The Bible Was Buried For A Reason. It Is Evil. It Was Obtained By Robbing A Grave. Again An Evil.

a reply to: chr0naut

The earliest canon, Marcion's, was140 years after Christ and is readable today (if you want to get into it).

Except his canon only had Pauls writing... and it is missing 3 of the four gospels, and revelation from the NT

You do know Marcion was a heretic right?

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

The earliest canon, Marcion's, was140 years after Christ and is readable today (if you want to get into it).

Except his canon only had Pauls writing... and it is missing 3 of the four gospels, and revelation from the NT

You do know Marcion was a heretic right?

Yup, and his stuff is not suppressed.

Something to consider.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

The earliest canon, Marcion's, was140 years after Christ and is readable today (if you want to get into it).

Except his canon only had Pauls writing... and it is missing 3 of the four gospels, and revelation from the NT

You do know Marcion was a heretic right?

Yup, and his stuff is not suppressed.

Something to consider.

actually it was... every bit of Marcions writing was destroyed...

And Marcion died of "poison" ironically... Likely murdered by the church just like Arius was many years later...

The only thing we have left from Marcion are reconstructions of his writing from hostile witnesses...

So ya... something to think about...

Im not a fan of Paul, so I likely wouldn't have liked Marcion's writing in any case...

But what I dislike more is when authorities are so afraid of a mans writing that they destroy everything he wrote and the writer himself...

Suspicious?

Oh HELL YES...

originally posted by: Akragon

But what I dislike more is when authorities are so afraid of a mans writing that they destroy everything he wrote and the writer himself...

Look into what the Romans would call Damnatio Memoriae ==> en.wikipedia.org...

Damnatio memoriae was enforced against high treason and challengers to the Emperor and the Empire. Keep this practice in mind the next time people try to prove Jesus never existed since there are virtually no historical documentation for his life and his mass gatherings 7c in Judea, there are for instance no surviving fragments of Tacitus' book covering the years around 30 AD.

A similar erase-from-history practice seems to have been imposed by the Jewish elite on several people relating to Jesus and early Christianity, when Christianity was still a growing Jewish sect. There are close to no Christian related manuscripts fragments surviving from the first century, but a few does, one of them holds 616 as the number of the beast, and others showing evidence of quite a different gospel. In contemporary correspondences and ecclesiastical writings one commentator is appalled by how the Christians referred to Jesus as JHVH. And how that was even worse than niqquds and spaces between words altogether.

originally posted by: TruthSeekerKnight
It Is Illegal To Rob Graves.

Why Do Scientists Still Go Out There Digging Up Things From The Past. We Are Not Supposed To Dig Things Up.

The Bible? Are you actually speaking about the NagHammiti Gnostic (Egyptian texts) dead sea scrolls? Paul would be offended as the Catholic Church spent hours including and excising spurious gospels (too ethereal) or too matter of fact, we can only have the 4 cannons (some others found themselves included by way of a miracle). Fairly sure the Bible as we know it today was not dug up in tact 'somewhere'.

a reply to: chr0naut

because that theory stands on particularly shaky ground in the light of evidence.

Oh really? Shaky Ground? Look no further than Christianity as religion. There could not be more shaky ground than Christianity.
All your evidence is written either A. For fun. B. To Enslave and Control the Masses. Yes I can totally imagine the Church Cult or any secret cult to sacrifice 1000 years of their time generation to generation just so that their future inbreeds could rule over all man king. I can totally see it happening. But the Bible. Lol. To me the Bible is a joke at best.

originally posted by: AzuriteStar
a reply to: chr0naut

because that theory stands on particularly shaky ground in the light of evidence.

Oh really? Shaky Ground? Look no further than Christianity as religion. There could not be more shaky ground than Christianity.
All your evidence is written either A. For fun. B. To Enslave and Control the Masses. Yes I can totally imagine the Church Cult or any secret cult to sacrifice 1000 years of their time generation to generation just so that their future inbreeds could rule over all man king. I can totally see it happening. But the Bible. Lol. To me the Bible is a joke at best.

Do you have any supporting evidence to prove stuff in the Bible was written for fun?

As the people who believe in the Bible are in the minority for most of history, in most of the world, can you support the claim that its purpose is to enslave and control the masses (because it appears to me, to be failing fairly majorly at it)?

The Bible has a few good jokes in it, but you have to know the full details behind its puns and jokes before its humor becomes apparent. Considering its verbosity, it is a rather un-funny collection of books.

a reply to: chr0naut

Bible is a Riddle book sham, no proof needed

originally posted by: AzuriteStar
a reply to: chr0naut

Bible is a Riddle book sham, no proof needed

The Bible is a library of 66 different books written over thousands of years (some say 5,000). it includes history, fiction, allegory, religious instruction, law, mysticism, poetry, lyrics, management advice, wise sayings and erotic prose.

For populations of the world it is the primary source of spiritual instruction and enlightenment.

In view of the way so many others view the Bible (some who spend much time studying it) perhaps it warrants more than a superficial glance?

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

The earliest canon, Marcion's, was140 years after Christ and is readable today (if you want to get into it).

Except his canon only had Pauls writing... and it is missing 3 of the four gospels, and revelation from the NT

You do know Marcion was a heretic right?

Yup, and his stuff is not suppressed.

Something to consider.

actually it was... every bit of Marcions writing was destroyed...

And Marcion died of "poison" ironically... Likely murdered by the church just like Arius was many years later...

The only thing we have left from Marcion are reconstructions of his writing from hostile witnesses...

So ya... something to think about...

Im not a fan of Paul, so I likely wouldn't have liked Marcion's writing in any case...

But what I dislike more is when authorities are so afraid of a mans writing that they destroy everything he wrote and the writer himself...

Suspicious?

Oh HELL YES...

Oh, we totally don't have these then?: The Gospel of Marcion or his letter to the Galatians. It is true that these are reconstructions, but not from hostile witnesses. He penned the originals for these documents himself.

Or perhaps his works were so totally obscured that no mention was ever made about them so they would slip from history?

Yeah, that must be it!

Additionally, as far as I can see, the time and manner of Marcions death is unknown. Perhaps you could enlighten me on a reputable (or even legendary) source for the story of Marcions passing?

Also Arius died suddenly of acute and bloody diarrhea at the end of a public parade in his honour. This would more likely be due to an internal injury such as a ruptured appendix, along with an E-Coli bacterial infection, rather than poisoning. (Although poisoning by vast amounts of an anticoagulant like Cinnamomum cassia is possible, but less likely).

a reply to: chr0naut

Oh, we totally don't have these then?

Right... we totally don't have them...

read your own links... they're reconstructions by people that weren't especially fond of Marcion

Thus... Hostile witnesses...

Like I said...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Oh, we totally don't have these then?

Right... we totally don't have them...

read your own links... they're reconstructions by people that weren't especially fond of Marcion

Thus... Hostile witnesses...

Like I said...

Apologies, I was editing my previous post for clarification. Please re-read, thanks.

a reply to: chr0naut

Well... IF you're looking for proof that the church murdered Arius and Marcion, you won't find it...

its my own theory... (not original either) It seems to be a trend in this world...

People that speak the truth or are a threat to certain "powers" in this world are exterminated...

Everyone from Jesus To Ghandi... you name it...

I find it obvious even if its nothing more then speculation... but its possible if one digs deep enough they could find the truth of the matter... And i'd bet its exactly what I believe

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Well... IF you're looking for proof that the church murdered Arius and Marcion, you won't find it...

its my own theory... It seems to be a trend in this world...

People that speak the truth or are a threat to certain "powers" in this world are exterminated...

Everyone from Jesus To Ghandi... you name it...

I find it obvious even if its nothing more then speculation... but its possible if one digs deep enough they could find the truth of the matter... And i'd bet its exactly what I believe

Fair enough, while I would argue natural causes for Arius demise, I cannot rule out foul play.

... and as a conspiracy website, this is the perfect platform for your hypothesis.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Well... IF you're looking for proof that the church murdered Arius and Marcion, you won't find it...

its my own theory... It seems to be a trend in this world...

People that speak the truth or are a threat to certain "powers" in this world are exterminated...

Everyone from Jesus To Ghandi... you name it...

I find it obvious even if its nothing more then speculation... but its possible if one digs deep enough they could find the truth of the matter... And i'd bet its exactly what I believe

Fair enough, while I would argue natural causes for Arius demise, I cannot rule out foul play.

... and as a conspiracy website, this is the perfect platform for your hypothesis.

Well no it is recorded that he died of poisoning actually...

The question is... was he poisoned on purpose or was it mistake...

Considering he was poisoned when these controversies were happening... I think It was a blatant disposing of the opponent of the church...

but that's me...

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

Well... IF you're looking for proof that the church murdered Arius and Marcion, you won't find it...

its my own theory... It seems to be a trend in this world...

People that speak the truth or are a threat to certain "powers" in this world are exterminated...

Everyone from Jesus To Ghandi... you name it...

I find it obvious even if its nothing more then speculation... but its possible if one digs deep enough they could find the truth of the matter... And i'd bet its exactly what I believe

Fair enough, while I would argue natural causes for Arius demise, I cannot rule out foul play.

... and as a conspiracy website, this is the perfect platform for your hypothesis.

Well no it is recorded that he died of poisoning actually...

The question is... was he poisoned on purpose or was it mistake...

Considering he was poisoned when these controversies were happening... I think It was a blatant disposing of the opponent of the church...

but that's me...

Arius and Emperor Constantine were in cahoots. Constantine wanted to force the existing Christian church to re-accept Arius. In the accounts of the time, Arius died because he was "stricken by God" one day before the Emperors mandate should be enforced on the church.

The idea that he was poisoned (most likely by Arsenic) is a more modern supposition and does not fit with the prolapse of his bowels and the evacuation of his internal organs (including spleen and liver) described by Socrates Scholasticus.

Based on the accounts, I would suppose that if Arius was murdered, he was given a laxative prior to his 'triumphal march' and that an assassin lay in wait in the privy nearest to the end of the march (knowing that Arius would likely 'hold on' until his triumph was over). When Arius entered the privy, he was speared up the rectum with a barbed spear with its wooden shaft removed (the sawn-off shotgun of ancient Rome) and died. His entrails removed when the spear was retracted.

I would suspect Socrates Scholasticus as the perpetrator (or conspirator), or had taken direct testimony from the perpetrator as his description of the events implied that he was a witness to things that would been done in private, and so, by reason, places him at the scene at the time of death and also calls into question the truthfulness of his testimony.

... or Arius was stricken by God.

Other than that, I don't know of any one particular thing (i.e: a poison) that fits the evidence.

a reply to: chr0naut

I think we really need to weigh the evidence in this matter... Socrates Scholasticus wasn't even born when all this happened for one thing... he was a church historian... and not a fan of Arius either by the way...

Athanasius wrote a letter To Serapion, concerning the death of Arius. In which he says this...

When the Bishop Alexander heard this, he was greatly distressed, and entering into the church, he stretched forth his hands unto God, and bewailed himself; and casting himself upon his face in the chancel, he prayed, lying upon the pavement. Macarius also was present, and prayed with him, and heard his words. And he besought these two things, saying, ‘If Arius is brought to communion to-morrow, let me Thy servant depart, and destroy not the pious with the impious; but if Thou wilt spare Thy Church (and I know that Thou wilt spare), look upon the words of Eusebius and his fellows, and give not thine inheritance to destruction and reproach4661, and take off Arius, lest if he enter into the Church, the heresy also may seem to enter with him, and henceforward impiety be accounted for piety.’ When the Bishop had thus prayed, he retired in great anxiety; and a wonderful and extraordinary circumstance took place. While Eusebius and his fellows threatened, the Bishop prayed; but Arius, who had great confidence in Eusebius and his fellows, and talked very wildly, urged by the necessities of nature withdrew, and suddenly, in the language of Scripture, ‘falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst4662,’ and immediately expired as he lay, and was deprived both of communion and of his life together.

Seems like the same thing that happened to Judas in one of the accounts... He "burst asunder" but this was apparently some miracle... which of course is highly unlikely...

to me this sounds like he passed out... and probably for good reason...

Also Constantine wasn't "in cahoots" with Arius...

IF you read this...

www.fourthcentury.com...

which is Constantine's final letter to Arius and the Arian's... He is almost begging Arius to return to the church... but later in the letter he calls arius a fool, and continues on to say..." Well; but now I shall proceed by my discourse against you yourself, you fool in respect to your soul, you wordy one in respect to your tongue, you infidel in respect to your wits. "

Constantine praises Arius for his bravery though... and seems almost amazed by his conviction...at the end of the letter he tells Arius to come to him... Clearly he wanted this matter solved as soon as possible... He wanted one church, undivided in his kingdom... This is when Arius was murdered in my opinion... as he was on his way to meet with Constantine to solve this matter once and for all...

But do you, iron-hearted man, give to me an evidence of your purpose, if you have faith in yourself, and be strong in the strength of faith, and you absolutely will have a pure conscience. Come to me, come, I say, to a man of God; believe that by my interrogations I shall search your heart’s secrets; and, if any madness shall seem to be in you, I, after having invoked divine grace, shall heal you fairer than a model. But if you shall appear to be healthy in respect to spiritual matters, I, after I have recognized the light of the truth in you, shall give thanks to God and I shall rejoice with myself for the sake of piety.

Now it is my opinion once again, that Arius had the better argument... Athanasius knew that Constantine would see this and had Arius disposed of before he made it to his meeting with the Emperor

Athanasius could not let Arius live to meet with the ruler of the empire IF he wanted his version of Christianity taught... His trinity is what is taught today... not the trinity which Arius wanted, and was so convicted of that he was willing to be excommunicated... and ended up dying for

The trinity which places the Father as the ONE God, and the holy spirit and Son subordinate to HIM... just like Jesus said

Reconciling Arius

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: chr0naut

I think we really need to weigh the evidence in this matter... Socrates Scholasticus wasn't even born when all this happened for one thing... he was a church historian... and not a fan of Arius either by the way...

Athanasius wrote a letter To Serapion, concerning the death of Arius. In which he says this...

When the Bishop Alexander heard this, he was greatly distressed, and entering into the church, he stretched forth his hands unto God, and bewailed himself; and casting himself upon his face in the chancel, he prayed, lying upon the pavement. Macarius also was present, and prayed with him, and heard his words. And he besought these two things, saying, ‘If Arius is brought to communion to-morrow, let me Thy servant depart, and destroy not the pious with the impious; but if Thou wilt spare Thy Church (and I know that Thou wilt spare), look upon the words of Eusebius and his fellows, and give not thine inheritance to destruction and reproach4661, and take off Arius, lest if he enter into the Church, the heresy also may seem to enter with him, and henceforward impiety be accounted for piety.’ When the Bishop had thus prayed, he retired in great anxiety; and a wonderful and extraordinary circumstance took place. While Eusebius and his fellows threatened, the Bishop prayed; but Arius, who had great confidence in Eusebius and his fellows, and talked very wildly, urged by the necessities of nature withdrew, and suddenly, in the language of Scripture, ‘falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst4662,’ and immediately expired as he lay, and was deprived both of communion and of his life together.

Seems like the same thing that happened to Judas in one of the accounts... He "burst asunder" but this was apparently some miracle... which of course is highly unlikely...

to me this sounds like he passed out... and probably for good reason...

Also Constantine wasn't "in cahoots" with Arius...

IF you read this...

www.fourthcentury.com...

which is Constantine's final letter to Arius and the Arian's... He is almost begging Arius to return to the church... but later in the letter he calls arius a fool, and continues on to say..." Well; but now I shall proceed by my discourse against you yourself, you fool in respect to your soul, you wordy one in respect to your tongue, you infidel in respect to your wits. "

Constantine praises Arius for his bravery though... and seems almost amazed by his conviction...at the end of the letter he tells Arius to come to him... Clearly he wanted this matter solved as soon as possible... He wanted one church, undivided in his kingdom... This is when Arius was murdered in my opinion... as he was on his way to meet with Constantine to solve this matter once and for all...

But do you, iron-hearted man, give to me an evidence of your purpose, if you have faith in yourself, and be strong in the strength of faith, and you absolutely will have a pure conscience. Come to me, come, I say, to a man of God; believe that by my interrogations I shall search your heart’s secrets; and, if any madness shall seem to be in you, I, after having invoked divine grace, shall heal you fairer than a model. But if you shall appear to be healthy in respect to spiritual matters, I, after I have recognized the light of the truth in you, shall give thanks to God and I shall rejoice with myself for the sake of piety.

Now it is my opinion once again, that Arius had the better argument... Athanasius knew that Constantine would see this and had Arius disposed of before he made it to his meeting with the Emperor

Athanasius could not let Arius live to meet with the ruler of the empire IF he wanted his version of Christianity taught... His trinity is what is taught today... not the trinity which Arius wanted, and was so convicted of that he was willing to be excommunicated... and ended up dying for

The trinity which places the Father as the ONE God, and the holy spirit and Son subordinate to HIM... just like Jesus said

Reconciling Arius

You're right, I had assumed that Socrates Scholasticus was contemporary by the tone of his narrative. I should have checked!

originally posted by: Akragon
[Context]«...urged by the necessities of nature withdrew, and suddenly, in the language of Scripture, ‘falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst4662,’ and immediately expired as he lay, and was deprived both of communion and of his life together.» (the letter to Arius from Constantine)[/context]

Seems like the same thing that happened to Judas in one of the accounts... He "burst asunder" but this was apparently some miracle... which of course is highly unlikely...

This is interesting. Take note of how in both cases the bursting asunder happens in relation to communion. Unleavened bread together with wine, is that really a good idea? If the bread started fermenting in the guy's intestines I suppose he would probably defecate (or be deprived of communion to quote the Emperor) and perhaps even literally burst open. Interesting also is how Jesus gives Judas a piece of specially prepared bread soaked in something, text doesn't say what, could it have been leaven or some kind of poison, resulting in "the devil entering the body" that would later burst open?

I always found the Arius heresy intriguing, and one of the subjects I'd like to get up to par with. I don't mean to jump in to your discussion without having followed your conversation, but where do I start with Arius?

[ETA] Looks like all the talk about water of life, bread from heaven and good clean spirits contra those evil dark spirits that make people blind-- may indeed be ethanol contra methanol. Paul is momentarily blinded by the spirit, and cured by the same, and later Paul seeks revenge by doing the same trick to the magician Bar-Jesus (son of Jesus, and it probably was the son of Jesus, living on Crete). Methanol will make you blind, the cure is to drink large amounts of ethanol, same method can be used (with a bit of luck) to stop fermentation in your intestines.

IF you have a dough fermenting in your intestines, one of the only ways you can stop this process with is large amounts of liqueur. After Jesus has dipped (Strong's G911 βάπτω, same root as in Baphomet, code for Sophia, wisdom and knowledge) the bread and given it to Judas, Satan enters him and Jesus says «What you are going to do, do quickly.» [ESV] John 13:27 -- as in «Hurry, Judas, I just did the worst prank ever, I'm awfully sorry, but I dipped your bread in leaven, now get your arse over to Proud Mary and get yourself a pot of moonshine, you can put it on my tab.» [/ETA]