something to God or to any other creature
which would otherwise be improper and incommensurate, then it should be
interpreted and explained in one or more of the following ways.
First, it is said to pertain metaphorically and proportionately, or by
similitude.
Second, it is said...according to our mode of consideration, apprehension,
understanding, knowing, etc.
Thirdly, it is said according to vulgar opinion and the common way of
speaking.' [Alister E. McGrath, © 1999, Science & Religion - An
Introduction, p 12-13]
}, and my other comments within this discussion converning a homoiotic
noumenon (ie. a quadruple form neural linguistic vMeme / Moment 9(9²+1)/2 =
#369 mathematical Kabbalistic paradigm as space/time overlay} that claims to
Christian belief is not only a claim made that Jesus of Nazareth is the
manifested form and substance of Godhead as First Cause {ie. 22/7 as
chronological, mathematical, taxonomical and cosmological consideration
related to its embodiment or form} but an actual acquaintance with the
psyche and persona of Jesus of Nazareth.
"Beware lest anyone should cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit,
according to the tradition of men, according to the the basic
principles-stoicheion of the world-kosmos, and not according to Christ. For
in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete
in him, who is the head of all principality-ARCHE {
a Kabbalistic term - a commencement, or (concrete) chief (in various
applications of order, time, place or rank):-beginning, corner, (at the,
the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule [#60,
#72, #26, #16 - Being a Guide/ Returning to the Root, (#46, #36)]
That is 22/7 as chronological, mathematical, taxonomical and cosmological
consideration related to its embodiment or form:
"the image {Heb: KO INR; cf: IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDAEORVM as Jesus of
Nazareth, King of the Jews [Matthew 27:37; Mark 15:26; John 19:19; Luke
23:38] from the Latin: I (#9) N (#50) R (#80) = 139 % 81 = #58} of (Heb:
ADNI) with the three signs of the name. Speak (Heb. YHWH ADNI) is the name
of the host ... by 22 corresponding to (Heb. ADNI) and the one power [as
Shaddai the Almighty God]." [Raziel p 176, 191] By Isopsephy this #330 value
equates with the Greek word Ison(omia) - 'Equilibrium, equal distribution,
balance, equality of political rights'.
} and power-EXOUSIA {
a Kabbalistic term - (in the sense of ability); privilege, that is,
(subjectively) force, capacity, competency, freedom, or (objectively)
mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate, token of control),
delegated influence:-authority, jurisdiction, liberty, power, right,
strength [#47, #68, #67, #26 - Ambiguous Reversals/ The Virtue of Gravity,
(#55, #27)]}." [Colossians 2:8-10]
The Genesis view, is that all occurrence which can be measured in time comes
from the apeiron, and the relativity of the time sequence itself underlies
the religious statement that God is 'arch kai teles' {
ie. Telos ('achariyth) = Arch (re'shiyth) + c² : Genesis/Arch as (22/7) 3W1D
.... Jubilee & Torah @ Sinai as 50J + 12 x 6J as 'oth 294 year cycle + 3W1D =
6,000 (122J3W1D) years as Saturday 1 January 2000 + solar eclipse on 25
December 2000 + 6 days = Telos
}, which as the logos, penetrates and rules all being:
1. Begin/Arch/Genesis ... 22/7 = 3W1D [#13, #12, #29, #69 - Profound Use/
The Function of the Mysterious (#3, #79)]
2. Cata {-strophe} ... 26J5W [#79, #26, #30, #9 - The Inconstancy of
Achievement/ Practising Placidity (#13, #69)]
3. Generation ... 40J4W [#80, #53, #72, #32 - A Natural Guide/ The Virtue of
Holiness (#24, #58)]
4. Torah Law & Jubilee @ Sinai [50J] - 1550 BCE ... [#38, #38, #40, #20 -
Left without Language/ Different From the Vulgar (#31, #51)]
5. Artaxerxes' decree as Hebrew's return from Babylonian Exile & Pythagorean
use of YHWH Tetragrammation [72J] + 3(3?+1)/2=[2W1D]} #3 = 457 BCE ... #10 =
33 CE [#9, #31, #51, #61 - Virtuosity at Using 'Beneath'/ The Virtue of
Humility (#59, #23)]
6. Jesus of Nazareth in midst 69th Week = 30 CE as [10J] = 490 years - 33 CE
.... [#3, #20, #52, #73 - Employing Deeming/ Daring to Act (#69, #13)]
7. Telos [122J3W1D] - 6,000 years + {9(9?+1)/2=[52W5D]} ... [#71, #80, #45,
#35 - Great Guiding Signs?/ The Virtue of Benevolence (#81, #1)]
- dolf
- http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/telos/kabbalah/noumenon.html
"The New Prophets" wrote in message
news:QgkGd.100064$dv1.76104@edtnps89...
"Qolon" <> wrote in message
....
> One might take the Constitutional argument to its logical conclusion with
> regards to whether one regards the Roman Pontif as Pontifex Maximus or
> grants some other-heteros king/queen that prerogative as Monarchy.
I see you have made the acquaintance of our famed Pseudo-scholar Roger.
Roger who yells ancient sources only please.
Pontifex Maxinus, brings to mind the recent post by Roger concerning the
Donation of Constantine.
Now, note from this data from Roger, how he twists things to suit his
preconcieved notions.
Just read what he has posted concerning the Donation of Constantine.
My summary of his ideas was:
"Coleman tells us in the preface that the Donation is probably to be
dated to the 8th century, when the last remains of Imperial Byzantine
authority were collapsing, and the Popes needed to act for their own
safety independently and with authority. The story of the Donation had
been circulating orally as a legend since the 6th century. Perhaps we
might speculate that someone - even a Pope - 'knowing' from hearsay
that some such donation had occurred but naturally unable to find the
paper proving it, ordered that the essentials be placed on paper in
order to safeguard the lives of everyone in Rome. With the later
abuse of the document we are not here concerned
What is Roger's source. Coleman?? Hardly an ancient source.
Then he says the Donation was probably dated to the 8th century, and the
dear old pope was concerned for his safety. But did you note the probably
earlier in the sentence.
But of course, no ancient source is noted.
Then how about this statement.
The donation had been circulating orally from the 6th century!!
Again no ancient source supplied.
Then how about this scholarly sounding statement.
Prehaps we might speculate that someone!!
Is this not the rank speculation that Roger screams about??
He really is a most amusing little man.
You really want to get him going?
Ask him about Plutarch's statement that the Pirates in Cilicia were
practicing the rites of Mithras in 67BC.
See Ulansey:
Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in
the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67
B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the
southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras.
The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the
first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the
third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult's membership included
significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded.
Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the
beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to
exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism.
Now ask Roger about there being rites of Mithras being practiced in Cilicia
100 years before Jesus is crucified, and therefore the religion of Mithras
was within the Roman Empire before Jesus.
Roger immediately goes into defense mode, and will tell you Plutarch must
have been wrong.
The pseudo scholar, with his mind made up before hand, tells us the ancient
scholar must have been mistaken.
And his source, some speculation by some current author.
But that is how Roger works.
Then when you point things like this out to him, he will immediately turn to
a personal attack. He actually thinks that he can yell you down in
cyberspace.
....
> Not sure why you think this; why not find out something about
> Mithraism? Don't read the rubbish on the net -- look for actual
> evidence from antiquity about the cult.
See the above statement by Roger about Mithras.
Now ask him about the quote from Plutarch - That is actual evidence from
antiquity. And listen to Roger tell you how Plutarch was mistaken.
I'm telling you he is most amusing.
|
|
| | From: | Qolon | | Subject: | Re: -- Roger Pearse's feigned piety | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 03:02:00 GMT |
|
|
| Thanks for your escellent contribution to this discussion thread. From of
scant understanding of Constatine, other than the fact he was regarded, as
is demonstrated by his erecting a statue to Apollo as likewise claiming as
Pontifex Maximus, the embodiment of the will (numen) or essence (genius) of
the
eternal-aidios power-dunamis and Godhead-theoites [Romans 1:19-23], thus his
near death conversion to Christianity is of extra-ordinary dubious merit: "I
have eliminated or my opponents therefore I AM"
But the other issue relates to the Homoiotic substance of Godhead and its
relationship Jesus Christ which was supposedly considered at the Council of
Nicea in 325 CE: "Constantine the Great convened the council of Nicea to
settle the Arian dispute concerning the nature of Jesus Christ. It was there
that the doctrine of the Trinity was declared to be the orthodox Christian
belief. Literature on what happened at this council is scant.
The Arian controversy lead to much discussion in the early part of the
fourth century. Gregory of Nyssa writes:
'Every corner of Constantinople was full of their discussions: the streets,
the market place, the shops of the money changers, the victuallers. Ask a
tradesman how many obols he wants for some article in his shop, and he
replies with the disquisition on generated and ungenerated being. Ask the
price of bread today and the baker tells you: 'The son is subordinate to the
father.' Ask your servant if the bath is ready and he makes an answer:
'The son arose out of nothing.' 'Great is the only Begotten,' declared the
Catholics, and the Arians rejoined: 'But greater is He that begot.'"
[Firth, J.B., Constantine the Great, p. 206. (New York, 1971)]
Thus the information convey by both my and now your post is entirely in
keeping with the view, that the individual Roger |
|
|