Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Gnostic Gospels Chapter 1

Expand Messages
  • coolas25
    Cari, Thank you so much for everything. Colleen ... want ... all ... the
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 6 5:05 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Cari,

      Thank you so much for everything.

      Colleen


      --- In gnosticism2@y..., lady_caritas <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > --- In gnosticism2@y..., coolas25 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > > Where it is documented that the Church claims Peter to be
      > the "first
      > > witness," thus this being why he is successor? I guess I just
      want
      > > to see it for myself since I've been told so many times that Mary
      > > Magdaline is the first witness througout my life. I appreciate
      all
      > > the information everyones been giving. Thank you :)
      > >
      > > Colleen
      >
      >
      > Hi, Colleen,
      >
      > Click on
      > http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
      >
      > Then scroll down to "The Risen Lord confirms Peter's precedence":
      >
      > "To him alone of the Apostles did Christ appear on the first day
      > after the Resurrection (Luke, xxiv, 34; I Cor., xv, 5)."
      >
      > Note the scriptural references. But also note, as I mentioned
      > before, that according to Catholics, Mary Magdalene was only
      > considered to be an "apostle to the apostles." So, she wasn't in
      the
      > running for leadership, even though no one will dispute that fact
      > that she is cited elsewhere in the Bible as being the first one to
      > witness the resurrection.
      >
      > Anyway, this seems to be the "official" Catholic view.
      >
      > Cari
    • ernststrohregenmantelrad
      Let me put this thred together with the thred on Phillip K Dick. As you know everything in this world in some what related to one another or maybe human have a
      Message 2 of 15 , Jul 9 2:30 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Let me put this thred together with the thred on Phillip K Dick. As you
        know everything in this world in some what related to one another or
        maybe human have a knack of drawing unrelated events as related....

        But "Rome never died" is precicely the answer to why Peter is the first to
        witness the risen Lord (hense the leader of Christianity) instead of female
        like Mary Magdalene although the Gospel of John (20:11-18) and Mark
        (9:1) DO STATE that it was Mary who first saw the Lord.

        The original question was from the first chapter of Pagel's book "Gnostic
        Gospels", the chapter entitled "The Controversy over Christ's
        Resurrection". It basically states the literal interpretation of the
        resurrection is more based upon the political factor. Pagel reason that the
        emerging church turned to hierchy by stating the resurrectionn as the
        literal event. By interpreting the resurrection as the literal event it
        legitamized the authority who witnessed the resurrection namely those of
        Apostles especially Peter. What is more telling is what Pagel wrote in the
        second chapter of the book entitled "One God, One Bishop". Noteably the
        legemecy of the Apostles were handed over to bishops. It clearly means
        that the authority is in the hand of bishops; furthermore, a Roman bishop
        as the time went by. A curious fact I would think. In the second chapter
        Pagel mentions the Letter of Clement of Rome to Corinth. I think this
        letter is very telling. It is considered to be one of the oldest document of
        Christiandom outside of Canonical writings. In fact some Traditions
        notebly coptic and Syriac included in their Canon. If you read the Clement
        of Rome or read the explanation from the Pagel's book it basically advise
        the Corinthian church to submit to the proper authority .ie bishops. The
        reason for this is that the church in Corinth was over taken by "young"
        "radicals" who rebelled against the authority. You know I wonder? What
        do you all think? I find it funny that an upstart church in Rome all of suden
        has authority over older one like Corinth. And what was these young
        rebelling against? Why Rome? Because Peter is there? or was there? It's
        only a legend. But Clement of Rome is said to be a Pope right after or
        second after Peter. Who is this Clement? What is his background? Why his
        basically telling every Christians to submit to the church authority? And
        by doing that he's claiming the legacy of Peter.

        This is my speculation. Roman authorty took over the new cult for the
        reason we shall see later when Constantine took over. Nice controling
        device. Who is Clement? full of speculation but there is claim that
        Clement was a commom name for a army official at the time. Nah
        couldn't be I'm crazy right? lol. Sure these offical saw Christian martyrs
        and said to themself NOT "wow look at that faith of Christians" but "wow,
        look at zelotness and great mass control" Yes, I think Christianity was
        highjacked at that point. Irenaeus was just an icing on the cake to wipe out
        the desenters and rationalize the political action as theological one. It
        maybe a specualtion but several things stand out. One is the number of
        converts amoung the Roman elite as Christianity spred. The original
        Christian message was basically geared toward less fortunate (women,
        slaves, etc) Why all of sudden elite joining? Second, this is fact not
        speculation, after the fall of Rome many Roman elites (high class and
        nobilty) joined the monastic order or became a church official.

        Well, to sum it up "Rome never died.... it hijacked one Hellenistic mystey
        religion and live to this day exerting influence." Of course I don't hold out
        for the "evil' Vatican theory but there are secret Vatican origanization
        like Opus Dei, Knights of Malta. It is like any organized institution like US
        government. Its right hand doesn't know what its left hand is doing.
      • morphodyte
        Hello Ernst; Rome actually never did die - and I mean this quite literally; Rome just changed the form of governance. If we look at the papacy and epicopate of
        Message 3 of 15 , Jul 10 7:59 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello Ernst;

          Rome actually never did die - and I mean this quite literally;
          Rome just changed the form of governance.

          If we look at the papacy and epicopate of the Church hierarchy
          we see that they were organized as a part of the Imperial
          bureaucracy, just as was the military and the Imperium. In fact
          the bureaucratic divide of Rome into East and West suggests a
          decentralization of power in late antiquity to make the vast
          Empire more manageable.

          The bishops were an arm of the governement, something to
          replace the senate with something more suited to the Imperial
          command and which assumed the Imperial role of Pontifex
          maximus, so as to relieve the Emperor of religious duty to
          concentrate on secular and military matters.

          These aspects of the Empire functioned so well that when the
          Vandals sacked Rome, the religious arm of the Imperial
          government was able to survive and establish itself by the time
          of Charlemagne as a power functioning independently of the
          Constantinople government and its diaconate.

          This Roman Church, functioning as the last vestige of Roman
          imperial rule sought to establish new Roman authorities through
          Charlemagne and the Germanic kings of Vienna - with some
          limited success, but the Imperial function was never able to
          emerge from the feudal syatem imposed by the Goths and
          franks.

          Nevertheless, Rome really never did die, and was in fact still
          powerful as a religious government until the time of the
          Reformation when it lost control of most of Germany as well as
          England. the next blow was the French Revolution and the loss
          of political power in France.

          You did mention Opus Dei and it is a well known secret that
          Cardinal Walensa was placed in the Papcy through the efforts
          and support of Opus Dei, and it is this Pope who was the moral
          force through the Solidarity movement which brough down Soviet
          Union.

          The Church continues to expand its base in Latin America, the
          Phillipines and in Africa - Opus Dei waiting in the wings.

          But Church aside - the United States is a reformulation of the
          Republican ideals of Rome; the legal and military systems are
          based on Roman models - the legislature owes much of its
          origins to Roman predecessors.

          Right now American republicanism (the USA is not a true
          democracy, contrary to popular belief) is threatened by the
          increasing powers of the Executive and its support from
          Christian extremists - much the same as in late antiquity.

          However, the system does have protections built in having
          installed a judiciary which acts independently - to a degree - of
          the Executive, to wit we have had some rather conroversial
          rulings like the recent one on the Plejaliejuntz.

          States also still exert some degree of autonomy, albeit much of
          that was dismantled by the despot Abraham Lincoln - yes I know
          he is a favorite for abolishing slavery, but his war against the
          South was disatrous and dismantled the federal rights of States.
          I suppose he was a Julius Caesar, we are simply awaiting our
          Constantine - perhaps he is already here.

          Morphodyte

          --- In gnosticism2@y..., ernststrohregenmantelrad
          <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > Let me put this thred together with the thred on Phillip K Dick.
          As you
          > know everything in this world in some what related to one
          another or
          > maybe human have a knack of drawing unrelated events as
          related....
          >
          > But "Rome never died" is precicely the answer to why Peter is
          the first to
          > witness the risen Lord (hense the leader of Christianity)
          instead of female
          > like Mary Magdalene although the Gospel of John (20:11-18)
          and Mark
          > (9:1) DO STATE that it was Mary who first saw the Lord.
          >
        • Coraxo
          Sorry, This post was not overtly gnostic; let it suffice that the antinomian character of Gnosticism was regrded as a threat to the Emperor and the Romish
          Message 4 of 15 , Jul 10 8:10 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Re: [Gnosticism] Re: Gnostic Gospels Chapter 1 Sorry,

            This post was not overtly gnostic; let it suffice that the antinomian character of Gnosticism was regrded as a threat to the Emperor and the Romish bishop, enough to have had them suppressed.

            Fortunately our friends Irenaeus and Tertullian were kind enough to preserve som much gnostic teaching in their polemical writings that just as Rome is resurgent today, Gnosticism is likewise resurgent, something I think Philip K. Dick saw.

            BTW, "Radi Free Albemuth" is like a parallel gospel to "Valis". Is valis anagramic for Salvi?

            Corax


            From: "morphodyte" <morphodyte@...>
            Reply-To: gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:59:12 -0000
            To: gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [Gnosticism] Re: Gnostic Gospels Chapter 1


            Hello Ernst;

            Rome actually never did die - and I mean this quite literally;
            Rome just changed the form of governance.

            If we look at the papacy and epicopate of the Church hierarchy
            we see that they were organized as a part of the Imperial
            bureaucracy, just as was the military and the Imperium. In fact
            the bureaucratic divide of Rome into East and West suggests a
            decentralization of power in late antiquity to make the vast
            Empire more manageable.

            The bishops were an arm of the governement, something to
            replace the senate with something more suited to the Imperial
            command and which assumed the Imperial role of Pontifex
            maximus, so as to relieve the Emperor of religious duty to
            concentrate on secular and military matters.

            These aspects of the Empire functioned so well that when the
            Vandals sacked Rome, the religious arm of the Imperial
            government was able to survive and establish itself by the time
            of Charlemagne as a power functioning independently of the
            Constantinople government and its diaconate.

            This Roman Church, functioning as the last vestige of Roman
            imperial rule sought to establish new Roman authorities through
            Charlemagne and the Germanic kings of Vienna - with some
            limited success, but the Imperial function was never able to
            emerge from the feudal syatem imposed by the Goths and
            franks.

            Nevertheless, Rome really never did die, and was in fact still
            powerful as a religious government until the time of the
            Reformation when it lost control of most of Germany as well as
            England. the next blow was the French Revolution and the loss
            of political power in France.

            You did mention Opus Dei and it is a well known secret that
            Cardinal Walensa was placed in the Papcy through the efforts
            and support of Opus Dei, and it is this Pope who was the moral
            force through the Solidarity movement which brough down Soviet
            Union.

            The Church continues to expand its base in Latin America, the
            Phillipines and in Africa - Opus Dei waiting in the wings.

            But Church aside - the United States is a reformulation of the
            Republican ideals of Rome; the legal and military systems are
            based on Roman models - the legislature owes much of its
            origins to Roman predecessors.

            Right now American republicanism  (the USA is not a true
            democracy, contrary to popular belief) is threatened by the
            increasing powers of the Executive and its support from
            Christian extremists - much the same as in late antiquity.

            However, the system does have protections built in having
            installed a judiciary which acts independently - to a degree - of
            the Executive, to wit we have had some rather conroversial
            rulings like the recent one on the Plejaliejuntz.

            States also still exert some degree of autonomy, albeit much of
            that was dismantled by the despot Abraham Lincoln - yes I know
            he is a favorite for abolishing slavery, but his war against the
            South was disatrous and dismantled the federal rights of States.
            I suppose he was a Julius Caesar, we are simply awaiting our
            Constantine - perhaps he is already here.

            Morphodyte

            --- In gnosticism2@y..., ernststrohregenmantelrad
            <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > Let me put this thred together with the thred on Phillip K Dick.
            As you
            > know everything in this world in some what related to one
            another or
            > maybe human have a knack of drawing unrelated events as
            related....
            >
            > But "Rome never died" is precicely the answer to why Peter is
            the first to
            > witness the risen Lord (hense the leader of Christianity)
            instead of female
            > like Mary Magdalene although the Gospel of John (20:11-18)
            and Mark
            > (9:1) DO STATE that it was Mary who first saw the Lord.
            >


            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            gnosticism2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

          • eris never died.
            ... morph s post seemed pretty gnostic to me, since it dealt with oppressive powers on our Earth which try to stifle the freedom of people and keep them asleep
            Message 5 of 15 , Jul 11 10:28 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Coraxo wrote:

              > Sorry,
              >
              > This post was not overtly gnostic; let it suffice that the antinomian
              > character of Gnosticism was regrded as a threat to the Emperor and the
              > Romish bishop, enough to have had them suppressed.
              >
              > Fortunately our friends Irenaeus and Tertullian were kind enough to preserve
              > som much gnostic teaching in their polemical writings that just as Rome is
              > resurgent today, Gnosticism is likewise resurgent, something I think Philip
              > K. Dick saw.
              >
              > BTW, "Radi Free Albemuth" is like a parallel gospel to "Valis". Is valis
              > anagramic for Salvi?
              >

              morph's post seemed pretty gnostic to me, since it dealt with oppressive
              powers on our Earth which try to stifle the freedom of people and keep
              them asleep and unconscious (maybe if he had thrown in the word Demiurge a
              few times it would be properly gnostified? :)

              the last few days i've been reading Philip K. Dick's "The Divine
              Invasion" which is part two of the trilogy that started with "VALIS" and
              ends with "The Transmigration of Timothy Archer". after spending the last
              month reading through more or less stale and boring works like Hans Jonas'
              "The Gnostic Religion" this book shows a more exciting, interesting, and
              living form of gnostic worldview to me. without having read the standard
              works on gnosticism, i might have missed a lot of themes in PKD, so it was
              beneficial. the best part, so far, is how he updated many symbols, or
              created his own, which are still connected to the symbols of classical
              gnosticism. one example is how the "exiles" from the planet Earth live in
              isolated domes on the surface of a dead planet called CY30, where other
              humans do live, but they are so cut off and it is such a hassle to
              interact with another. the themes of isolation and alienation are there,
              but in sci-fi context instead of spirit-soul-body imagery. the Demiurge in
              his story seems to be a combination of the Catholic-Islamic Church and the
              Communist Party, rather than some Yahwehmonster. i'm not finished with the
              book yet, so my comments are premature, but i do recommend this to anyone
              who wants to see a more modern gnostic writing.

              john.
            • regeneratia
              Cari, How are you? As always, I am amazed at your knowledge base. I have been brainstorming on gnosticism in real life. I have not been on the boards much. It
              Message 6 of 15 , Jul 11 5:44 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                Cari,

                How are you?
                As always, I am amazed at your knowledge base.
                I have been brainstorming on gnosticism in real life. I have not
                been on the boards much.
                It is good to see you here. Keep up the good light.

                I believe that the beloveddisciple.org will help in your discussion.

                regeneratia


                --- In gnosticism2@y..., lady_caritas <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                > --- In gnosticism2@y..., coolas25 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                > > Where it is documented that the Church claims Peter to be
                > the "first
                > > witness," thus this being why he is successor? I guess I just
                want
                > > to see it for myself since I've been told so many times that
                Mary
                > > Magdaline is the first witness througout my life. I appreciate
                all
                > > the information everyones been giving. Thank you :)
                > >
                > > Colleen
                >
                >
                > Hi, Colleen,
                >
                > Click on
                > http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
                >
                > Then scroll down to "The Risen Lord confirms Peter's
                precedence":
                >
                > "To him alone of the Apostles did Christ appear on the first day
                > after the Resurrection (Luke, xxiv, 34; I Cor., xv, 5)."
                >
                > Note the scriptural references. But also note, as I mentioned
                > before, that according to Catholics, Mary Magdalene was only
                > considered to be an "apostle to the apostles." So, she wasn't
                in the
                > running for leadership, even though no one will dispute that
                fact
                > that she is cited elsewhere in the Bible as being the first one to
                > witness the resurrection.
                >
                > Anyway, this seems to be the "official" Catholic view.
                >
                > Cari
              • lady_caritas
                ... regeneratia, I m just fine, thank you. What a delight to see you! And how are you? I know you re a busy mom (love the recent pic), but I hope you find
                Message 7 of 15 , Jul 11 9:49 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In gnosticism2@y..., regeneratia <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                  > Cari,
                  >
                  > How are you?
                  > As always, I am amazed at your knowledge base.
                  > I have been brainstorming on gnosticism in real life. I have not
                  > been on the boards much.
                  > It is good to see you here. Keep up the good light.
                  >
                  > I believe that the beloveddisciple.org will help in your discussion.
                  >
                  > regeneratia
                  >

                  regeneratia, I'm just fine, thank you. What a delight to see you!
                  And how are you? I know you're a busy mom (love the recent pic), but
                  I hope you find time to post some more over here.

                  Also, thanks for the link. You reminded me of another site (where
                  that article is also located) that might interest Colleen regarding
                  Mary Magdalene ~
                  http://magdalene.org/

                  Cari
                • ernststrohregenmantelrad
                  Dear Morphodyte. I really commend you on your knowledge on the subject. I really apreciate your input. a few comments on your post and perhaps you or others
                  Message 8 of 15 , Jul 12 4:03 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Morphodyte. I really commend you on your knowledge on the
                    subject. I really apreciate your input.

                    a few comments on your post and perhaps you or others could comment
                    back on mine.


                    > If we look at the papacy and epicopate of the Church hierarchy
                    > we see that they were organized as a part of the Imperial
                    > bureaucracy, just as was the military and the Imperium. In fact
                    > the bureaucratic divide of Rome into East and West suggests a
                    > decentralization of power in late antiquity to make the vast
                    > Empire more manageable.
                    >

                    On the side note to this the line that separates the East and West
                    Empire is STILL there. If you notice the western side is Roman
                    Catholism and the the eastern side is Orthodox. This in turn affected
                    the form of writing as well as the West uses the Latin alpahbet and
                    the East (with the exception of Rumania and Albenia) uses Cyrillic
                    alphabet. One clear example of this is seen in the fomar Yugoslavia
                    where the line between the west and the east cuts right through the
                    middle. Serbs and Croats are basically same language meaning they are
                    basically same people. In fact the language is termed Serbo-Croatian.
                    What is the difference is that Serbs are Orthodox and uses Cyrillic
                    alphabet whereas Croats are Roman Catholic and uses Latin alphabet.
                    and now they hate each other. But that is well known. but there is
                    more on this line that divids the East and the West. As you know the
                    Roman Empire included Africa and that line is also visible. However,
                    it is not clearly distingishable unless you know something about
                    Arabic dialects. Arabic dialects could be divided into East and West
                    too and percise there that line falls in somewhere west of Eygypt. For
                    the dialects of Maghreb and that of Egypt and vastly different. Ok I
                    guess I ventured into off topic here.


                    > These aspects of the Empire functioned so well that when the
                    > Vandals sacked Rome, the religious arm of the Imperial
                    > government was able to survive and establish itself by the time
                    > of Charlemagne as a power functioning independently of the
                    > Constantinople government and its diaconate.
                    >
                    > This Roman Church, functioning as the last vestige of Roman
                    > imperial rule sought to establish new Roman authorities through
                    > Charlemagne and the Germanic kings of Vienna - with some
                    > limited success, but the Imperial function was never able to
                    > emerge from the feudal syatem imposed by the Goths and
                    > franks.
                    >

                    Funny, you brought in goths and vandals. aren't they adhered to
                    Arianism form of Christianity at first? Can we make some connection here?

                    > Nevertheless, Rome really never did die, and was in fact still
                    > powerful as a religious government until the time of the
                    > Reformation when it lost control of most of Germany as well as
                    > England. the next blow was the French Revolution and the loss
                    > of political power in France.
                    >


                    Those god damned revolutionaries!But in case of Germany I think thing
                    went peachy after the Bismarck's Kulturekampf. I think they made the
                    deal. As for England all is lost after the Jocabite Rebellion and they
                    still hate Cromwell. But then England is not a major power anymore so
                    who care's now?


                    > You did mention Opus Dei and it is a well known secret that
                    > Cardinal Walensa was placed in the Papcy through the efforts
                    > and support of Opus Dei, and it is this Pope who was the moral
                    > force through the Solidarity movement which brough down Soviet
                    > Union.
                    >

                    Ooooh now you are getting into to the meat of it. I would like to
                    mention them in relation to the Vatican bank scandal (money laudrying
                    with Italian and american mafias) and a bogus masonic lodge P-2 which
                    have great deal to do with the death of JP I (which became a sub-plot
                    for the movie "Godfather III") and shooting of the current Pope.

                    > The Church continues to expand its base in Latin America, the
                    > Phillipines and in Africa - Opus Dei waiting in the wings.

                    Yes, indeed but too but mother Theresa, the propagandaist for them
                    died. Who would they turn to now?
                    >

                    > But Church aside - the United States is a reformulation of the
                    > Republican ideals of Rome; the legal and military systems are
                    > based on Roman models - the legislature owes much of its
                    > origins to Roman predecessors.
                    >
                    And one more thing is the use of monetary system which is quiet liken
                    to that of Rome.

                    > Right now American republicanism (the USA is not a true
                    > democracy, contrary to popular belief) is threatened by the
                    > increasing powers of the Executive and its support from
                    > Christian extremists - much the same as in late antiquity.
                    >
                    It is disturbing that these people coupled with extreme zionists and
                    Islamists (Wahabism-Islamo-fascists) are getting control.


                    > However, the system does have protections built in having
                    > installed a judiciary which acts independently - to a degree - of
                    > the Executive,
                    >to wit we have had some rather conroversial
                    > rulings like the recent one on the Plejaliejuntz.
                    >
                    but thanks to the 9-11 Reichtag incidents the rights are slowly
                    striping away for the reason of National Security. So we must get
                    these terrorists, right? Like in rome we must protect from German
                    barbarians. but you know I think these barberians and roman officials
                    knew each other. hhhmmm I wonder bin Ladin and Bush .....

                    > States also still exert some degree of autonomy, albeit much of
                    > that was dismantled by the despot Abraham Lincoln - yes I know
                    > he is a favorite for abolishing slavery, but his war against the
                    > South was disatrous and dismantled the federal rights of States.
                    > I suppose he was a Julius Caesar, we are simply awaiting our
                    > Constantine - perhaps he is already here.
                    >

                    Hey, Lincoln didn't care for black slaves. His plan was to send them
                    all back to Africa. (Like Liberia which is what that nation was
                    created) And right it was the state rights that was lost in the
                    American Civil War. Too bad the issue that used in the state rights
                    was slavery which had moral consequeces. I think we could again insert
                    the state's rights this time by bringing up the medical marijana.


                    But the next Constantine well.... After Nero that is Shrub, I think it
                    could Hirary Rodem Clinton. So it could be she.
                  • ernststrohregenmantelrad
                    ... Demiurge a ... yeah, so in sum the more you know about these things. Everything you know is wrong like AIDS then you start to wonder. Who won the WWII.
                    Message 9 of 15 , Jul 12 4:07 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > morph's post seemed pretty gnostic to me, since it dealt with oppressive
                      > powers on our Earth which try to stifle the freedom of people and keep
                      > them asleep and unconscious (maybe if he had thrown in the word
                      Demiurge a
                      > few times it would be properly gnostified? :)
                      >


                      yeah, so in sum the more you know about these things. Everything you
                      know is wrong like AIDS then you start to wonder.

                      Who won the WWII. That's right Nazis

                      Those things won me over to the Gnostic view.
                    • morphodyte
                      ... the ... Thank you Ernst, I also found a great deal interesting in your response. ( ...) ... suggests a ... West ... affected ... and ... Cyrillic ... Yes
                      Message 10 of 15 , Jul 13 7:20 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In gnosticism2@y..., ernststrohregenmantelrad
                        <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                        > Dear Morphodyte. I really commend you on your knowledge on
                        the
                        > subject. I really apreciate your input.
                        >

                        Thank you Ernst, I also found a great deal interesting in your
                        response.
                        ( ...)

                        > > the bureaucratic divide of Rome into East and West
                        suggests a
                        > > decentralization of power in late antiquity to make the vast
                        > > Empire more manageable.
                        > >
                        >
                        > On the side note to this the line that separates the East and
                        West
                        > Empire is STILL there. If you notice the western side is Roman
                        > Catholism and the the eastern side is Orthodox. This in turn
                        affected
                        > the form of writing as well as the West uses the Latin alpahbet
                        and
                        > the East (with the exception of Rumania and Albenia) uses
                        Cyrillic
                        > alphabet.

                        Yes the ancient hatreds with the Serbs and Croats reflect the
                        divide and animus between the Greek and Roma episcopate
                        after the decision of Rome to centralize all authority at the
                        Vatican. Given the recent wars started in Balkans, it is plain to
                        see that the ancient Roman interests STILL play out in our day -

                        Ernst is correct in saying that Rome never died -

                        and Philip K. Dick also wrote to the same effect in Radio Free
                        Albemuth when he also drew the parallel to the US and Soviet
                        Union dividing up the world between East and West like Rome
                        and Constantinople.

                        > Roman Empire included Africa and that line is also visible.
                        However,
                        > it is not clearly distingishable unless you know something
                        about
                        > Arabic dialects. Arabic dialects could be divided into East and
                        West
                        > too and percise there that line falls in somewhere west of
                        Eygypt. For
                        > the dialects of Maghreb and that of Egypt and vastly different.
                        Ok I
                        > guess I ventured into off topic here.
                        >

                        Actually this is interesting and may also be reflected in the types
                        of historical development we see in Islamic thought; just to
                        speculate, we see the establishment of the Umayyad califat in
                        Cordova and the Abbasid Baghdad califat in Babylon, again an
                        East-West divide with the dicision falling somewhere along
                        Tunis, until the formation of the Fatimid Califat for a period of two
                        hundred years, and the foundation of Cairo.

                        Similarly, the Califat in the Maghrib fell to the descendants of
                        those same Goths, Vandals and Sueves that formerly drove out
                        Rome. Like late Rome, the Califat of Cordova collapsed
                        because of internal rivalries, fundamentalist religious
                        movements ( Almohads and Murabitun) and disunited armies.

                        The Fatimid califat, a resurgence of Ptolemaic Egypt, along with
                        a variant form of Islam - Fatimid Ismailism and its neoplatonic
                        and Alexandrian influences.

                        >
                        > > These aspects of the Empire functioned so well that when
                        the
                        > > Vandals sacked Rome, the religious arm of the Imperial
                        > > government was able to survive and establish itself by the
                        time
                        > > of Charlemagne as a power functioning independently of the
                        > > Constantinople government and its diaconate.

                        And when Constantinople fell to the Turks, the Sultans only had
                        to step into a bureaucracy that continued to function and serve
                        the new Emperors, the Sultans who managed an empire which
                        conformed more of less to old Byzantium.

                        > Funny, you brought in goths and vandals. aren't they adhered to
                        > Arianism form of Christianity at first? Can we make some
                        connection here?
                        >

                        I have often wondered if the collapse of the West was due to
                        some resentment or rebellion among the Visigothic
                        commanders of Spain who continued to practice their Arian
                        religion and resented the imposition of Trinity by Nicea.

                        Also, Priscillianus of Avila was the first bishop of record
                        executed for heresy. It is rumored that his remains are those in
                        the pilgrimage spot of Santiago Camposella, not St. James.

                        > > England. the next blow was the French Revolution and the
                        loss
                        > > of political power in France.

                        (>>>)
                        (>>>)
                        > Ooooh now you are getting into to the meat of it. I would like to
                        > mention them in relation to the Vatican bank scandal (money
                        laudrying
                        > with Italian and american mafias) and a bogus masonic lodge
                        P-2 which
                        > have great deal to do with the death of JP I (which became a
                        sub-plot
                        > for the movie "Godfather III") and shooting of the current Pope.
                        >

                        Yes, JP-I seems to have been 'put to sleep' by those interested
                        in installing someone more attuned to regaining temporal power
                        after John XXIII managed to dismantle so much with Vatican 2.

                        > > The Church continues to expand its base in Latin America,
                        the
                        > > Phillipines and in Africa - Opus Dei waiting in the wings.
                        >
                        > Yes, indeed but too but mother Theresa, the propagandaist for
                        them
                        > died. Who would they turn to now?
                        > >

                        Actually, their current Modus Operandi is to use 'liberation
                        theology' and community intervention in the form of health clinics,
                        pharmaceuticals and hospitals and schools- for example in
                        Guatemala where the Church has managed to play Government
                        against the indigenous Maya - offering the Maya safety if they
                        practice Catholic religion rather than the ancient Maya.
                        (>>>)
                        > And one more thing is the use of monetary system which is
                        quiet liken
                        > to that of Rome.
                        >

                        The coin of Caesar, I agree very much so.

                        > > Right now American republicanism (the USA is not a true
                        > > democracy, contrary to popular belief) is threatened by the
                        > > increasing powers of the Executive and its support from
                        > > Christian extremists - much the same as in late antiquity.
                        > >
                        > It is disturbing that these people coupled with extreme zionists
                        and
                        > Islamists (Wahabism-Islamo-fascists) are getting control.
                        >

                        Fundamentalism is a curious reaction to modernity, let us not
                        forget Americans are just as violently fundamentalist over two
                        main issues;

                        abortion

                        teaching evolution in schools.

                        These two issues alone have given what would otherwise be
                        regarded as backwater hicks a major control of American
                        politics.

                        recent comments by Southern baptist leadership calling
                        Muhammad a demonic pedophile bode ill for the couse of
                        American destiny; perhaps we will again see witch burnings if
                        these rabid bigots are not reigned in.

                        (>>>>)
                        > but thanks to the 9-11 Reichtag incidents the rights are slowly
                        > striping away for the reason of National Security. So we must
                        get
                        > these terrorists, right?

                        Like the Reichstag, the 9-11 has given the Brown Shirts in
                        American politics the rule of the day - anyone suspected of
                        'terrorism' can now be hauled off to tribunal without legal counsel
                        or due process - the "terrorists" have succeeded in ways most
                        Americans do not suspect; they have gotten us to destroy our
                        own freedoms. Now police, having been made into heroes by
                        sacrificing bodies at the Altar of 1 and 2 World Trade Center act
                        with impunity to beat up and harrass not "terrorists" but blacks,
                        hispanics, and people middle eastern descent - anyone with a
                        brown skin, because the now common perception is that they
                        are all heroes.

                        Homeland Security - Fatherland the resemblances are all to
                        scary.

                        >Like in rome we must protect from German
                        > barbarians. but you know I think these barberians and roman
                        officials
                        > knew each other. hhhmmm I wonder bin Ladin and Bush .....
                        >

                        yes, the Goth armies were in the employ of Rome, they grew the
                        wheat for Roman bread on the banks of Guadalquivir, citrus from
                        Valencia, wine from Seville, olive oil - hmmm. Now we get
                        petroleum oil from the very enemies we would protect our
                        empire from.
                        (>>>>)
                        > Hey, Lincoln didn't care for black slaves. His plan was to send
                        them
                        > all back to Africa. (Like Liberia which is what that nation was
                        > created) And right it was the state rights that was lost in the
                        > American Civil War.

                        Agreed, the emancipation was aimed only at the dismantling of
                        Southern agriculture and economy to favor polictical and
                        economic control by the industrialized North - get the black to
                        migrate North to work for low wage in the textile factories .

                        Too bad the issue that used in the state rights
                        > was slavery which had moral consequeces. I think we could
                        again insert
                        > the state's rights this time by bringing up the medical marijana.
                        >

                        The predecessor in the "War on Terror", the "War on Drugs" - say
                        goodbye to amendments 4, 5, 9, to protect us from the demon
                        weed and wage undeclared war on villagers in Mexico and the
                        Andes. The war on Drugs sets a bad precedent for the War on
                        Terror since they are both unspecified and undefined enemies;
                        no clear objectives or outcomes and terrorism like drug is a
                        matter of definition, someday refusing to say Pledge Allegiance
                        could get suspect of terrorist sympathy and jail - we live in
                        Orwellian times.

                        Terrorist, like Christian in the Colusseum - anyone suspected
                        can be fed to Lions, or in this case, the Police. Quickly our
                        country has forgotten the lessons of McCarthy era where anyone
                        could be suspect of Communism - and like a witch, only took the
                        suspicion to be accused and convicted.

                        The value of Gnosticism in our times cannot be understated
                        because it is of course a message of Freedom, not dogma or
                        doctrine nor Law nor State. The times we live in are an echo of
                        our ancestors, the Rome that never died.

                        Morph
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.