Istoria lumii - 364 de ani vechime

sandokhan a scris:Cum Raphael nu beneficia de o masina a timpului, fresca de la Pompei este o copie fidela, exacta a lucrarii semnate Raphael

sandokhan a scris:Motivul pentru care nu au mai existat alte comentarii aici este urmatorul:

http://help.forumgratuit.ro/f8-probleme-legate-de-panoul-de-administrare

http://help.forumgratuit.ro/t27930-nu-mai-functioneaza-vizualizarile?highlight=inregistreaza+vizualizarile

The Pauline Epistles scrisa de E. Johnson ne arata clar si precis cum epistolele lui Pavel au fost copiate dupa Historia Ecclesiastica lui Eusebius

sandokhan a scris:The Pauline Epistles de E. Johnson explica cum a fost falsificata istoria oficiala a secolelor XVI - XVII, cu dovezi de exceptie, putin cunoscute istoricilor de la noi, si asta tocmai in contextul cronologiei oficiale. Sa examinam acum aceste dovezi.

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459891 (biografia lui Polydore Vergil, unul dintre primii mari istorici moderni, si citatul care demonstreaza ca inainte de anul 1520 e.n. NU EXISTAU NICI UN FEL DE EPISTOLE ALE LUI PAVEL CARE SA FI FOST CUNOSCUTE, SUB ORICE FORMA, IN ANGLIA)

Let me now call attention to some salient points in the evidence which tends to prove that, whatever may have been the previous fate of books in ages more remote, very few could have been extant in any part of Europe 400 years ago.

Let me render from the Latin a passage from a writer who says that he was studying and writing in London during the reign of King Henry the Eighth. Of the early Tudor period (1485-1603) he expressly says:

"In those times Perfect Letters, both Latin and Greek, shut out from Italy by nefarious wars, exterminated, expelled, poured over the Alps, through all Germany, Gaul, England, and Scotland. The Germans first introduced them into their towns, and, having been the most illiterate of all in former times, are now the most learned...

Having studied the Perfect Letters some years in Italy, he returned home, and was the first Englishman to teach them in England to his countrymen. Before him Cornelio Vitellio, an Italian, of Corneto, in Tuscany, of a noble stock, was the first of all to teach good letters to the boys at Oxon.

E. Johnson:

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459892

I might leave this striking passage to speak for itself, were it not that its teaching and that of kindred passages have been so much neglected. I am bound to infer from them: (1) That there was practically no literature in England before the Tudor period (1485-1603) -- no teaching, reading, or writing class; (2) that letters did gradually come to us from Italy during that period, but that no exact date, not even of the foundation of St. Paul's school, is ascertainable that we must consequently content ourselves with the vague date, "about 400 years ago," of the epoch when literary culture was beginning in England.

I shall now have to assume, with my readers' goodwill, that letters of any kind, and consequently Biblical letters in particular, were only beginning to be cultivated here during the Tudor period -- very slightly even then; that the evidence for this statement is quite massive; and that for a contrary opinion no scintilla of evidence exists, or ever has existed. It is false dates, it is the superficial study of the books which were coming to light during the Tudor period itself, which have caused the great prevailing deception in this important matter.

Tot in aceasta sectiune, Johnson discuta despre Bede, Gildas, King Alfred si King Beauclerc, documentele falsificate de aceeasi calugari benedictini care au inventat atat cele patru evanghelii cat si epistolele lui Pavel.

Not to confuse my readers with too many details, I would beg them to keep in mind the date 1533 as one of the best landmarks in chronology I am able at present to point out. In that year Polydore is stated to have addressed Henry the Eighth., pointing out that next to nothing was known of English history, and disparaging the few monkish writings on the subject which had come into his hands. The same year Leland is alleged to have set out on his literary tour through the monasteries, which occupied him till 1539. If these dates be trustworthy, the results of his investigations show that the whole scheme of Church history must have been laid down and brought, as it were, to a short first edition during about the period 1500-1533.

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459893

I must return to the question of the Pauline Epistles. It is impossible to determine what form they had assumed in Colet's time, or what his exact teaching may have been. In fact, I hold it impossible to suppose that the full Pauline Epistles, as we have them, could have been taught in England at the time to which Polydore refers. There can have been extant, in my opinion, only the little book of Sentences, called "The Apostle," which is so frequently alluded to in Church books, out of which the larger Pauline Epistles were gradually evolved.

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459900 (citatele din Historia Ecclesiastica care ne arata ca aceasta lucrare a fost scrisa INAINTE DE crearea epistolelor lui Pavel)

I must now deal with the references to Paul in the Eusebian literature -- that is, the Church History and the list of "Illustrious Men." And here a series of literary falsehoods must be sharply contradicted. It is in the Latin List of Illustrious Men, or Catholic writers, that the name of Eusebius occurs. This list was published during the Age of Publication, commonly called the "sixteenth century;" and there is absolutely no vestige of proof that this key book to Church literature (for such it evidently is) was composed, or could have been composed, long before that age. It is certain that in its present form it was not in the hands of Polydore. It is alleged that Eusebius was bishop of Caesarea, and was connected with literary men in that city 1,200 years before Polydore's time. That is sheer invention and falsehood. The real authors of the Eusebian books were the literary monks of the West, and the city to which they were related was, above all, Paris.

Acum, citatele...

H.E. 3:24:

One of these passages is to the effect that Paul, the most able of all in literary discipline, and the most sufficient in opinions, "committed no more than the briefest epistles to writing, though he had a multitude of matters -- yea, unutterable things to say, as he had attained to the visions of the third heaven, had been snatched up to the very paradise of God, and had been deemed worthy to listen to the unutterable words thence." (H. E. 3:24)

Poate ca ati crezut ca aceste afirmatii apartin sau au fost scoase din Epistola catre Corinteni (II, cap. 12), NICIDECUM!

I must entreat my readers not to fall in with the false notion that this passage is an echo of a passage in the Epistles as we have them. That is the reverse of the fact. I must repeat, every chapter of this Church History proves that it is written as an introduction to romantic books not yet fully written, or more than in their inception, and which had not yet been designated by the name of the New Testament, though a similar term is employed.

Now, everyone knows that a similar passage to the above is found inserted in our second Epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 12 -- a passage shockingly written in point of grammar, and every principle of good taste, even as the passage in the Church History. But it will be found, on comparison, that the one passage is not copied from the other, though both are evidently from the same mind. It is impossible to draw any other conclusion than that the two passages, substantially one in meaning, though variant in form, are from the same workshop of monastic fiction.

Eusebius nu avea cunostinta de vreo Epistola catre Corinteni la acea data (sec. IV e.n., conform cronologiei oficiale).

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459904

Epistle to the Romans -- "According to my Gospel." The Church historian ascribes this phrase to Paul in order to allege that when he used it he alluded to Luke's Gospel. Accordingly we find the phrase thrice inserted in the New Testament: Romans 2:16, 16:25, and 2 Timothy 2:8.

"The sufferings of the present season are not worthy to be compared with the glory to. be revealed unto us." This passage occurs in the Church History in connection with a tale of persecution under Verus. It is not quoted from Paul, nor alleged to be. But we find something very like it in our Romans 8:18.

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459907

But my present business is to impress upon the reader that this first Church historian most certainly knew nothing but a few lines of the Pauline Epistles, or of any of the "testamentary" books. He calls Paul to witness that, "after the resurrection, the Saviour was seen by Kephas first, then by the Twelve, and, after them, by more than five hundred brethren at the same time; of whom some had fallen asleep, but the greater part were still living at the time he composed these things. Then he was seen by James, who was one of those called brothers of the Savour." He adds that, besides these, Paul, as if in imitation of the Twelve Apostles, he being also an apostle, continues: "Afterwards he was seen by all the Apostles."

The ordinary reader, abetted in the delusion by clerical apologists, supposes that this must be quoted from 1 Corinthians xv. 5. It is absolutely not so! The Epistle is not named, and the comparison of the two passages again excludes any other opinion than that 1 Corinthians has been built up around this slight fabric of personal names, and primarily in order to imbed and preserve those names.

In the last book of the History we find the saying, "Eye hath not seen nor ear heard," and so on, referred to as a martyr hymn. It is not quoted from any source whatever. We find it inserted in 1 Corinthians 2:9. There is something like the expression, "coveting earnestly the best gifts," in a passage in the historian; but again no allusion to any Epistle.

Mai multe exemple despre faptul ca Eusebius nu citeaza din nici un fel de epistole atribuite lui Pavel, si ca folosea aceleasi cuvinte:

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459908
http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459910

I come to the Epistle to the Philippians. The remarkable theological sentence occurs twice in tales of martyrs, "Christ, who, being in the form of God, did not think equality with God a thing of rapine (H. E. 5:2; 8:10) (again most crude Greek); but there is no allusion to Paul's authorship; on the contrary, it is assigned to other writers. We find it repeated under the name of Paul, Philippians 2:6. It is simply a blunder, due to ignorance of the facts, not to see that the passage is original in the Church History -- that is, in the mind of the monastic theologians. (H. E. 3:4 and 15)

Din nou E. Johnson:

There is no older Christian book that I can discover than the Church History. But the nature of the book has hitherto been misconceived, though it has been again and again in part discredited. It is the foundation-stone of the whole system. The New Testament has been written upon its lines. It is the proper introduction to the New Testament.

Structura oculta (portavoce pentru biserica catolica) a epistolelor lui Pavel (informatii senzationale):

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459924


But the Post-Apostolic Men Do Not Know Their Alleged Apostolic Masters, Which Is Absurd!

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459974

It is, however, part of the mistaken view of the subject, arising from the acceptance of the false chronology, to suppose that the alleged "Apostolic Fathers" quote from and build upon the Apostles. The discovery of this it was which led me first to see the enormous fictions that had been at work in the Christian literature, for it is absurd to suppose that Paul, after making a vast reputation as a literary man in the first century, was afterwards almost lost in oblivion in the second century. And the like applies to the deeds and sufferings of Christ himself, and to the whole fable of the origins. After all, these mythologists have made some great blunders in their system.

Take the richest theological Epistle ascribed to Paul: that to the Romans. Positively these so-called post-Apostolic men do not know it. They have merely some faint echoes of its contents; which is a very different thing. And it is the merest sophistry to confound them, or to talk of "Reminiscences," where there is no proof of anything of the kind. I must distinctly warn my readers against this fallacy of the handbooks and introductions to the New Testament, the only thorough cure for which is to read these "post-Apostolic" men for themselves. They will then discover that these writers, assumed to be following in the steps of their forerunners, and to be diligently perusing their writings as we have them, are doing nothing of the kind. They are dreaming, rambling, and raving; but they do not know that romantic figure of Paul that is known to us, nor yet his alleged writings as we have them. `

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459982

I might rest my case on Luther alone; but a mass of facts can be adduced in proof of the statement that the Pauline Epistles (in common with the whole of the Scriptures) are novel to the learned world in the early sixteenth century (1500-1550), and that opinion is forming about them during the whole of that age.

Demonstratia faptului ca TOATE manuscrisele atribuite sec. XV-XVI, traducerea in latina a Bibliei, APARTIN DE FAPT SFARSITULUI DE SECOL XVI (DUPA 1590):

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459986
http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459999

It seems, notwithstanding all the tales told us about the Revival Biblical scholars, Erasmus, or Luther, or Polydore, the Alcalŕ editors, the Fathers and Doctors of the Council of Trent (1546), there is nowhere to be found a Latin manuscript of the Bible of the complete Pauline Epistles that one can, with fair certainty, assume to have been in use before or during the Council of Trent.

I wish I could give the reader a precise account, or anything like it, of the number of copies of the Pauline Epistles in any crudest form during the reign of Henry the Eighth, for beyond that reign it is impossible to ascend. I would beg the reader to dismiss from his mind the tales about Wicliff and about Tyndal: there is absolutely no evidence from the writers of the time, Polydore and Leland, that any translation of the Bible had been put forth under the name of "Wicliff", "Tyndal", or any name.

Falsificarea marturiilor istorice din Anglia (de asemenea demonstratia faptului ca Povestile din Canterbury a fost scrisa cel putin dupa anul 1550 e.n.):

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459991

Luther si Pavel (analiza senzationala):

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460011

Vechiul Testament inventat dupa anul 1600 e.n.:

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460029

sadang a scris:Nic, cu scuzele de rigoare fata de sandokan si bineinteles si fata de tine, daca mesajul meu de deranjeaza, dar tu personal de unde stii ca suntem in 2011?

nu mai puneți carul înaintea boilor! iar se dau în stambă pe net pseudocreștinii dându-și în cap unii altora cu biblia!? vorba părintelui cleopa, da' unde era biblia aia pe vremea lui adam? ce credință o fi avut adam? mozaic? ortodox? evreu? budist? nu vedeți cât de falsă e credința voastră dacă se sprijină NUMAI pe o carte sfântă apărută la 4000 de ani după creația lumii? de unde atâta orbire și lipsă de judecată de a pretinde că oamenii l-au cunoscut pe dumnezeu doar de la apariția bibliei încolo!? avraam, părintele evreilor, oare în ce religie se închina domnului? că nu exista nici o biblie pe vremea lui! iar în biblie se spune clar că se ruga domnului și ridica locuri de jertfă pentru el!

tradiția creștină începe de la adam și trece prin multe tradiții până la torah, cele 5 cărți ale lui moise, prin vechiul testament, noul testament și după ele foarte multe tradiții creștine scrise sau doar orale care formează baza creștinismului! biblia e o mică parte a credinței! e o parte nu întregul! tradiția creștină a sfintei biserici ortodoxe, neîntreruptă de la adam până în zilele noastre, pe aia trebuie să o țineți în mână când vă bateți în argumente cu restul lumii! dar pe aia nu o știți pentru că sunteți de modă nouă, un fel de protestanți nedeclarați care își închipuie că doar cunoscând biblia ignorând și respingând tradiția devin creștini!

iar până la torah-ul lui moise cine știe câte biblii o mai fi fost! multe s-au pierdut, sau pierdut popoare întregi cum ar fi cele 10 triburi pierdute ale lui israel șamd, de multe ori învățăturile scrise au fost mâncate de rugina timpului și doar tradiția orală a supraviețuit! unde e babilonul? asiria? pierduți în negura timpului! egiptenii? a fost o vreme când doar citind biblia ne mai aminteam de ei!

Every reader of the Bible can see for himself that in Acts, though Paul's achievements are described in extenso, there is nowhere word of his letters

Sinodul de la Niceea a avut loc cel putin dupa anul 876-877 e.n...poti intelege asta?

cum si cand a avut loc convertirea la catolicism a tribului maghiar, sau la ortodoxism a tribului rhus, la sfarsit de secol X?

ignori dovezile extraordinare pe care le ai la dispozitie

Si atunci, este sau nu E. Johnson indreptatit, pe baza a tot ce a prezentat in The Pauline Epistles sa spuna ca inainte de anul 1500 nu exista vreo cunostinta despre epistolele lui Pavel in Europa de Vest (Anglia, Franta, Germania, Olanda)? Sinodul de la Niceea, datat in anul 876-877, cu dovezile cele mai precise, arunca in aer toata cronologia oficiala, in care crezi orbeste

Circulă pe „YouTube" un reportaj amuţitor realizat de Prahova TV. Într-un sat oarecare, un tânăr reporter îi întreabă pe trecători dacă ştiu cine a scris Biblia. Să fiu slujbaş al Bisericii, preot, teolog sau profesor, aş cădea, după cele şase minute ale reportajului, într-o neagră nevroză

Insa lipseste ceva cu adevarat important, cea mai importanta chestiune care ar fi trebuit sa fie dezbatuta: faptul ca trei din cele patru reguli emise la Sinodul de la Niceea (325 e.n.) erau incalcate in fiecare an.

Regulile canonizate la Sinodul de la Niceea, anul 325 e.n. dupa cronologia oficiala:

Regulile 1&2: Pastele nu este sarbatorit impreuna cu pastele ebraic si este celebrat dupa echinoctiul de primavara.

Regulile 3&4: Sarbatoarea sa aiba loc chiar dupa prima luna plina care are loc dupa echinoctiu, si nu in orice zi, ci in prima duminica dupa luna plina.

Matthew Vlastar. Here's the relevant excerpt from the text: "For the Lord suffered for our salvation in the year 5539,when the sun was a circle 23, circle the moon 10, and Jews Passover had inSaturday (as they say evangelicals) on March 24. In the following for this SaturdaySunday, March 25 ... Christ is risen. Legitimate Passover (Jewish)equinox occurs on the 14 th the moon (ie, the full moon) of 21March to 18 April - Easter, our same occurs in the accompanyingresurrection.

Rabbi Gamaliel, he wrote in 75 AD: "Because the pigeons still small and lambs are very young, and to the same time, Aviva has not yet come, then ... we found it necessary to add this year another 30 days. "(See IA Klimishin Calendar and chronology, p. 246)