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

Arianism

Expand Messages
  • Mikael Bynke
    ... Surely the Gothic church was known as Arian! After all arianism derives its name from Arius... Lets also not forget that in the time of Wulfila, there were
    Message 1 of 28 , Jun 8, 2003
      > Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 21:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
      > From: greg scaff <g_scaff@...>
      >Subject: (unknown)
      >
      >Hails,
      > Does anyone know, or have any idea, of what Goths may have called the
      >Arian and Orthodox churches? Besides "Us" and "Them", I mean. Surely the
      >Gothic church wasn't called "Arian' in ancient times? Or was it?
      >Thank you all for your input,
      >Graig

      Surely the Gothic church was known as Arian! After all arianism derives its
      name from Arius... Lets also not forget that in the time of Wulfila, there
      were three different christian movements (Catholicism, Arianism and Audianism)
      across the Danube, and that was even before the majority of the goths were
      christian. From early on even the common Goth must have known that there
      were many variteties of christianity, and also which of them he was converted
      to.

      /Mikael Bynke

      _______________________________________________________
      Sök företag på Gula Sidorna
      http://www.gulasidorna.se
    • faltin2001
      ... called the ... Surely the ... derives its ... Wulfila, there ... Audianism) ... goths were ... there ... converted ... I think it is not quite right to
      Message 2 of 28 , Jun 26, 2003
        --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Mikael Bynke" <adragoor@p...> wrote:
        > > Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 21:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
        > > From: greg scaff <g_scaff@y...>
        > >Subject: (unknown)
        > >
        > >Hails,
        > > Does anyone know, or have any idea, of what Goths may have
        called the
        > >Arian and Orthodox churches? Besides "Us" and "Them", I mean.
        Surely the
        > >Gothic church wasn't called "Arian' in ancient times? Or was it?
        > >Thank you all for your input,
        > >Graig
        >
        > Surely the Gothic church was known as Arian! After all arianism
        derives its
        > name from Arius... Lets also not forget that in the time of
        Wulfila, there
        > were three different christian movements (Catholicism, Arianism and
        Audianism)
        > across the Danube, and that was even before the majority of the
        goths were
        > christian. From early on even the common Goth must have known that
        there
        > were many variteties of christianity, and also which of them he was
        converted
        > to.
        >
        > /Mikael Bynke
        >


        I think it is not quite right to speak of a 'Gothic church'. The
        Arian church, which as Mikael rightly said derives its name from the
        Roman bishop Arius, was also a Roman church. I am not sure if the
        contemporaries would have really used the term Arian though. Both
        churches regarded themselves as 'the one and true church' of course.
        The Arian church is also known by the name homophysitic church if I
        remember correctly. In general, the real difference between Arianism
        and Catholoicism is marginal.

        Dirk
      • Tore Gannholm
        ... During the 4th century there were big fights between the Arian and the Ortodox churches (The Catholic line I think came later) During some time the Arian
        Message 3 of 28 , Jun 26, 2003
          >unknown)
          > > >
          >> >Hails,
          >> > Does anyone know, or have any idea, of what Goths may have
          >called the
          >> >Arian and Orthodox churches? Besides "Us" and "Them", I mean.
          >Surely the
          >> >Gothic church wasn't called "Arian' in ancient times? Or was it?
          >> >Thank you all for your input,
          >> >Graig
          >>
          >> Surely the Gothic church was known as Arian! After all arianism
          >derives its
          >> name from Arius... Lets also not forget that in the time of
          >Wulfila, there
          >> were three different christian movements (Catholicism, Arianism and
          >Audianism)
          >> across the Danube, and that was even before the majority of the
          >goths were
          >> christian. From early on even the common Goth must have known that
          >there
          >> were many variteties of christianity, and also which of them he was
          >converted
          >> to.
          >>
          >> /Mikael Bynke
          >>
          >
          >
          >I think it is not quite right to speak of a 'Gothic church'. The
          >Arian church, which as Mikael rightly said derives its name from the
          >Roman bishop Arius, was also a Roman church. I am not sure if the
          >contemporaries would have really used the term Arian though. Both
          >churches regarded themselves as 'the one and true church' of course.
          >The Arian church is also known by the name homophysitic church if I
          >remember correctly. In general, the real difference between Arianism
          >and Catholoicism is marginal.
          >
          >Dirk
          >


          During the 4th century there were big fights between the Arian and
          the Ortodox churches (The Catholic line I think came later)

          During some time the Arian line was the official Roman line.

          The difference was documented in the Church meeting in Nicea 325

          Tore
          --
        • faltin2001
          ... it? ... and ... that ... was ... the ... course. ... Arianism ... Catholic and Orthodox are in this period one and the same thing. The schism between
          Message 4 of 28 , Jun 26, 2003
            --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...>
            wrote:
            > >unknown)
            > > > >
            > >> >Hails,
            > >> > Does anyone know, or have any idea, of what Goths may have
            > >called the
            > >> >Arian and Orthodox churches? Besides "Us" and "Them", I mean.
            > >Surely the
            > >> >Gothic church wasn't called "Arian' in ancient times? Or was
            it?
            > >> >Thank you all for your input,
            > >> >Graig
            > >>
            > >> Surely the Gothic church was known as Arian! After all arianism
            > >derives its
            > >> name from Arius... Lets also not forget that in the time of
            > >Wulfila, there
            > >> were three different christian movements (Catholicism, Arianism
            and
            > >Audianism)
            > >> across the Danube, and that was even before the majority of the
            > >goths were
            > >> christian. From early on even the common Goth must have known
            that
            > >there
            > >> were many variteties of christianity, and also which of them he
            was
            > >converted
            > >> to.
            > >>
            > >> /Mikael Bynke
            > >>
            > >
            > >
            > >I think it is not quite right to speak of a 'Gothic church'. The
            > >Arian church, which as Mikael rightly said derives its name from
            the
            > >Roman bishop Arius, was also a Roman church. I am not sure if the
            > >contemporaries would have really used the term Arian though. Both
            > >churches regarded themselves as 'the one and true church' of
            course.
            > >The Arian church is also known by the name homophysitic church if I
            > >remember correctly. In general, the real difference between
            Arianism
            > >and Catholoicism is marginal.
            > >
            > >Dirk
            > >
            >
            >
            > During the 4th century there were big fights between the Arian and
            > the Ortodox churches (The Catholic line I think came later)
            >
            > During some time the Arian line was the official Roman line.
            >
            > The difference was documented in the Church meeting in Nicea 325
            >
            > Tore
            > --


            Catholic and Orthodox are in this period one and the same thing. The
            schism between Catholicism and Orthodoxy was only in the 11th
            century. What is important to note that the practical interpretation
            of Catholicism is basically identical to Arianism. At the time of
            Nicea, the Arian faction lost itself in unimportant detail. In
            reality both groups had the same perception only they defined it
            slightly differently.

            Dirk
          • Hieromonk Maximos
            ... Ariansim was the doctrine of the presbyter Arius of Alexandria, who made the claim that Christ was a creature of God, and not the Son of God, but some sort
            Message 5 of 28 , Jun 26, 2003
              > >unknown)
              >> > >
              >>> >Hails,
              >>> > Does anyone know, or have any idea, of what Goths may have
              >>called the
              >>> >Arian and Orthodox churches? Besides "Us" and "Them", I mean.
              >>Surely the
              >>> >Gothic church wasn't called "Arian' in ancient times? Or was it?
              >>> >Thank you all for your input,
              >>> >Graig
              >>>
              >>> Surely the Gothic church was known as Arian! After all arianism
              >>derives its
              >>> name from Arius... Lets also not forget that in the time of
              >>Wulfila, there
              >>> were three different christian movements (Catholicism, Arianism and
              >>Audianism)
              >>> across the Danube, and that was even before the majority of the
              >>goths were
              >>> christian. From early on even the common Goth must have known that
              >>there
              >>> were many variteties of christianity, and also which of them he was
              >>converted
              >>> to.
              >>>
              >>> /Mikael Bynke
              >>>
              >>
              >>
              >>I think it is not quite right to speak of a 'Gothic church'. The
              >>Arian church, which as Mikael rightly said derives its name from the
              >>Roman bishop Arius, was also a Roman church. I am not sure if the
              >>contemporaries would have really used the term Arian though. Both
              >>churches regarded themselves as 'the one and true church' of course.
              >>The Arian church is also known by the name homophysitic church if I
              >>remember correctly. In general, the real difference between Arianism
              >>and Catholoicism is marginal.
              >>
              >>Dirk
              >>
              >
              >
              >During the 4th century there were big fights between the Arian and
              >the Ortodox churches (The Catholic line I think came later)
              >
              >During some time the Arian line was the official Roman line.
              >
              >The difference was documented in the Church meeting in Nicea 325
              >
              >Tore
              >--

              Ariansim was the doctrine of the presbyter Arius of Alexandria, who
              made the claim that Christ was a creature of God, and not the Son of
              God, but some sort of a super angel. The great patriarch of
              Alexandria, Athanasius rejected this doctrine and over the next 40
              years opposed it successfully. Arianism was spread to the west by
              Ulfias, who apparently did not " get the memo" that Arianism was
              declared heretical at the Council of Nicea. The simpler doctrine of
              Arianism appealed to the less sophisticated tribes of the West, who
              tended to be baffled by the Orthodox doctrine that Christ "proceedeth
              from the Father, before all Ages". Which is mystical and
              metaphysically more ungraspable.
              --

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Francisc Czobor
              Hails allaim! There is an indirect evidence that the Christian Ostrogoths claimed themselves from Arius: among the Bavarian words considered to be introduced
              Message 6 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                Hails allaim!

                There is an indirect evidence that the Christian Ostrogoths claimed
                themselves from Arius:
                among the Bavarian words considered to be introduced by the Gothic
                mission (VIth century) is: O. Bav. erintag (Mod. Bav. Ergetag,
                Erchtag, Ertag) "Tuesday" < OHG *Ariótag < Go. *Arjaus dags < Gk.
                Areo:s (he:mera) "day of Ares", reinterpreted by the Arians as "day
                of Arius" (otherwise Christians would not keep the name of a pagan
                god). The sources for the Gothic words in Bavarian I presented in my
                message to Gothic-L No. 2225 ("Gothic and Old Bavarian").

                Francisc

                GUTANI WIHAILAG
              • greg scaff
                Hails, Thank you Francisc, most helpful and informative. best, Graig Friathwa taujau, ni drauhtinassu Francisc Czobor wrote: Hails
                Message 7 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                  Hails,
                  Thank you Francisc, most helpful and informative.
                  best,
                  Graig

                  Friathwa taujau, ni drauhtinassu

                  Francisc Czobor <fericzobor@...> wrote:
                  Hails allaim!

                  There is an indirect evidence that the Christian Ostrogoths claimed
                  themselves from Arius:
                  among the Bavarian words considered to be introduced by the Gothic
                  mission (VIth century) is: O. Bav. erintag (Mod. Bav. Ergetag,
                  Erchtag, Ertag) "Tuesday" < OHG *Ari�tag < Go. *Arjaus dags < Gk.
                  Areo:s (he:mera) "day of Ares", reinterpreted by the Arians as "day
                  of Arius" (otherwise Christians would not keep the name of a pagan
                  god). The sources for the Gothic words in Bavarian I presented in my
                  message to Gothic-L No. 2225 ("Gothic and Old Bavarian").

                  Francisc

                  GUTANI WIHAILAG



                  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                  You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.

                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                  ---------------------------------
                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • greg scaff
                  Hails, Thanks again to all. To add to some of this, I have since read in Lives of the Visigothic Fathers by A.T. Fear, in a footnote on p xii, ( which refers
                  Message 8 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                    Hails,
                    Thanks again to all.
                    To add to some of this, I have since read in Lives of the Visigothic Fathers by A.T. Fear, in a footnote on p xii, ( which refers to Gregory of Tours GC 24 and John of Biclarum Chron. 58, ) that Goths-I assume Visigoths- referred to their church as the "Catholic" church, (whatever "catholic=universal was in Gothic), and the Orthodox as the "Roman" church. Christians of whatever stripe in that time , as Dirk said, were concerned to be the 'one true universal holy church", that concept was a pervasive value, so Goths were apparently in step with everyone else, as has been said.
                    I believe I referred to "the Gothic church" because I wonder about the extant of Arian unity- as in, I gather Goths seemed liberal about where they attended church, but would say, a Greek Arian have preferred to worship in a church with other Greco-Roman Arians, while thinking that "that other Arian church is just for Goths,,,", or would they have mixed in with the Goths on the basis of Arian unity? If the liturgy was spoken in Gothic,however similar it might be to Orthodox or other Arian services, non-Gothic ( or non-Germanic) Arians might have felt out of place, and gone elsewhere My famialiarity with modern Christians makes me ponder along these lines.
                    cheers and thanks,
                    Graig

                    Friathwa taujau, ni drauhtinassu

                    faltin2001 <dirk@...> wrote:
                    --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...>
                    wrote:
                    > >unknown)
                    > > > >
                    > >> >Hails,
                    > >> > Does anyone know, or have any idea, of what Goths may have
                    > >called the
                    > >> >Arian and Orthodox churches? Besides "Us" and "Them", I mean.
                    > >Surely the
                    > >> >Gothic church wasn't called "Arian' in ancient times? Or was
                    it?
                    > >> >Thank you all for your input,
                    > >> >Graig
                    > >>
                    > >> Surely the Gothic church was known as Arian! After all arianism
                    > >derives its
                    > >> name from Arius... Lets also not forget that in the time of
                    > >Wulfila, there
                    > >> were three different christian movements (Catholicism, Arianism
                    and
                    > >Audianism)
                    > >> across the Danube, and that was even before the majority of the
                    > >goths were
                    > >> christian. From early on even the common Goth must have known
                    that
                    > >there
                    > >> were many variteties of christianity, and also which of them he
                    was
                    > >converted
                    > >> to.
                    > >>
                    > >> /Mikael Bynke
                    > >>
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >I think it is not quite right to speak of a 'Gothic church'. The
                    > >Arian church, which as Mikael rightly said derives its name from
                    the
                    > >Roman bishop Arius, was also a Roman church. I am not sure if the
                    > >contemporaries would have really used the term Arian though. Both
                    > >churches regarded themselves as 'the one and true church' of
                    course.
                    > >The Arian church is also known by the name homophysitic church if I
                    > >remember correctly. In general, the real difference between
                    Arianism
                    > >and Catholoicism is marginal.
                    > >
                    > >Dirk
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    > During the 4th century there were big fights between the Arian and
                    > the Ortodox churches (The Catholic line I think came later)
                    >
                    > During some time the Arian line was the official Roman line.
                    >
                    > The difference was documented in the Church meeting in Nicea 325
                    >
                    > Tore
                    > --


                    Catholic and Orthodox are in this period one and the same thing. The
                    schism between Catholicism and Orthodoxy was only in the 11th
                    century. What is important to note that the practical interpretation
                    of Catholicism is basically identical to Arianism. At the time of
                    Nicea, the Arian faction lost itself in unimportant detail. In
                    reality both groups had the same perception only they defined it
                    slightly differently.

                    Dirk








                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                    You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.

                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                    ---------------------------------
                    Do you Yahoo!?
                    SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Ingemar Nordgren
                    ... Fathers by A.T. Fear, in a footnote on p xii, ( which refers to Gregory of Tours GC 24 and John of Biclarum Chron. 58, ) that Goths-I assume Visigoths-
                    Message 9 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                      --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, greg scaff <g_scaff@y...> wrote:
                      > Hails,
                      > Thanks again to all.
                      > To add to some of this, I have since read in Lives of the Visigothic
                      Fathers by A.T. Fear, in a footnote on p xii, ( which refers to
                      Gregory of Tours GC 24 and John of Biclarum Chron. 58, ) that
                      Goths-I assume Visigoths- referred to their church as the "Catholic"
                      church, (whatever "catholic=universal was in Gothic), and the
                      Orthodox as the "Roman" church. Christians of whatever stripe in that
                      time , as Dirk said, were concerned to be the 'one true universal holy
                      church", that concept was a pervasive value, so Goths were
                      apparently in step with everyone else, as has been said.


                      Hi Greg,

                      I am not sure those references are universally adaptable. The
                      Visigoths were Arian till the conversion of Reccared in 586 only, and
                      then they turned Roman Catholic. When Gregory refers to the Catholic
                      Church you must consider he became bishop of Tours in the Frankish
                      realm 573 and not all Visigoths were Arian even before 586, not even
                      all bishops, specially not one who became a Frankish bishop. He was a
                      power-keeper closely related to the Merovingian kings who were
                      Catholic. Hence his statement does not inform of what the confessing
                      Arians called their church because he most surely refers to the
                      church that he and the Catholics regarded as theirs. The so called
                      Catholic church of Teodosius was but a joke and in reality it was
                      divided in a Greek/Eastern part and a Western more loyal to the pope
                      and supported by the Franks. The final break when you get an Ortodox
                      and a Roman Catholic church is not until 1054 through the
                      filioque-question, that already after the council in Constantinople in
                      386 was rejected by the pope and his followers, but cheerished in the
                      Eastern church as the most important part of the decision of the
                      council. Besides in the Eastern half there was a fight between the
                      followers of Nicea centered in Alexandria and the disguised,
                      forbidden Arians in Antiocia. The fight was disguised as concerning
                      the Teotokos - the God Mother. Hence the Arians could only appear
                      openly in the Germanic states but many Eastern/Romans in the eastern
                      part of the so called Catholic church in reality stayed Arians quite
                      long.The differences may be small to Dirk but they indeed were
                      impressively great for the confesssors and even now there is a great
                      difference between claiming that God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost were
                      all equal/of the same matter and gods, Jesus was supposed to have been
                      the first created entity having existed all the time in the decision
                      of 386. This all was by the Arians understood as polyteism. The Arian
                      original wiew was that Jesus was born human and through a holy life
                      was accepted in heaven and hence became Christ but later compromises
                      did water it out quite much but in the end they claimed that
                      Christ/Jesus was the son and not the father, who was the only real god
                      commanding over the son and the son over the spirit.Nota bene that the
                      son still was born human and had become divine (exactly as the
                      Antiocens claimed) before the last compromise in 386 which Wulfila
                      never accepted. It means monoteism. I am accordingly quite convinced
                      they did not use the term Catholic in the Arian church since this was
                      the forced and divided construction of Teodosius.Maybe I am wrong and
                      so I am convinced I will be told so with good references which is
                      allways a way of learning something new.

                      Best regards
                      Ingemar
                    • AElfric and Ursula
                      Hails Ingemar! ... Leovigild referred to Arianism as our Catholic faith : King Leovigild assembled a synod of bishops of the Arian sect in the city of Toledo
                      Message 10 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                        Hails Ingemar!

                        >I am accordingly quite convinced
                        >they did not use the term Catholic in the Arian church since this was
                        >the forced and divided construction of Teodosius.Maybe I am wrong and
                        >so I am convinced I will be told so with good references which is
                        >allways a way of learning something new.


                        Leovigild referred to Arianism as "our Catholic faith": "King Leovigild
                        assembled a synod of bishops of the Arian sect in the city of Toledo and
                        amended the ancient heresy with a new error, saying, 'those coming from the
                        Roman religion to our Catholic faith ought not to be baptized...'" Kenneth
                        Baxter Wolf, _Conquerors and Chroniclers of Early Medieval Spain_ Liverpool
                        Press, 1990, pg 58.

                        Albareiks
                      • Le Bateman
                        The term catholic with a small c means universal church, but the term with C means Roman Catholic. They may have used the reference with a small c, but not
                        Message 11 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                          The term catholic with a small c means universal church, but the term with
                          C means Roman Catholic. They may have used the reference with a small c, but
                          not with capital. In the Apostles Creed used by the Methodist Church the
                          holy catholic church means universal. I do not have the creed used by
                          Arianism wish I did so I could compare the two. But if Arianism did not
                          believe in the Triune God it would do me no good to compare the two.
                          Le
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: "AElfric and Ursula" <amali@...>
                          To: <gothic-l@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:19 PM
                          Subject: Re: [gothic-l] Re: Arianism


                          Hails Ingemar!

                          >I am accordingly quite convinced
                          >they did not use the term Catholic in the Arian church since this was
                          >the forced and divided construction of Teodosius.Maybe I am wrong and
                          >so I am convinced I will be told so with good references which is
                          >allways a way of learning something new.


                          Leovigild referred to Arianism as "our Catholic faith": "King Leovigild
                          assembled a synod of bishops of the Arian sect in the city of Toledo and
                          amended the ancient heresy with a new error, saying, 'those coming from the
                          Roman religion to our Catholic faith ought not to be baptized...'" Kenneth
                          Baxter Wolf, _Conquerors and Chroniclers of Early Medieval Spain_ Liverpool
                          Press, 1990, pg 58.

                          Albareiks




                          You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
                          to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.

                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        • Le Bateman
                          Was this faith influenced by Gnosticism. Would the Jehovah s Witnesses by a Modern day form of Arianism. They view Jesus Christ as a lesser being. Le ...
                          Message 12 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                            Was this faith influenced by Gnosticism. Would the Jehovah's Witnesses by a
                            Modern day form of Arianism. They view Jesus Christ as a lesser being.
                            Le

                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: "Le Bateman" <LeBateman@...>
                            To: <gothic-l@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:19 PM
                            Subject: Re: [gothic-l] Re: Arianism


                            The term catholic with a small c means universal church, but the term with
                            C means Roman Catholic. They may have used the reference with a small c, but
                            not with capital. In the Apostles Creed used by the Methodist Church the
                            holy catholic church means universal. I do not have the creed used by
                            Arianism wish I did so I could compare the two. But if Arianism did not
                            believe in the Triune God it would do me no good to compare the two.
                            Le
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: "AElfric and Ursula" <amali@...>
                            To: <gothic-l@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:19 PM
                            Subject: Re: [gothic-l] Re: Arianism


                            Hails Ingemar!

                            >I am accordingly quite convinced
                            >they did not use the term Catholic in the Arian church since this was
                            >the forced and divided construction of Teodosius.Maybe I am wrong and
                            >so I am convinced I will be told so with good references which is
                            >allways a way of learning something new.


                            Leovigild referred to Arianism as "our Catholic faith": "King Leovigild
                            assembled a synod of bishops of the Arian sect in the city of Toledo and
                            amended the ancient heresy with a new error, saying, 'those coming from the
                            Roman religion to our Catholic faith ought not to be baptized...'" Kenneth
                            Baxter Wolf, _Conquerors and Chroniclers of Early Medieval Spain_ Liverpool
                            Press, 1990, pg 58.

                            Albareiks




                            You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
                            to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.

                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






                            You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email
                            to <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.

                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          • Le Bateman
                            Was this faith influenced by Gnosticism. Would the Jehovah s Witnesses be a Modern day form of Arianism. They view Jesus Christ as a lesser being. Le
                            Message 13 of 28 , Jun 27, 2003
                              Was this faith influenced by Gnosticism. Would the Jehovah's Witnesses be a
                              Modern day form of Arianism. They view Jesus Christ as a lesser being.
                              Le
                            • Ingemar Nordgren
                              Hi Albareiks and Le, Thank you Alabreiks for the reference. And thanks Le for the pointing out of small and capital letters. I was totally unaware of that.
                              Message 14 of 28 , Jun 28, 2003
                                Hi Albareiks and Le,

                                Thank you Alabreiks for the reference. And thanks Le for the pointing
                                out of small and capital letters. I was totally unaware of that. Hence
                                it is important to know if the reference of Albareiks used small or
                                great letters.

                                Best
                                Ingemar


                                > Leovigild referred to Arianism as "our Catholic faith": "King Leovigild
                                > assembled a synod of bishops of the Arian sect in the city of Toledo and
                                > amended the ancient heresy with a new error, saying, 'those coming from the
                                > Roman religion to our Catholic faith ought not to be baptized...'" Kenneth
                                > Baxter Wolf, _Conquerors and Chroniclers of Early Medieval Spain_ Liverpool
                                > Press, 1990, pg 58.
                                >
                                > Albareiks

                                > The term catholic with a small c means universal church, but the term with
                                > C means Roman Catholic. They may have used the reference with a small c, but
                                > not with capital. In the Apostles Creed used by the Methodist Church the
                                > holy catholic church means universal. I do not have the creed used by
                                > Arianism wish I did so I could compare the two. But if Arianism did not
                                > believe in the Triune God it would do me no good to compare the two.
                                > Le
                              • Ingemar Nordgren
                                Hi Le, Yes in that special sense you could indeed do that, but they have gone a step further not even celebrating Christmas which the Arians did. Best Ingemar
                                Message 15 of 28 , Jun 28, 2003
                                  Hi Le,

                                  Yes in that special sense you could indeed do that, but they have gone a
                                  step further not even celebrating Christmas which the Arians did.

                                  Best
                                  Ingemar



                                  > Message: 15
                                  > Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 23:51:54 -0500
                                  > From: "Le Bateman" <LeBateman@...>
                                  > Subject: Re: Re: Arianism
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Was this faith influenced by Gnosticism. Would the Jehovah's Witnesses be a
                                  > Modern day form of Arianism. They view Jesus Christ as a lesser being.
                                  > Le
                                • faltin2001
                                  ... Visigothic ... that ... holy ... and ... a ... confessing ... in ... the ... been ... decision ... Hi Ingemar, this is a slight misunderstanding. Clearly,
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Jun 29, 2003
                                    --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Ingemar Nordgren" <ingemar@n...>
                                    wrote:
                                    > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, greg scaff <g_scaff@y...> wrote:
                                    > > Hails,
                                    > > Thanks again to all.
                                    > > To add to some of this, I have since read in Lives of the
                                    Visigothic
                                    > Fathers by A.T. Fear, in a footnote on p xii, ( which refers to
                                    > Gregory of Tours GC 24 and John of Biclarum Chron. 58, ) that
                                    > Goths-I assume Visigoths- referred to their church as the "Catholic"
                                    > church, (whatever "catholic=universal was in Gothic), and the
                                    > Orthodox as the "Roman" church. Christians of whatever stripe in
                                    that
                                    > time , as Dirk said, were concerned to be the 'one true universal
                                    holy
                                    > church", that concept was a pervasive value, so Goths were
                                    > apparently in step with everyone else, as has been said.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Hi Greg,
                                    >
                                    > I am not sure those references are universally adaptable. The
                                    > Visigoths were Arian till the conversion of Reccared in 586 only,
                                    and
                                    > then they turned Roman Catholic. When Gregory refers to the Catholic
                                    > Church you must consider he became bishop of Tours in the Frankish
                                    > realm 573 and not all Visigoths were Arian even before 586, not even
                                    > all bishops, specially not one who became a Frankish bishop. He was
                                    a
                                    > power-keeper closely related to the Merovingian kings who were
                                    > Catholic. Hence his statement does not inform of what the
                                    confessing
                                    > Arians called their church because he most surely refers to the
                                    > church that he and the Catholics regarded as theirs. The so called
                                    > Catholic church of Teodosius was but a joke and in reality it was
                                    > divided in a Greek/Eastern part and a Western more loyal to the pope
                                    > and supported by the Franks. The final break when you get an Ortodox
                                    > and a Roman Catholic church is not until 1054 through the
                                    > filioque-question, that already after the council in Constantinople
                                    in
                                    > 386 was rejected by the pope and his followers, but cheerished in
                                    the
                                    > Eastern church as the most important part of the decision of the
                                    > council. Besides in the Eastern half there was a fight between the
                                    > followers of Nicea centered in Alexandria and the disguised,
                                    > forbidden Arians in Antiocia. The fight was disguised as concerning
                                    > the Teotokos - the God Mother. Hence the Arians could only appear
                                    > openly in the Germanic states but many Eastern/Romans in the eastern
                                    > part of the so called Catholic church in reality stayed Arians quite
                                    > long.The differences may be small to Dirk but they indeed were
                                    > impressively great for the confesssors and even now there is a great
                                    > difference between claiming that God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost were
                                    > all equal/of the same matter and gods, Jesus was supposed to have
                                    been
                                    > the first created entity having existed all the time in the
                                    decision
                                    > of 386.




                                    Hi Ingemar,

                                    this is a slight misunderstanding. Clearly, for the people involved
                                    at the time the difference between an Arian and a Catholic confession
                                    was significant. However, it has been pointed out (I'll get the
                                    reference later) that the Catholic practice was much closer to the
                                    Arian creed than the actual doctrines foresaw. Hence, although Jesus
                                    is seen as 'God's equal' in the 'theoretical interpretation of
                                    Catholicism, Jesus' role as son of god has always made him 'inferior'
                                    to God almighty. This is still the case today. I am not a theologian,
                                    and some of the expressions I use may be questionable, but it is
                                    widely agreed that in the real perception of these things Catholicism
                                    and Arianism were practically the same thing in substance.

                                    I think the factor which made Arianism unacceptable to the Catholic
                                    church, and which likely created the biggest rift between the two was
                                    the fact that the pope claims to be the 'representative of Jesus on
                                    earth'. Thus, if Jesus' role is diminished, as it is in the Arian
                                    teaching, so is that of the pope. However, for the normal Christians
                                    there was really no substantial difference, since Catholics in
                                    practice regarded God superior to Jesus, just as the Arians did only
                                    perhaps in a slightly more explicit way.


                                    Cheers
                                    Dirk
                                  • Ingemar Nordgren
                                    ... Hi again Maximos, I have read your text carefully and I also re-read mine. I see that we both are a little unclear and so I must make a more clear
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Jul 1, 2003
                                      --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Hieromonk Maximos <frmaximos@m...>

                                      Hi again Maximos,

                                      I have read your text carefully and I also re-read mine. I see that we
                                      both are a little unclear and so I must make a more clear definition
                                      of filioque. It is true the 'que' is of Western origin mostly as the
                                      original text proposed in Constantinople in 382. The decision however
                                      was to exclude that 'que' and replace it with "The Father through the
                                      son and the spirit". The Westerners later, as you say, replaced the
                                      original meaning with the earlier proposed " The Father and -que- the
                                      son through the spirit. I am sorry I misunderstood that part in your
                                      writing.

                                      My best wishes
                                      Ingemar
                                    • Tore Gannholm
                                      ... Dirk, You can read about arianism on http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/extracts_/arianism/default.htm Tore --
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Jul 2, 2003
                                        >
                                        > > During the 4th century there were big fights between the Arian and
                                        >> the Ortodox churches (The Catholic line I think came later)
                                        >>
                                        >> During some time the Arian line was the official Roman line.
                                        >>
                                        >> The difference was documented in the Church meeting in Nicea 325
                                        >>
                                        >> Tore
                                        >> --
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >Catholic and Orthodox are in this period one and the same thing. The
                                        >schism between Catholicism and Orthodoxy was only in the 11th
                                        >century. What is important to note that the practical interpretation
                                        >of Catholicism is basically identical to Arianism. At the time of
                                        >Nicea, the Arian faction lost itself in unimportant detail. In
                                        >reality both groups had the same perception only they defined it
                                        >slightly differently.
                                        >
                                        >Dirk
                                        >

                                        Dirk,
                                        You can read about arianism on
                                        http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/extracts_/arianism/default.htm


                                        Tore
                                        --
                                      • Ingemar Nordgren
                                        Hi Tore, An very interesting book, indeed. You really made your point showing the intensity in the controversy between Nicaeneans and Arians. Here we have the
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Jul 2, 2003
                                          Hi Tore,

                                          An very interesting book, indeed. You really made your point showing
                                          the intensity in the controversy between Nicaeneans and Arians. Here
                                          we have the story told by a convinced and evidently strongly beleiving
                                          Nicaenean, who adores the quite crooked Athanasius and hates Eusebius
                                          and his followers. He presents good evidence for my further conclusion
                                          the Gnostics were part of the background and of the old Eastern
                                          trinity of triadic origin. He however has never succeded in
                                          understanding the subleties of Arius, and since he, as he self
                                          admits, detests logics all his opinions are based on a blind belief. A
                                          funny thing is that he declares Sabellius a heretics, but later
                                          himself uses a twisted version of Sabellius true statements to
                                          justify the Nicaenean definition of Trinity. It is however correct
                                          that Arius was depending on the background mentioned, but he was far
                                          closer to Sabellius than this story claims. He indeed also confirms
                                          that Antioch was an Arian stronghold. It evidently is long time ago
                                          Christianity ceased to be a religion and just became an organisation
                                          ruled by political decisions on diverse councils.
                                          I find your site a very useful one, indeed.

                                          Best wishes
                                          Ingemar


                                          > http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/extracts_/arianism/default.htm
                                        • faltin2001
                                          ... and ... The ... interpretation ... Tore, nice collection. I had a brief look, however, some comments at the end where somebody talks of Arianism in
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Jul 3, 2003
                                            --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...>
                                            wrote:
                                            > >
                                            > > > During the 4th century there were big fights between the Arian
                                            and
                                            > >> the Ortodox churches (The Catholic line I think came later)
                                            > >>
                                            > >> During some time the Arian line was the official Roman line.
                                            > >>
                                            > >> The difference was documented in the Church meeting in Nicea 325
                                            > >>
                                            > >> Tore
                                            > >> --
                                            > >
                                            > >
                                            > >Catholic and Orthodox are in this period one and the same thing.
                                            The
                                            > >schism between Catholicism and Orthodoxy was only in the 11th
                                            > >century. What is important to note that the practical
                                            interpretation
                                            > >of Catholicism is basically identical to Arianism. At the time of
                                            > >Nicea, the Arian faction lost itself in unimportant detail. In
                                            > >reality both groups had the same perception only they defined it
                                            > >slightly differently.
                                            > >
                                            > >Dirk
                                            > >
                                            >
                                            > Dirk,
                                            > You can read about arianism on
                                            > http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/extracts_/arianism/default.htm
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Tore
                                            > --


                                            Tore,

                                            nice collection. I had a brief look, however, some comments at the
                                            end where somebody talks of Arianism in Vaestegoetaland in 500AD can
                                            hardly be taken seriously. But I think we had this debate before.

                                            Dirk
                                          • Tore Gannholm
                                            ... Dirk, Yes we have discussed this before and I know that you don t have very high thoughts about Swedish archaeology. Fortunately there are others on this
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Jul 3, 2003
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >Tore,
                                              >
                                              >nice collection. I had a brief look, however, some comments at the
                                              >end where somebody talks of Arianism in Vaestegoetaland in 500AD can
                                              >hardly be taken seriously. But I think we had this debate before.
                                              >
                                              >Dirk
                                              >

                                              Dirk,
                                              Yes we have discussed this before and I know that you don't have very
                                              high thoughts about Swedish archaeology. Fortunately there are others
                                              on this list who can read Scandinavian and are better acquainted with
                                              this important area.

                                              Admittedly sometimes archaeologists over-interpret their findings.
                                              However I think Gotland and some parts of Sweden have a much richer
                                              early iron age history than you would like to admit.
                                              Tore


                                              --
                                            • faltin2001
                                              ... can ... very ... others ... with ... Tore I never denied that Gotland and Sweden have a rich early iron age history. Yet, about the early iron age history
                                              Message 22 of 28 , Jul 3, 2003
                                                --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...>
                                                wrote:
                                                > >
                                                > >
                                                > >Tore,
                                                > >
                                                > >nice collection. I had a brief look, however, some comments at the
                                                > >end where somebody talks of Arianism in Vaestegoetaland in 500AD
                                                can
                                                > >hardly be taken seriously. But I think we had this debate before.
                                                > >
                                                > >Dirk
                                                > >
                                                >
                                                > Dirk,
                                                > Yes we have discussed this before and I know that you don't have
                                                very
                                                > high thoughts about Swedish archaeology. Fortunately there are
                                                others
                                                > on this list who can read Scandinavian and are better acquainted
                                                with
                                                > this important area.
                                                >
                                                > Admittedly sometimes archaeologists over-interpret their findings.
                                                > However I think Gotland and some parts of Sweden have a much richer
                                                > early iron age history than you would like to admit.
                                                > Tore
                                                >


                                                Tore

                                                I never denied that Gotland and Sweden have a rich early iron age
                                                history. Yet, about the early iron age history of Gotland and Sweden
                                                we know practically nothing. The early iron age starts in those areas
                                                in around 500BC, and no historical sources are available to shed
                                                light on historical events there at that early time.

                                                About Arianism, I have not seen any evidence for the presence of
                                                Arianism in 6th century Sweden. Since you read Swedish, I would like
                                                to ask you to present this evidence.

                                                I suppose the first step would be to demonstrate that there were
                                                Christian grave yards in Sweden in 500AD and the second step would be
                                                to show that these were Arian Christians. If any grave with
                                                tentatively Christian lay-out dated to post 550AD it would -following
                                                Brigit Arrhenius- be better regarded as Catholic, since Scandinavian
                                                contacts shifted toward the Frankish realm at that point.
                                                Alternatively, 6th century authors like Procopius, who took a great
                                                interest in Thule, would surely have reported the presence of
                                                Christians, even if they were Arians there. Yet, it is clear that he
                                                regarded them as pagans.

                                                Dirk






                                                >
                                                > --
                                              • Hieromonk Maximos
                                                ... True, I think we were perhaps a little less precise then we could have been. I should have said, that the filoque was introduced into Western usage in
                                                Message 23 of 28 , Jul 3, 2003
                                                  >--- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Hieromonk Maximos <frmaximos@m...>
                                                  >
                                                  >Hi again Maximos,
                                                  >
                                                  >I have read your text carefully and I also re-read mine. I see that we
                                                  >both are a little unclear and so I must make a more clear definition
                                                  >of filioque. It is true the 'que' is of Western origin mostly as the
                                                  >original text proposed in Constantinople in 382. The decision however
                                                  >was to exclude that 'que' and replace it with "The Father through the
                                                  >son and the spirit". The Westerners later, as you say, replaced the
                                                  >original meaning with the earlier proposed " The Father and -que- the
                                                  >son through the spirit. I am sorry I misunderstood that part in your
                                                  >writing.
                                                  >
                                                  >My best wishes
                                                  >Ingemar
                                                  >

                                                  True, I think we were perhaps a little less precise then we could
                                                  have been. I should have said, that the filoque was introduced into
                                                  Western usage in Spain at a council held in Toledo.

                                                  The Eastern Church has never adopted the filoque and the form we use
                                                  is the" Holy Spirit proceedeth from the Father "( only) the so-called
                                                  " double procession" that is the proposed ontological procession, is
                                                  specifically condemned as heresy by the Eastern Church ( this is
                                                  clearly defined by St.Photios of Constantinople) The later idea of
                                                  the reference to the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit from the
                                                  Son ( as at Pentecost) is of course correct, but this is not what the
                                                  Creed is referring to at that point in the text.

                                                  I hope that is clearer, though theology is by its nature always a bit fuzzy.
                                                  --

                                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                • Ingemar Nordgren
                                                  ... Hi Maximos, Thank you very much for your information. It is good to get information of a really professional expert on religious matters. My very best
                                                  Message 24 of 28 , Jul 3, 2003
                                                    --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Hieromonk Maximos <frmaximos@m...> wrote:
                                                    > >--- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Hieromonk Maximos <frmaximos@m...>
                                                    Hi Maximos,

                                                    Thank you very much for your information. It is good to get
                                                    information of a really professional expert on religious matters.

                                                    My very best greetings
                                                    Ingemar

                                                    > True, I think we were perhaps a little less precise then we could
                                                    > have been. I should have said, that the filoque was introduced into
                                                    > Western usage in Spain at a council held in Toledo.
                                                    >
                                                    > The Eastern Church has never adopted the filoque and the form we use
                                                    > is the" Holy Spirit proceedeth from the Father "( only) the so-called
                                                    > " double procession" that is the proposed ontological procession, is
                                                    > specifically condemned as heresy by the Eastern Church ( this is
                                                    > clearly defined by St.Photios of Constantinople) The later idea of
                                                    > the reference to the temporal procession of the Holy Spirit from the
                                                    > Son ( as at Pentecost) is of course correct, but this is not what the
                                                    > Creed is referring to at that point in the text.
                                                    >
                                                    > I hope that is clearer, though theology is by its nature always a
                                                    bit fuzzy.
                                                    > --
                                                    >
                                                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                  • Tore Gannholm
                                                    ... Dirk, We know plenty from the archaeological point of view. Take the Havor ring for example http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/beowulf_/halsring/default.htm
                                                    Message 25 of 28 , Jul 5, 2003
                                                      >
                                                      >Tore
                                                      >
                                                      >I never denied that Gotland and Sweden have a rich early iron age
                                                      >history. Yet, about the early iron age history of Gotland and Sweden
                                                      >we know practically nothing. The early iron age starts in those areas
                                                      >in around 500BC, and no historical sources are available to shed
                                                      >light on historical events there at that early time.

                                                      Dirk,
                                                      We know plenty from the archaeological point of view.

                                                      Take the Havor ring for example
                                                      http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/beowulf_/halsring/default.htm

                                                      They were very skilled metal workers and there is plenty made in both
                                                      gold and silver. The closet from where they could have learned that
                                                      is the Goths at the Black Sea.

                                                      In Gotland we have about 1500 buildings from Roman Iron Age, the
                                                      largest is 67x11 meters. There are plenty of houses from that time
                                                      that surpasses 60 meters.

                                                      se also http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/zentrum_/thule/default.htm
                                                      Anmerkung 11.





                                                      >
                                                      >About Arianism, I have not seen any evidence for the presence of
                                                      >Arianism in 6th century Sweden. Since you read Swedish, I would like
                                                      >to ask you to present this evidence.

                                                      There were very close trading links with the Goths, also when they
                                                      were in Italy. The archaeological finds show that.


                                                      >I suppose the first step would be to demonstrate that there were
                                                      >Christian grave yards in Sweden in 500AD and the second step would be
                                                      >to show that these were Arian Christians. If any grave with
                                                      >tentatively Christian lay-out dated to post 550AD it would -following
                                                      >Brigit Arrhenius- be better regarded as Catholic, since Scandinavian
                                                      >contacts shifted toward the Frankish realm at that point.
                                                      >Alternatively, 6th century authors like Procopius, who took a great
                                                      >interest in Thule, would surely have reported the presence of
                                                      >Christians, even if they were Arians there.

                                                      Procopius only had knowledge of the Eruls.

                                                      Tore

                                                      >Yet, it is clear that he
                                                      >regarded them as pagans.
                                                      >
                                                      >Dirk
                                                      >




                                                      --
                                                    • faltin2001
                                                      ... Sweden ... areas ... Tore, you just wrongly accused me of denying that Sweden and Gotland have a rich early iron age history. Now you come with
                                                      Message 26 of 28 , Jul 7, 2003
                                                        --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...>
                                                        wrote:
                                                        > >
                                                        > >Tore
                                                        > >
                                                        > >I never denied that Gotland and Sweden have a rich early iron age
                                                        > >history. Yet, about the early iron age history of Gotland and
                                                        Sweden
                                                        > >we know practically nothing. The early iron age starts in those
                                                        areas
                                                        > >in around 500BC, and no historical sources are available to shed
                                                        > >light on historical events there at that early time.
                                                        >
                                                        > Dirk,
                                                        > We know plenty from the archaeological point of view.
                                                        >

                                                        Tore,

                                                        you just wrongly accused me of denying that Sweden and Gotland have a
                                                        rich early iron age history. Now you come with archaeology. History
                                                        is about names and events and history starts with written records. I
                                                        retain my view that we know next to nothing about early iron age
                                                        (500BC) history in Scandinavia.







                                                        >
                                                        > Take the Havor ring for example
                                                        > http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/beowulf_/halsring/default.htm
                                                        >
                                                        > They were very skilled metal workers and there is plenty made in
                                                        both
                                                        > gold and silver. The closet from where they could have learned that
                                                        > is the Goths at the Black Sea.



                                                        Now you jumped some 600-700 years foreward. So far you refered to
                                                        the 'rich early iron age history of Gotland and Sweden', but the
                                                        Havor ring dates to about 100AD, while the Roman bronze dishes and
                                                        objects which were found together with the Havor ring and which come
                                                        from Italy, date to about 200AD.

                                                        At any rate this only tells you something about trade links from
                                                        Gotland to Italy and perhaps the Black Sea region. This does not tell
                                                        you anything about history.






                                                        >
                                                        > In Gotland we have about 1500 buildings from Roman Iron Age, the
                                                        > largest is 67x11 meters. There are plenty of houses from that time
                                                        > that surpasses 60 meters.
                                                        >



                                                        Again, that is all very well, but this is not history. History begins
                                                        with written records. There clearly was a rich culture on Gotland,
                                                        but about its history we are almost not informed.






                                                        > se also http://www.stavgard.com/Gotland/zentrum_/thule/default.htm
                                                        > Anmerkung 11.
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        > >
                                                        > >About Arianism, I have not seen any evidence for the presence of
                                                        > >Arianism in 6th century Sweden. Since you read Swedish, I would
                                                        like
                                                        > >to ask you to present this evidence.
                                                        >
                                                        > There were very close trading links with the Goths, also when they
                                                        > were in Italy. The archaeological finds show that.
                                                        >



                                                        These trading links were between Gotland and Italy or the
                                                        Mediterranean. We have no real record of the Ostrogoths engaging in
                                                        trade at all. The Ostrogoths and other Germanic people who came to
                                                        Italy in the 470s onwards were anything but professional traders. If
                                                        anything, trade was conducted by the Romans, and they were
                                                        Catholics.






                                                        >
                                                        > >I suppose the first step would be to demonstrate that there were
                                                        > >Christian grave yards in Sweden in 500AD and the second step would
                                                        be
                                                        > >to show that these were Arian Christians. If any grave with
                                                        > >tentatively Christian lay-out dated to post 550AD it would -
                                                        following
                                                        > >Brigit Arrhenius- be better regarded as Catholic, since
                                                        Scandinavian
                                                        > >contacts shifted toward the Frankish realm at that point.
                                                        > >Alternatively, 6th century authors like Procopius, who took a great
                                                        > >interest in Thule, would surely have reported the presence of
                                                        > >Christians, even if they were Arians there.
                                                        >


                                                        > Procopius only had knowledge of the Eruls.



                                                        Well, he provides a lengthy description of the people in Thule
                                                        (Scandinavia), about their habits, names, living areas etc. If any of
                                                        them would have been Christians of any form or shape, he would have
                                                        let his readers know.

                                                        From your reply, I must conclude that despite reading the
                                                        Scandinavian sources in original, you have no evidence for Arianism
                                                        in 500AD in Scandinavia.


                                                        Dirk
                                                      • Tore Gannholm
                                                        ... Dirk, I have not promoted the idea of Arianism in Scandinavia. I only said that certain archaeologists have detected traces of it. This makes it
                                                        Message 27 of 28 , Jul 7, 2003
                                                          >
                                                          >
                                                          >
                                                          >
                                                          >>
                                                          >> >I suppose the first step would be to demonstrate that there were
                                                          >> >Christian grave yards in Sweden in 500AD and the second step would
                                                          >be
                                                          >> >to show that these were Arian Christians. If any grave with
                                                          >> >tentatively Christian lay-out dated to post 550AD it would -
                                                          >following
                                                          >> >Brigit Arrhenius- be better regarded as Catholic, since
                                                          >Scandinavian
                                                          >> >contacts shifted toward the Frankish realm at that point.
                                                          >> >Alternatively, 6th century authors like Procopius, who took a great
                                                          >> >interest in Thule, would surely have reported the presence of
                                                          >> >Christians, even if they were Arians there.
                                                          >>
                                                          >
                                                          >
                                                          >> Procopius only had knowledge of the Eruls.
                                                          >
                                                          >
                                                          >
                                                          >Well, he provides a lengthy description of the people in Thule
                                                          >(Scandinavia), about their habits, names, living areas etc. If any of
                                                          >them would have been Christians of any form or shape, he would have
                                                          >let his readers know.
                                                          >
                                                          >From your reply, I must conclude that despite reading the
                                                          >Scandinavian sources in original, you have no evidence for Arianism
                                                          >in 500AD in Scandinavia.
                                                          >
                                                          >Dirk
                                                          >

                                                          Dirk,
                                                          I have not promoted the idea of Arianism in Scandinavia. I only said
                                                          that certain archaeologists have detected traces of it.

                                                          This makes it interesting to continue the study of these traces.

                                                          Tore
                                                          --
                                                        • faltin2001
                                                          ... were ... would ... great ... of ... said ... Tore, can you list some of these traces of Arianism in Scandinavia, please. Dirk
                                                          Message 28 of 28 , Jul 7, 2003
                                                            --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Tore Gannholm <tore.gannholm@s...>
                                                            wrote:
                                                            > >
                                                            > >
                                                            > >
                                                            > >
                                                            > >>
                                                            > >> >I suppose the first step would be to demonstrate that there
                                                            were
                                                            > >> >Christian grave yards in Sweden in 500AD and the second step
                                                            would
                                                            > >be
                                                            > >> >to show that these were Arian Christians. If any grave with
                                                            > >> >tentatively Christian lay-out dated to post 550AD it would -
                                                            > >following
                                                            > >> >Brigit Arrhenius- be better regarded as Catholic, since
                                                            > >Scandinavian
                                                            > >> >contacts shifted toward the Frankish realm at that point.
                                                            > >> >Alternatively, 6th century authors like Procopius, who took a
                                                            great
                                                            > >> >interest in Thule, would surely have reported the presence of
                                                            > >> >Christians, even if they were Arians there.
                                                            > >>
                                                            > >
                                                            > >
                                                            > >> Procopius only had knowledge of the Eruls.
                                                            > >
                                                            > >
                                                            > >
                                                            > >Well, he provides a lengthy description of the people in Thule
                                                            > >(Scandinavia), about their habits, names, living areas etc. If any
                                                            of
                                                            > >them would have been Christians of any form or shape, he would have
                                                            > >let his readers know.
                                                            > >
                                                            > >From your reply, I must conclude that despite reading the
                                                            > >Scandinavian sources in original, you have no evidence for Arianism
                                                            > >in 500AD in Scandinavia.
                                                            > >
                                                            > >Dirk
                                                            > >
                                                            >
                                                            > Dirk,
                                                            > I have not promoted the idea of Arianism in Scandinavia. I only
                                                            said
                                                            > that certain archaeologists have detected traces of it.
                                                            >
                                                            > This makes it interesting to continue the study of these traces.
                                                            >
                                                            > Tore



                                                            Tore,

                                                            can you list some of these 'traces of Arianism' in Scandinavia,
                                                            please.

                                                            Dirk


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