2020.10.24 13:19 ipunchvagina Ok so here’s one for the record books!
2020.10.24 05:03 Anglicanpolitics123 Christian history is often times misunderstood in popular culture. There are many popular myths and stereotypes about it.
2020.10.23 16:09 Dr_Aradius Bardaisan, the forgotten Gnostic poet and statesman
2020.10.23 05:45 StevenStevens43 Cerdic the Merovingian
Keredic:submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]
In this article, i am going to be investigating more british legends, criticisms of modern day historians and scholars, and studying just how the legends and criticisms hold up to actualy contemporary history.
I am going to begin with a later king named Keredic, that will eventually bring us round to an earlier king, who will become the main focus of this article.
So i will begin with one of Geoffrey of Monmouth's kings, Keredic.
Of course, modern day historians and scholars always appear to feel the need to attempt to know better than Geoffrey.
In the case of Geoffrey's Keredic, there simply is no proof of the existence of a Keredic, and modern historians and scholars suspect that Geoffrey may have gotten confused with the actual historically factual kings Cerdic, that preceded, and succeeded Geoffrey's Keredic, respectively.
Keredic (Welsh: Ceredig) was a legendary king of the Britons, as recounted by Geoffrey of Monmouth. The origin of Geoffrey's character is unknown, but he is not depicted as a Saxon. According to Geoffrey, Keredic's rule was so unpopular that the Saxons enlisted the aid of an army of Vandals from Ireland to drive him from his kingdom.Geoffrey of Monmouth's British king list:
So, what i will do, in order to establish whether it is likely Geoffrey got himself confused with the two Cedric's, i will find out from his king list exactly when Keredic was said to have reigned.
And as we can see below, he reigned between the 6th Century Malgo Maelgwn and the official Saxon occupation of Southern portions of Britain, in 597 AD.
Geoffrey of Monmouth's British king list
Malgo Maelgwn Gwynedd, 6th-century king of Gwynedd.Maelgwn Gwynedd:
So, in order to establish exactly when approximately Keredic began his reign, let us look at the date of death given for Maelgwn Gwynedd.
And as we can see, it is 547 AD.
Therefore, Geoffrey's Keredic reigned between 547 AD and 597 AD, approximately.
Maelgwn Gwynedd (Latin: Maglocunus; died c. 547) was king of Gwynedd during the early 6th century. Surviving records suggest he held a pre-eminent position among the Brythonic kings in Wales and their allies in the "Old North" along the Scottish coast.Link for photo
Britain 540 AD
Man of the North:
So let us look at the historically contemporary Ceretic of Leeds whom is described by historians and scholars as being identical to a historical figure known as "the man of the north", and let us find out when historians and scholars attribute Ceretic (man of the north) to having been born.
According to English historian Bede, it was 614 AD.
Ceretic of Elmet
Ceretic of Elmet (or Ceredig ap Gwallog) was the last king of Elmet, a Britonnic kingdom that existed in the West Yorkshire area of Northern England in sub-Roman Britain.Cerdic of Wessex:
Now, i will look at Cerdic of Wessex, and find out what contemporary historians and scholars give for his reign.
As we can see, his reign was from between 519 and 534 AD.
Cerdic of Wessex
Cerdic (/ˈtʃɜːrdɪtʃ/; Latin: Cerdicus) is cited in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a leader of the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain, being the founder and first king of Saxon Wessex, reigning from 519 to 534 AD.Link for photo
Britain, late 400's, early 500's
Now, whilst modern day historians and scholars likely fail to see any familial connection between Cerdic of Wessex, and Cerdic of Elmet, Scientists and biologists would be more inclined to agree that Geoffrey of Monmouth's historical understanding is more consistant with the actual reality of descendency and ancestry.
As the world was not full of kings named Cedric, there is in fact an extremely high probability that Cedric of Elmet was in fact a descendant of Cedric of Wessex.
However, in order for Cedric of Elmet to be born in the early 600's in to a family of kings, it would be from a Scientific perspective, far more likely that there was in fact an actual factual real person of high nobility that lived between Cerdic of Wessex and Cerdic of Elmet.
Therefore the politics of who is real, and who is fantasy, is not shared by chemistry and biology, were human lineages cannot be decided by discrimination, and do in fact require the involvement of actual real humans, whether those humans suit ones agenda, or not.
Link for photo
Sex awareness symbol (Buenos Aires)
Now, i find it interesting that Geoffrey's Kederic is depicted as a king of the Saxons, whilst Kederic is actually not himself a Saxon.
The origin of Geoffrey's character is unknown, but he is not depicted as a Saxon. According to Geoffrey, Keredic's rule was so unpopular that the Saxons enlisted the aid of an army of Vandals from Ireland to drive him from his kingdom.Brittonic:
This is also true with Cerdic of Wessex.
Cerdic was actually not considered a Saxon, and is in fact believed to have been a native Briton, by contemporary historians and scholars.
The name Cerdic is thought by most scholars to be Brittonic – a form of the name Ceretic) – rather than Germanic in origin. According to the Brittonic origin hypothesis, Cerdic is derived from the British name \Caratīcos* or \Corotīcos*. This may indicate that Cerdic was a native Briton, and that his dynasty became Anglicised over time.Link for photo
Cerdic of Wessex
House of Woden:
Now, a good clue as to the origins of Cerdic comes from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles that claim to trace his ancestry back to the house of Woden, and the antediluvian patriarch's.
And of course Woden is the god Odin
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle provides a pedigree tracing Cerdic's ancestry back to Wōden and the antediluvian patriarchs).Link for photo.jpg)
In an ideal world it would be easier to write articles if Odin, being the same entity as Woden, was a self explanatory fact that went without saying.
However after many debates with self confessed historians and scholars, i have found that in actual fact, it is not something they are usually aware of.
Therefore i will take a little time to provide a little proof, below.
In wider Germanic mythology and paganism, the god was known in Old English and Old Saxon as Wōden,Den:
Now, it is probably a bit unfair on modern day historians and scholars, that are still attempting to find the connection between Odin and Woden, to suggest how Egyptian pharoah Dens tomb, could actually be the house of Woden.
Den, also known as Hor-Den, Dewen and Udimu, is the Horus name of a pharaoh of the Early Dynastic Period) who ruled during the First Dynasty of Egypt.Link for photo#/media/File:Tomb_of_Den_1.jpg)
Tomb of Den
Though there are clues as to where this king with a typical Brythonic name, with ancestral line-age to a legendary Scandinavian royal house, most immediately came from.
King of Wessex
According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Cerdic landed in what is today Hampshire in 495 with his son Cynric in five ships.Link for photo
In order to land in Hampshire, instead of Dover, or elsehwere on East coast, it would be more likely Cerdic came in from Brittany.
Also known as Armorica.
The word Brittany, along with its French, Breton and Gallo equivalents Bretagne, Breizh and Bertaèyn, derive from the Latin Britannia, which means "Britons)' land".Cherdik:
Now, Cerdic is only his name in the dialect spoken on the Southern shores of Britain.
Elsewhere his name is recognised as Cherdik.
So in order to find out who exactly Ceredic most likely was, i am going to go through a list of Merovingian kings, with names similar to him.
Beginning with Chlodio, a Frankish king, believed to be one of the earliest most immediate ancestors of the Merovingian dynasty.
Chlodio (d. approx. 450) also Clodio, Clodius, Clodion, Cloio or Chlogio, was a Frankish king who attacked, and apparently then held, Roman-inhabited lands and cities in the Silva Carbonaria forest, now in central Belgium, then Cambrai and Tournai, and reached as far south as the River Somme.Link for photo
Chilperic I of Burgandy
Chilperic I (died c. 480) was the King of Burgundy from 473 until his death. He succeeded his brother Gundioch and co-ruled with his nephews Godomar, Gundobad, Chilperic II, and Godegisel.Childeric I:
Childeric I (/ˈkɪldərɪk/; French: Childéric; Latin: Childericus; reconstructed Frankish: \Hildirīk; c. 437 – 481 AD) was a Frankish leader in the northern part of imperial Roman Gaul and a member of the Merovingian dynasty, described as a king (Latin *rex), both on his Roman-style seal ring, which was buried with him, and in fragmentary later records of his life. He was father of Clovis I, who acquired effective control over all or most Frankish kingdoms, and a significant part of Roman Gaul.Link for photo
Childeric I's golden bees
Then there was one of Childeric I's four sons, "Childebert I" that had a kingdom which stretched from Brittany to the English channel.
In the partition of the realm, Childebert received as his share the town of Paris, the country to the north as far as the river Somme), to the west as far as the English Channel, and the Armorican peninsula (modern Brittany). His brothers ruled in different lands: Theuderic I in Metz, Chlodomer in Orléans, and Clothar I in Soissons.Link for photo
Childebert I coin
In fact, the vast majority of Merovingian kings had names that would appear closely related to Cerdic.
Battle of Badon:
Now Cerdic is thought by historians and scholars to have been the British king that fought against the Britons at battle of Badon.
Though something about that statement does not make 100% sense.
It is unlikely that Cerdic was in fact a Briton, from Great Britain.
But more likely a Briton, from Armorica, given that in Great Britain, he is fighting "Britons".
Cerdic of Wessex
Some scholars suggest that Cerdic was the Saxon leader defeated by the Britons at the Battle of Mount BadonBattle of Cambrai:
Now, if Cerdic fought in the battle of Badon, then there is an extremely good chance he was also involved in the battle of Cambrai, were the legendary king Arthur likely lost his life, and the historical Ragnachar, definitely lost his life.
As is revealed in this thread here.
Art Oenfer VII - Thee king Arthur
So, before i can present my case that the most likely explanation for Cerdic, is that he is a Merovingian related to the Childeric's and is attempting to add Britain to the Merovingian empire, i first need to find out if the Saxons during this period were under Merovingian rulership.
If they were not, then my case collapses.
If they were, then Cerdic was almost definitely a Merovingian.
And guess what, the Saxons were indeed under Merovingian rulership during this period.
The Merovingian dynasty was the ruling family of the Franks from the middle of the 5th century until 751. They first appear as "Kings of the Franks" in the Roman army of northern Gaul. By 509 they had united all the Franks and northern Gaulish Romans under their rule. They conquered most of Gaul, defeating the Visigoths (507) and the Burgundians (534), and also extended their rule into Raetia (537). In Germania, the Alemanni, Bavarii and Saxons accepted their lordship. The Merovingian realm was the largest and most powerful of the states of western Europe following the breaking up of the empire of Theoderic the Great.Link for photo
Farther, a Thrungian princess named Saint Radegund, and married to a Merovingian king, did a Christian mission around the Southern shores of Britain, during the reign of Cerdic, and at least five religious institutions in Britain today, are named after her.
So there was definitely a Merovingian presence in Southern Britain during this period.
Radegund (Latin: Radegunda; also spelled Rhadegund, Radegonde, or Radigund; c. 520 – 13 August 587) was a Thuringian princess and Frankish queen, who founded the Abbey of the Holy Cross) at Poitiers. She is the patron saint of several churches in France and England and of Jesus College, Cambridge (whose full name is "The College of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Saint John the Evangelist and the glorious Virgin Saint Radegund, near Cambridge").Link for photo
Church of Saint Radegund (Lincolnshire)
2020.10.23 02:58 pomona-peach Jan van Reeth argues that the Book of Jubilees had great influence on the formation of Islam. In the Book of Jubilees there is the very same concept of revelation as in Islam: God's words and commandments are eternally written on celestial tablets. An angel reveals their content to a prophet
2020.10.19 19:48 TheGuillamon The Four Stoic Virtues Stoicism as The Art of Living
2020.10.19 08:04 AractusP Biblical scripture has changed significantly
The fact that the gospels were literalised fundamentally changes how they are read, used, and understood. Irenaeus uses the gospels in several places, alongside the Old Testament scriptures, to make his argument that Jesus was at least 50 when crucified.There's been an assumption that it's a literal record of truth - a lot of the early scholars got very worried about inconsistencies between Matthew and Luke, for example.
But for people teaching the Bible in the fourth century, it's not the literal meaning which is important, it's how it's read allegorically.
In contemporary Biblical scholarship a lot of the gospels are written with symbolism in mind.
They are not setting out to be literal accounts but they are set out to be symbolic.
2020.10.17 12:07 Majhul_101 France’s “Laïcité”, the Secular Fundamentalism at War with Multiculturalism
submitted by Majhul_101 to u/Majhul_101 [link] [comments]
OverviewFrance’s problem with multiculturalism is not a new phenomenon. Since the end of World War II, France has become one of the most ethnically diverse countries in Western Europe. The rapid growth of its multiculturalism started when France welcomed millions of immigrants mainly from its former colonies in North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South-East Asia to take part in its post-war economic recovery.
Unlike many of its Western counterparts like the United States, Canada, or Australia, France has implemented a “color-blind” approach in dealing with multiculturalism. It means that the French government does not institute policies that target a particular ethnic group or race, but instead, it institutes policies that target a specific geographic area or social cluster in which they tend to be ethnically-clustered. In 1978, France enacted a law that made it illegal to collect data on race or ethnicity. The law makes it difficult to assess the cultural composition of French society. Experts believe that visible minority is estimated to be 14% of the French population versus 20% in the United States and 22% in Canada.
While France, officially, holds a color-blind stance with regards to its multicultural society, the truth of the matter is that its political leaders and citizens are not blind to the fact that race and ethnicity do matter. Anyone who says otherwise is not believable.
Given the color-blind approach and the lack of data on race or ethnicity, it is difficult to accurately comprehend how effective France has been in assessing and combatting racism. In May 2020, a French government spokesman of Senegalese origin, Sibeth Ndiaye, surprised the French government when she made the call to legalize ethnic statistics. Ndiaye pointed out that the absence of statistics makes it difficult for people to assess how prevalent racism is in France. The response from the economy minister Bruno Le Maire was that the call did not align with France’s idea of universalism and that the concept of a French person does not consider his or her race, ethnicity, or religion. In his address of racism, the minister resorted to the condemnation of discrimination in any shape or form. While these statements are nice noble words, it does not tell us much on the prevalence of racism in France and the government effectiveness in combating racism. So, what is the real situation of racism in France?
1- Racism in FranceIn 1997, the Economist did a study on racism in France. They found that about 48% of French citizens consider themselves to be racists coming in second place after Belgium. Among those who feel racist, 35% would vote for the far-right, 35% would vote for the mainstream right, and 28% would vote for the left. The study also found that most French citizens believe that there are too many Arabs than Blacks and that there are too many Blacks than Jews.
Source: The Economist
Fast forward 2013, the Washington Post conducted another research survey in which they found that between 20% and 30% of French do not prefer people of another race as their neighbors. Another study by Pew research center in 2016 showed that only 26% of French believe that diversity makes their country a better place to live in contrast to 33% in the UK and 58% in the US. These percentages show that in comparison to the US, Canada, and the UK, France is the least tolerant. It also reveals that racial and ethnic diversity is seen more as a problem in France than in the US, the UK, Canada, and Australia.
Sources: Pew Research Center and Washington Post
2- Politicization of Arabs, Immigrants, and IslamFor decades, immigration has been a subject of political debate in France. French Arab which constitute the largest ethnic minority in France, have been the most stigmatized community and have been subject to political debates across the political spectrum. After 9/11, the stigmatization has rapidly gravitated toward Muslims (practitioners of Islam) which a large percentage is of Arab origin.
In early October 2020, French President Emmanuel Macron said that Islam is in crisis all over the world and plans to defend France’s secular values against what he termed as “Islamist radicalism”.
The President’s comment is the latest example of mainstream politicians pandering to the far-right whose leader Marine Le Pen has seen her chances for winning the 2022 presidential election increased and is currently neck and neck with Macron.
President Macron’s predecessors across the political spectrum have also used these tactics in the past:
Source: The Guardian
Source: The Guardian
Source: France 24
According to Pew research, France has the largest Muslim community in Europe, representing 8.8% of the population. Yet, Muslims are often stigmatized in French political debates.
Source: Pew Research Center
To understand the place of Islam in France and how Arabs, Muslims, and Immigrants have been stigmatized across the political spectrum; it requires a need to understand three components: France’s secularism (laïcité), France’s history of colonialism and decolonization, and France’s history of anti-Semitism:
a- The French Revolution and the Birth of French Secularism (Laïcité)
For a very long time, France’s mainstream politics have had a deep suspicion of religion. A suspicion that dates back to the French Revolution. The French Revolution was a time in history when the population revolted against the Monarchy and the Church. For centuries, the Church had imposed its doctrine on society dictating every aspect of French lives. After the abolishment of the French monarchy, the new Republic began to marginalize the Catholic Church and all faiths from any participation and organization in public life. From that time onwards, the French State was born in direct opposition to the public display of religious organizations, religious faiths, religious symbols, and religious minorities.
In 1905, France enacted a law known as Laïcité, the French version of secularism. The 1905 law was founded on three main principles: the separation of Church and State, the supremacy of the State over religious institutions, and the neutrality of the State towards religion. In that regard, the French State guarantees the freedom of religion and the right of every French person to express one’s faith while respecting public order and institutions. The law does not recognize religious marriages and bans the display of religious symbols in public institutions.
This version of secularism explains in part the stigmatization of Muslims across the political spectrum.
b- France Colonial Past and Decolonization
In the 16th century, France established its first colony in Canada called New France at the time. A century later, France would colonize Africa and would take part in the slave trade of millions of Africans. The French colonization of North Africa (1830-1962) and the devastating Algerian Independence War (1954-1962) are factors that led to the presence of a major Arab community in France.
The Algerian war was France’s most violent decolonization. At the time, the French colony had the highest concentration of French citizens to the point it was given the status of “Department” (A French Province).
After World War II, the French economy was in tatters. The country was facing challenges to maintain its colonies worldwide. Soon after, France lost to its colony Vietnam which declared independence along with Laos and Cambodia, Algeria began declaring its independence. This event led France to wage a bitter colonial war against Algeria to maintain its largest colony. In 1962, France under Charles De Gaulle capitulated to Algeria which managed to gain its independence from France. Many French at the time saw De Gaulle's act as a betrayal to France and saw Algerians as the enemy to French integrity.
The Franco-Algerian war led to a massive emigration of Algerians to France, especially those who stood by France during the war. Immigration to France was not a new phenomenon at the time as privileged Algerians, Moroccans, Tunisians, Senegalese, Ivorians, and others (a majority of them being Muslims) had emigrated to France way before the conflict ever started. However, the war made it difficult for France to manage the massive wave of migration.
France's loss to Algeria would be a main factor that can explain the perception of native French on Arabs and Muslims. Initially, the negative public perception would focus on race and ethnicity targeting Arabs and Blacks, however as decades went by, especially after the 9/11 terrorist attack in New York, the focus would gradually gravitate towards religion targeting specifically Muslims and their faith (Islam). The figure below shows an increase in attacks against Muslims as they continue to face mistrust and violence in the secular country.
Source: The Huffington Post
France has had a long history of anti-Semitism and discrimination against the Jews. France played a major role during the Second World War, when the Vichy government under Marshal Pétain collaborated with the Nazis by taking part in the deportation of 80,000 Jews to Nazi concentration camps, the execution of 15,000 Jews, and the creation of anti-Jewish discrimination laws. For decades, the French government denied their involvement. It was not until 1995 that France under Jacques Chirac admitted France’s guilt and role in the persecution and mass deportations of Jews.
Source: France 24
France’s far-right ideology has a long history which dates back to the French revolution. Thirty years after World War II, the far-right movement would publicly resurface in 1972 under the leadership of Jean Marie Le Pen, the founder of the 'Front National' (National Front) party. The National Front under Le Pen was notorious for making anti-Semitic statements with a derogatory fixation on France’s Jewish population. Le Pen would also frame the narrative of the rejection of North African Muslim immigrants and “The Arab”. In 2011, her daughter Marine Le Pen would later re-brand the party to the name ‘Rassemblement National’ (National Rally) to soften the party’s past image on anti-Semitism. Only this time, her party would rally under the banner of “Laïcité” to spread Islamophobic attacks.
While many French citizens decry National Rally’s anti-Semitic discourse, many remain silent on anti-Islam or anti-Arab narratives by dismissing them as a right to free speech.
The rise of the far-right discourse in France has led to an increase in hate crimes against Jews and Muslims. According to the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights, CNCDH, a French governmental organization, the number of acts and threats of anti-Semitism (plotted in green) and racism and xenophobia (plotted in blue) has been on the rise.
The upward trend of attacks also mirrors the rise of the National Rally which has been gaining popularity in key election battlegrounds. As a result, many Jews are pondering whether they should leave France. The trends show a growing exodus of Jews from France to Israel. France, home to the largest Jewish community in Europe, has seen the largest exodus of Jews for Israel in Western Europe.
3- The Rise of France’s Far RightFor the past decades, the far-right has seen a gradual increase in voters support. Since 2011, the Party under the leadership of Marine Le Pen would see a stellar rise. Marine Le Pen’s anti-immigrant, anti-Europe, and anti-Islam stance was able to win her 10 million voters.
After decades of a toxic reputation linked with anti-Semitism and xenophobia, Marine Le Pen took the reins from her father and adopted a strategy of toning down their xenophobic and anti-Semitic image. The tactic worked in the party’s favor.
The stellar rise of Le Pen marks the growing normalization of far-right support in France. The far-right party under the banner of defending the principle of “Laïcité” (French version of secularism) and French identity, was able to rally a growing number of voters against Muslims and their faith. The slogan Le Pen concocted was ‘No to Islamism’. The National Rally wanted to paint the picture of Islam as an enemy fundamentalist ideology rather than a religion. This emphasis on Islamism started with Marine Le Pen in 2010 and has become the focus of her rhetoric.
The popularity of the far-right sets a dangerous precedent as mainstream political parties are gradually failing in halting the National Rally from taking the presidency. Across the spectrum, some politicians are starting to adopt some of Le Pen’s talking points. They are regularly using the identity card for political gains.
During the 2016 Presidential campaigns, Former Conservative candidate Francois Fillion called for a ban on the full-body Islamic burkini swimming suit. Former socialist prime minister, Manuel Valls, and former right-wing president Nicholas Sarkozy rallied behind the mayors’ ban on burkini swimming suits. Sarkozy made a promise to extend the ban on the hijab in schools to universities and restrict access to benefits for women who violate the ban, an action that has been detrimental to the emancipation and integration of young Muslim women. Today, Macron is trying to brandish his tough-on-Islam credentials in a populist political environment.
The stigmatization of minorities in political debates shows the ugliness of French politics. The French media has also been guilty of taking part in the narrative where inflammatory and racist statements have also been published.
Illustrations of Media Racism
4- French Secularism: The Root Cause of France’s Intolerance towards multi-culturalismFrance is a country in crisis. The country’s secularism (French Laïcité) follows a doctrine that is fundamentalist and dogmatic, creating an environment of intolerance and lack of acceptance for other cultures. For a very long time, France has always wanted Assimilation and not Integration.
French secularism has been used as a political tool to target minorities and their faith. In the 1920s and 1930s, Polish and Italians immigrants were often targeted for practicing their Catholic faith and displaying their religious symbols in public.
In the aftermath of the Algerian war, the rejection of the North Africans was more of a rejection of their ethnicity rather than their religion. Over time, xenophobic attacks on French Arabs, Blacks, and other minorities eventually led to the 1983 March in protest against widespread racism, discrimination, and racial profiling and violence. For many young French of Arab descent (mostly of the second generation), the movement placed a greater emphasis on the acceptance of ethnic and cultural identity. The movement was advocacy for anti-racism, equality, political integration, social integration, and economic integration for minorities.
The 1983 March prompted President François Mitterrand to intervene in an attempt to diffuse the escalating movement. While the French authorities managed to diffuse the movement to the issue of race, it disregarded the demands for cultural recognition and socio-economic integration.
For decades, the government's lack of initiative to take minorities' demands seriously, compounded the frustrations of Franco-Arabs and other minorities. To add insult to injury, mainstream politicians have been politicizing their cultural identity and faith.
5- French Youth Radicalism: Decades of Marginalization in the MakingYears of constant stigmatization and exclusion of their cultural identity, ethnicity, and religion have driven French Arabs feeling very bitter towards their country France. But worse, it has pushed some French youths towards radicalism. While most French would attribute Islam as the cause of radicalism and violence, research has shown that the majority of Muslims staunchly oppose violence in the name of Islam (Pew Research Center).
The 1995 Paris metro bombings, the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attack, the 2015 Jewish Kosher Supermarket attack in Nice, and the 2015 mass shootings attacks on Stade de France, and other atrocious attacks are symptoms of France’s years of marginalization and intolerance towards its ethnic minorities giving birth to youth radicalism and terrorism. The increasing number of attacks paint a trouble picture.
According to a study on Terrorism, France holds the largest number of foreign fighters in western Europe. A 2016 report published by the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism (ICCT) estimates that over 900 French foreign fighters had traveled to Syria and Iraq between 2012 and 2015. Of this total, 75 percent had joined ISIS. The study paints a scary picture of a potential of 2000 radicalized French citizens that could be active in terrorist activities.
In contrast to France, the UK had about 750 foreign fighters who traveled abroad between 2011 and 2015. On the other hand, the US had far less with 200 US citizens and residents were convicted of terrorism-related activities between 2001 and 2013. About 250 Americans attempted to or successfully traveled to Syria and Iraq. While Canada had only 185 Canadian foreign fighters had traveled abroad.
The reason why France has more foreign fighters than its British and North-American counterparts is that the perceived better social, economic, and political integration of Muslims and other minorities in North American communities as compared to France.
Source: Pew Research Center
According to Pew Research Center, most Muslims in France feel very French however they feel that the native French don’t see them as French because of their ethnicity. The study also found that French Muslims are somewhat more likely than those in other Western countries to report that they have had experienced xenophobic and racist attacks with younger Muslims more likely to report a bad experience.
The Legatum Prosperity Index is an index that measures a country's level of individual freedom. The index ranks countries based on access to legal rights; freedom of speech and religion; and social tolerance, notably towards immigrants and ethnic minorities. The ranking shows that the UK (11th place), Canada (14th place), and the United States (18th place) are more tolerant than France ranking at 23rd place.
Part of the problem of France’s intolerance towards its minorities lies in its secondary education system. The French education system tends to glorify France's history while minimizing its legacy of colonialism and oppression. Such a set-up creates an uncomfortable feeling of identity for French minorities. Furthermore, contrary to North America, ethnic cultural studies are non-existent in France's secondary education. Such an education ecosystem creates a cultural rift between the majority culture and the minority multi-ethnic culture. A rift that the far-right has been able to exploit to its advantage.
6- France’s Secular Fundamentalism vs SecularismToday, France’s version of secularism (Laïcité) is borderline 'secular fundamentalism'. This form of secularism is defined in the urban dictionary as:
“The adherence to anti-religious ideology that militantly ridicules, mocks, scorns and satirizes the idea of the existence of a deity or deities and or religion, indifferent of feelings of bigotry intolerance hatred and persecution that adherents feel as a result.”
France’s secularism embodied by the spirit of Voltaire differ greatly from the Anglophones’ secularism embodied by the spirit of John Locke. The former advocates for State freedom from religious influence while the latter advocates for State liberal toleration towards religion. The two contrasting philosophies explain why multiculturalism tends to thrive in countries like the US, Canada, UK, New Zealand, or Australia as compared to France.
Laïcité comes from the Latin word ‘laicus’ which means “of the people”. It is a republican social pact that defines a place for religion in society. However, many francophones who look up to France, have a hard time reconciling the version of Laïcité that France is perpetuating. The kind of secularism that French politicians and the public have been using to justify intolerance and exclusion. True Laïcité should not be used to justify xenophobic and racist intolerance towards a particular ethnic minority group.
If there is one model of Laïcité that France should learn from is of its former colony Senegal. At the time of colonization, Senegal became the primary French base in West Africa. The West African nation’s secularism was heavily influenced by France’s concept of secularism with a strong sense of civil society; a tradition that has been maintained since its 1960 independence. Senegal is a vibrant democracy with 20 ethnic groups and has a predominantly Muslim population (about 94%). The Christian population represents 5% while other beliefs represent 1%. It is a country that respects and tolerates different religions and faiths. For instance, Senegal’s first President Leopold Sedar Senghor was a Catholic who ruled the country for 20 years. His successor Abdou Diouf is a Muslim married to a Christian wife. Diouf's son is a Muslim married to a Jewish wife. Abdou Diouf’s successor, Abdoulaye Wade is a Muslim married to a French Christian wife. Furthermore, Senegal recognizes both Muslim and Christian holidays as national holidays. So, religious, cultural and ethnic tolerance has been part of the DNA of Senegal.
Contrary to France, Senegal’s secularism can be described as a hybrid between the French and Anglo-Saxon models of secularism. On the one hand, the secular state maintains a separation between religious and governmental institutions, and on the other hand, it allows religious and non-religious institutions to try to influence the government, without ever threatening the nation’s peaceful coexistence among various faiths. In this context, Senegal’s form of secularism is used as a political instrument for the social control of religion while ensuring the freedom and protection of religion against persecution, abuse, and public bigotry.
Conclusion: What Secularism Should Be and Should Not Be?Secularism should not be used as an ideology to force people to assimilate or place a ban on a person’s freedom to wear religious symbols or clothes in public, in the same way, that it is practiced in authoritarian regimes (i.e China's religious and cultural genocide) or in countries with sharia law (forcing hijabs) . Instead, secularism should be a political principle that embraces and values all faiths, and provides the freedom of choice to all individuals.
Secularism should not be used as an excuse to perpetuate xenophobic attacks and bigotry on minorities, but instead should be used as a platform to promote tolerance of multiculturalism and diversity.
The conclusion is that France’s aggressive and fundamentalist version of secularism compounded with decades of stigmatization and marginalization of minorities has contributed to the radicalization of French Muslim youths, who then turn to terrorism. France should learn from the Anglo-Saxon model and Francophone models such as Senegal. Until France takes minorities seriously in terms of cultural tolerance, ethnic identity recognition and socio-economic inclusion, France will continue to remain a country in crisis and in decline.
2020.10.16 14:48 StevenStevens43 Art Oenfer & the search for King Lots grail
Search for Lancelots grail:submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]
In this article i am going to attempt to locate Lancelots grail, leading up to trying to finally identify the most likely candidate for King Arthur.
Now before we go any farther, i have left links below for the previous Art Oenfers.
You should not read the book back to front.
First read those below, starting at one, and then read this one.
King Art Oenfer & Son - Part 1
Gallus the Mac - Part 2
King Art Oenfer III & the barbarcia conspiriato - Part 3
King Art Oenfer IV & V - Part 4
King Art Oenfer VI - Part 5
King Art Oenfer & the historia francorum - Part 6
King Art Oenfer & The boys - Part 7
Link for photo
Ok, so as with most of my other articles, i will be investigating the myths and legends of traditional British history, comparing them to contemporary accounts, and also investigating the modern day criticisms from historians and scholars.
I will begin with the criticisms below.
I will also add, the criticisms are blank statements, and completely unhelpful without explanation into how they came to their conclusion, and without proving that they have the necessary understanding in the subject to make such a judgement.
The details of Arthur's story are mainly composed of folklore and literary invention, and modern historians generally agree that he is unhistorical.Link for photo
Arthurian coat of Arms
So, where on earth do i begin with this?
I think i will begin with why it might be that King Arthur's earliest appearances are in Y Goddodin literature.
 The sparse historical background of Arthur is gleaned from various sources, including the Annales Cambriae, the Historia Brittonum, and the writings of Gildas. Arthur's name also occurs in early poetic sources such as Y Gododdin.Link for photo
And the reason King Arthur is so popular in Gododdin literature, probably has to do with Lancelot, which mythology depicts as being orphaned as a child and being brought up in the realm of the Lady in the lake.
Lancelot du Lac (meaning Lancelot of the Lake, Welsh: Lawnslot y Llyn), also written as Launcelot and other variants (including early German Lanzelet, early French Lanselos, early Welsh Lanslod Lak, Italian Lancelotto and Lanci[a]lotto, and Spanish Lanzarote del Lago) is one of the Knights of the Round Table in Arthurian legend, where he typically is depicted as King Arthur's greatest companion and one of his greatest knights. According to legend, Lancelot is the orphaned son of King Ban of Benwick, raised in the fairy realm by the Lady of the Lake.Link for photo
Now, the mythological Lancelot, would most likely be the same person as the legendary King Lot of Lothian.
But basically, according to the infinite wisdom of modern day historians, scholars and university graduates, this is just something Geoffrey of Monmouth quite literally made up.
Lot, Loth or Lothus /ˈlɒt/ is the king of Lothian, the realm of the Picts in the Arthurian legend. Such a ruler first appeared late in the 1st millennium's hagiographical material concerning Saint Kentigern (also known as Saint Mungo), which feature a Leudonus, king of Leudonia, a Latin name for Lothian. In the 12th century, Geoffrey of Monmouth adapted this to Lot, king of Lothian, in his influential chronicle Historia Regum Britanniae, portraying him as King Arthur's brother-in-law and ally. In the wake of Geoffrey's writings,Link for photo
King Lots arms
However, there is a factual and historic Saint, and founder of the city of Glasgow, named Saint Mungo.
Kentigern (Welsh: Cyndeyrn Garthwys; Latin: Kentigernus), known as Mungo, was a missionary in the Scottish Kingdom of Strathclyde in the late sixth century, and the founder and patron saint of the city of Glasgow.Link for photo
Tomb of Saint Mungo in Glasgow cathedral
Now, the factual and historic Saint Mungo, was the grandson of the allegedly legendary King Lot.
Mungo's mother Teneu was a princess, the daughter of King Lleuddun (Latin: Leudonus) who ruled a territory around what is now Lothian in Scotland, perhaps the kingdom of Gododdin in the Old North.Link for photo
Saint Mungo sitting atop of the Glasgow coat of Arms
Constantine I of Picts:
Now did you read the quote where it said King Lot was the king of the Picts? Aswell as being King Arthurs Brother in law?
Well, this would be because the legendary King Lot, is the real Lancelot, and the historic Constantine I, is the surname of Lot.
Fergus II to Kenneth II
43, Constantine, 457 AD, Polydore Vergil (Anglica Historia, 1555) gives from here a succession close to Buchanan.Link for photo
Lothian from atop Arthur's seat
King of Norway:
However, nothing is known about the Historic Constantine.
It appears everything about Constantine is written under the name Lot, by the norse-gales.
And that is what Goddodin is.
It is norse-gaelic.
And Lot is also the king of Norway, as well as the Orkneys.
Lot chiefly figures as king of Lothian, but in other sources he also rules Orkney and sometimes Norway. He is generally depicted as the husband of Arthur's sister or half-sister, often known as Anna or Morgause.Fergus Mor:
And of course, as you will remember from the previous article, king of Dal Riata, Fergus Mor was sent by his parents to be brought up in Scandinavia, as wartorn Britain was too dangerous at this point in time.
Fergus Mor in later accounts
Fergusius II according to Buchanan's count, was raised in exile in Scandinavia. He later fought with the Franks, before eventually returning to Scotland and reconquering the Scottish lands.Erc of Dalriata:
Now, i would just like to look at Fergus Mor's father just a second.
Fergus Mór mac Eirc (Scottish Gaelic: Fearghas Mòr Mac Earca; English: Fergus the Great) was a legendary king of Dál Riata. He was the son of Erc of Dalriada.Eric and Alaric:
Then i would like to pop over to Scandinavia, and point out the two Swedish myhtological warrior brothers, Alaric and Eric.
Alaric and Eric
Alaric and Eric (Old Norse Alrekr and Eiríkr ), were two legendary kings of Sweden.Link for photo
Alaric and Eric hitting eachother with horse bridles
Then i would like to point out the historic king of the Visigoths, who is best known in history for destroying the Western Roman empire forever, and had a Visgothic empire that actually, in the end, dwarfed the western Roman empire, and likely stretched as far as Scotland, Ireland and Wales, but were likely opposed by the Saxons.
Oh, and also a son of Euric. Who was the son of Alaric I, who had sacked Rome in 410 AD.
Therefore, historians and scholars that have been referring to Alaric and Eric for years, as mythological warriors, are simply not doing their jobs as historians, and would appear to not be historians.
Alaric II (Gothic: *Alareiks, *𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐍃, "ruler of all"; also known as Alaricus in Latin, c. 458/466 – August 507) was the King of the Visigoths in 484–507. He succeeded his father Euric as king of the Visigoths in Toulouse on December 28, 484; he was the great-grandson of the more famous Alaric I, who sacked Rome in 410. He established his capital at Aire-sur-l'Adour (Vicus Julii) in Aquitaine. His dominions included not only the majority of Hispania (excluding its northwestern corner) but also Gallia Aquitania and the greater part of an as-yet undivided Gallia Narbonensis.Link for photo
Alaric II coin
And to top it off, it is infact quite contemporary that the norse gaelic realm of Gododdin, was located in Lothian.
Link for photo
Gododdin on map
Geoffrey of Monmouth the fantasist:
Now i am going to deal with the claim from professional historians and scholars, that just as good as call Geoffrey a fantasist.
Now, whilst Geoffrey does credit King Arthur and the boys with a few military victories, he actually say's nothing about collapsing the Roman empire along the way.
But, that is exactly what contemporary history points to.
It points to kings of Lothian and Dal riata being from the exact same family as the kings that collapsed the Roman empire, and those kings are said to be related to King Arthur.
So, what is fanciful about it? It appears our scholars and historians must think the Roman empire was collapsed by fairy kings, if they do not believe that actual real kings were behind it.
Perhaps they have been reading historic childrens stories, as opposed to adult history.
Arthur is a central figure in the legends making up the Matter of Britain. The legendary Arthur developed as a figure of international interest largely through the popularity of Geoffrey of Monmouth's fanciful and imaginative 12th-century Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain).Link for photo
Lady of the lake (Waterfalls in the Norwegian fjords are often referred to with ladies names)
And now, on to Arthur constantine's sword, excalibur.
Many elements and incidents that are now an integral part of the Arthurian story appear in Geoffrey's Historia, including Arthur's father Uther Pendragon, the magician Merlin, Arthur's wife Guinevere, the sword Excalibur,Link for photo_(14801002423).jpg)
The sword would most likely be Crocea Mors, the sword that Nennius allegedly took from Julius Caesar.
I think it would far more likely be that, than the mythological contemporary tale spread by contemporary historians and scholars that Constantines sword was a message in the sky from Jesus.
. The Britons hold firm, and that night Caesar flees back to Gaul. Cassibelanus's celebrations are muted by Nennius's death from his head wound. He is buried with the sword he took from Caesar, which is named Crocea Mors (Yellow Death).Link for photo
And now to the Holy grail.
Is it a cup? Is it a dish? Is it a stone?
Is it simply a treasure of great importance, as described in Arthurian literature, or is it some unknown and mystic magical thing connected to Jesus, as taught by most contemporary historians and scholars?
How do we solve this?
Well, the holy grail means different things to different people.
To Christians it is the drinking cup of Christ.
But we are not looking for the drinking cup of Christ.
We are looking for Lancelots holy grail.
The 12th-century French writer Chrétien de Troyes, who added Lancelot and the Holy Grail to the story, began the genre of Arthurian romanceLink for photo
Location of the grail
So, remembering that Lancelot is King Lot, let us begin the search for the divine grace, and castle of Corbenic, by finding out the most likely location for Galahads birth.
Corbenic (Carbone[c]k, Corbin) is the name of the Grail castle, the edifice housing the Holy Grail in Arthurian legend. It is a magical domain of the Grail keeper, often known as the Fisher King. The castle's descriptions vary greatly in different sources, and it first appears by that name in the Lancelot-Grail cycle where it is also the birthplace of Galahad.Link for photo
So, to begin the search for the divine grace, and Corbenic castle, we must find out who King Lots illegitimate son was.
The authors of the Vulgate Cycle used the Grail as a symbol of divine grace; Galahad, illegitimate son of Lancelot and Elaine, the world's greatest knight and the Grail Bearer at the castle of CorbenicLink for photo
Out of King Lots five legitimate sons, one of them is very much considered a bastard son, whos father is disputed.
So Mordred is obviously Galahad.
As Modredus, Mordred was depicted as Arthur's traitorous nephew and a legitimate son of King Lot in Geoffrey of Monmouth's pseudo-historical work Historia Regum Britanniae which then served as the basis for the following evolution of the legend since the 12th century. Later variants most often characterised him as Arthur's villainous bastard son, born of an incestuous relationship with his half-sister, the Queen of Orkney named either Anna, Orcades or Morgause.Link for photo
Well, the most likely location for Mordreds birth would have been Arthur seat, as Arthur seat around 1600 years ago was one giant hill fort, with forts within forts, all the way to the summit.
Link for photo
It must have been quite an incredible place.
Archaeologists have found several hillforts within what would have been Grail castle.
And they were written about in Y Goddodin.
Hill fort defences are visible round the main massif of Arthur's Seat at Dunsapie Hill and above Samson's Ribs, in the latter cases certainly of prehistoric date. These forts are likely to have been centres of power of the Votadini, who were the subject of the poem Y Gododdin which is thought to have been written about 600 AD. Two stony banks on the east side of the hill represent the remains of an Iron Age hill-fort and a series of cultivation terraces are obvious above the road just beyond and best viewed from Duddingston.Link for photo
Dunsapie hill fort, within a fort
This is going to have tbc in Search for the grail part 2, as i just ran out of characters.
2020.10.14 03:36 sunnysucculent Is there any evidence to explain why Tuesday 13 (Martes 13) is considered unlucky in Latin America?
2020.10.13 23:53 God_Is_Good123 Why I'm KJV Only
"These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."-1 John 2:26-27KJVO people do not believe that God can't speak to believers through other versions. On the contrary. We just believe that God will gift them with understanding if they do seek out a perfect version, and that they will always come to find out that it's the KJV. God will put the KJV in their hands if they're truly seeking it. If not this, at least a translation in their language that stems from it. Seeing as we know what happened at Pentecost, (Acts 2), none of this is rather too farfetched to assume. After all, with God, all things are possible.
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."-Matthew 24:35Let's look at some verses, shall we?
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."-2 Timothy 3:16-17According to the Word of God, "the man of God" is perfect if he has the Scriptures in his hands and abides by them and only them. Why would the Bible make such a proclamation, if there was not one book for the man to depend upon? Do you think that God would make it difficult to know His truth, or that He would lock it behind language barriers, cultural contexts, and various manuscripts in multiple places rather than simply put it all in one place to be easily accessible to all?
"Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God."-Hebrews 10:7Notice, this verse says book (as in singular) and not "books." There must be one book from which we derive all our doctrine. Otherwise, things would be confusing ("For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints"; 1 Cor. 14:33) and it could be harder for someone to get saved, despite Jesus saying it only requires child-like faith to come to God and nothing more:
"In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."-Luke 10:21Do you really think learning a whole new language and pouring over thousands upon thousands of manuscripts could be considered "child-like" faith?
"Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein."-Luke 18:17
"At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me."-Matthew 18:1-5
"The LORD preserveth the simple: I was brought low, and he helped me."-Psalm 116:6Reading the Gospels as ancient documents to be analyzed, dissected and read in their original languages may be a legitimate activity in its own right, but you’ll never come to faith in that way. That would be like performing literary source criticism on a love letter in order to get to know your beloved better. God is not limited by time, space, and the whims of culture and human language. His Word was meant to withstand the test of time, and be preserved. And we know this because the Scriptures say so.
"The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."-Psalm 12:6-7The point I'm trying to make here is that English speakers have an easier path to the Word of God through simply approaching and reading the KJV, rather than having to learn a whole new language. Maybe someone decides to learn Hebrew and/or Greek, and that's great. But for the rest of us who don't, doctrinal sacrifices (most specifically those pertaining to the subject of salvation, as I'm well aware the rest of the Bible is rich with deeper meaning that requires one to study; Pro. 25:2 cf. 2 Timothy 2:15) aren't suddenly being made if we decide to make that decision. Since I'm KJVO, I'm perfectly fine with the belief that God preserved His Word in the English language through that version. If someone cannot speak English, then any other version translated using the KJV's manuscripts would do just fine for that person's language. Simple as that.
"And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears."-Luke 4:20-21This passage, again, seems to make clear that there is one book, and that everything you can learn about what God has decided to reveal to man is found in one place.
"And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.”-Deuteronomy 8:3Why would God starve His children by making it unnecessarily difficult for us to find His perfect preserved Word? Not only that, but this verse says that by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God does a man live. Not just some here and some there, but every. Would God sprinkle some of His Word here, or there? Or would He simply put it all in one place?
"Thus speaketh the Lord God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book."-Jeremiah 30:2God promised He would preserve His word forever. This promise of preservation goes beyond just the general message of the Scriptures to the very words themselves (Psa. 12:6-7). God did not promise He will preserve His word (singular), but His words (plural). If not every word God breathed-out is preserved, then we cannot say with certainty that the Scriptures are pure and inerrant.
"This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success."-Joshua 1:8
"Seek ye out of the book of the Lord, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them."-Isaiah 34:16
"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you."-Deuteronomy 4:2I'm not "KJV Only" just because it's the KJV. I'm first and foremost a big believer of God being able to preserve His words, then am I KJV only. It's not the other way around. I come to the first conclusion, then the second after the fact. That means I pour through all the evidence of the KJV being the perfect Bible after having realized there must be a perfect version. KJVO folks do not conflate the two processes. If God led us to believe it was the ESV, then that's what we've would've considered as perfect. It's the same with every other version. But alas, we always come to the conclusion that it's the KJV after considering all the facts and evidence supporting it, not before.
"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."-Proverbs 30:5-6
"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."-Revelation 22:18-19
"For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven."-Psalm 119:89What I've shown you here does indeed establish the fact that there is one book, and one place where you can find all of God's Word in full. If "KJV Onlyism" is "bad" because we believe God can actually preserve His Word like He said He did, then all I have to say is Romans 3:4.
" And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?  And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.  And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him."-Acts 8:36-38Just look at what this looks like when you remove this passage of verse 37. This is where you get all your Catholics believing that baptism comes before salvation, effectively making your salvation dependent on works. The crazy thing is, these Alexandrian manuscripts aren't even consistent in their heretical theology! They not only strip and add to God's word flippantly, but they make doctrinal statements that contradict each other all over the place and support a wide variety of heretical beliefs which include (but are not limited to): Mormonism, Roman Catholicism, Jehovah's Witness theology, Eastern Orthodox, arianism, annihilationism, universalism, gnosticism, “humanism,” and so much more.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."Go ahead and look for yourself how many modern "Bibles" omit the word "begotten" here, effectively making Jesus look like a son (small s) of God (as if a created being like an angel or human) and not the only begotten Son (big S) of God (Who is, obviously, not created)...
" For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.  And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."-1 John 5:7-8[Note, I include verse 8 for reasons that I am about to make clear by way of quoting another translation's reading of both verses 7 and 8.]
" For there are three that testify:  the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."-1 John 5:7-8This modern "Bible" not only omits pretty much the entirety of verse 7, but also the words "there are three that bear witness in earth" in verse 8 so as to try and make the two frankensteined verses make any sense. It even says "these three are in agreement" rather than "these three agree in one" in verse 8.
"It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."-Psalm 118:8
2020.10.13 04:23 Heru_Ur The Great God El and the spread of the UrRean culture
The Homo sapiens transitioning from hunting & gathering into farming and then into Homo sapiens sapiens. This takes place following the collapse of the ice age followed by massive inland flooding throughout the world.submitted by Heru_Ur to mythology [link] [comments]
Assur, the God-of-Agriculture and Animal husbandry built an Archonship following the collapse of the ice age.
c. 10,000 BC Preboreal period begins.
World: Sea levels rise abruptly and massive inland flooding occurs due to glacier melt.
Neolithic culture begins, end of most recent glaciation. First cave drawings of the Mesolithic period are made, with war scenes and religious scenes, beginnings of what became storytelling, and metamorphosed into acting.
They were hunters. Ur the perfect power icon.
Ur, the hawk-god, got his name from the sound of hawk's wings.
Heru_Ur in Stride
A soaring hawk floats silently on air. After the hawk swoops down and snatches up its prey, it makes powerful wing thrusts to gain altitude carrying the load. That is the successful moment of the hunt. At that successful moment of the hunt, the hawk's wings make an ur ur ur sound as it makes those power thrusts to gain altitude. That ur sound of hawk's wings thrusting to gain altitude is the root source of Ur, the hawk-god's original name.
Re, the sun-god, got its name from Ur, the hawk-god.
When Assur's descendants became sun worshippers, their sun-god needed a name. A soaring hawk floats silently above the earth. The sun was also a silent high soaring deity. The sun-god got its name from the hawk-god. The name of Re, the sun-god is derived from Ur, the hawk-god's name. Re is Ur said backward. UrRe is the name of the winged sun disk without serpents.
Assur and his descendants founded a far-flung empire of related kingdoms. Those original agrarian descendants of Assur were the original UrRe-ans. Their name UrReans defines them as followers of the hawk-god and sun-god religion.
The name of this symbol is not "winged solar disk," or "sun disk." That's a description. It has a name. It's name is UrRe. The name UrRe is a compound of two gods' names, Ur the hawk god + Re the sun god. This is the source of our word Aryan. This is the source of our Aryan family of languages.
When our ancestors turned to agriculture to replace their hunting and gathering economies, they began to recognize the sun as the source of their sustenance. The "sun god" became a major deity. The UrRe winged solar disk religious symbol represents the transitional phase from hunting and gathering to farming in the evolution of human civilization.
Following the meltdown of the Ice Age, a great conquering hero was born. That was "El." He was a Genghis Khan or Alexander the Great of the prehistoric age. There are no written records of that era. There are only tales and legends that were handed down by word of mouth for generations before any of them were recorded. El and his sons conquered and bred widely over the whole region that we call "The Levant." El became a deified ancestor. His descendants became an empire of related tribes and kingdoms in the prehistoric era. The empire of El included kingdoms, clans, and tribes that farmed along the Nile before there was an Egypt. The original Isis was a descendant of El who was born in the Nile delta. Egyptian civilization sprang from the womb of Isis. Over the course of time, descendants of El from the Isis bloodline came to dominate the old El empire. Her bloodline became the Egyptian empire.
El was the first king of the first kingdom. Before El there were tribal chieftains and tribal governments by councils of elders, but there weren't hereditary kings. Out of the first kingdom, the first empire was born. The conquerors of the El bloodline bred more or less indiscriminately with the people they conquered. "they took them wives of all which they chose." When two tribes come together by love or by war, subsequent generations will be speaking some combination of both languages. The El empire was held together by family ties, UrRean religion, and some linguistic links. There was no unified language throughout the empire, but there were some linguistic ties. UrRean hawk god/sun god religion spread throughout the Mediterranean region with the conquests of El and his descendants.
Hawk god/Sun god UrRae symbol from the ruins of Nimrud palace
Winged Solar Disc religion of El and his descendants spread throughout the eastern Mediterranean region... BEFORE the dawn of dynastic Egypt. Before the dawn of dynastic Egypt, the Nile River was home to two UrRean kingdoms. Those early conquests by El and his descendants combined warring tribes and clans into larger units. The more successful ones developed work-gang agriculture, large scale engineered irrigation systems, some specialization of labor (artisanship), possibly land ownership, and the organizational structure to manage and maintain all of that. That was the UrRean empire of El. Our languages were being developed in that early culture.
You can go all over the world and see Christian crosses on buildings and whatnot which tell you something about the local culture - it's a Christian culture regardless of what language and culture it might otherwise have.
This is the famous Narmer palette. It allegedly depicts king Narmer of Upper Egypt conquering Lower Egypt and establishing historical Egypt. The Narmer palette contains hawk god and solar disk symbols. King Narmer was an UrRean. King Narmer was an African. King Narmer was an Aryan. The name Aryan didn't always have the racist connotations that it has now. It was a religious designation, not a racial one.
Aryan c. 1600, as a term in classical history, from Latin Arianus, Ariana, from Greek Aria, Areia, names applied in classical times to the eastern part of ancient Persia and to its inhabitants. Ancient Persians used the name in reference to themselves (Old Persian ariya-), hence Iran. Ultimately from Sanskrit arya- "compatriot;" in later language "noble, of good family."
In time, the old UrRean empire fell into war and disarray. Internal rivalries tore it apart. Then 5000 years ago, a genius child was born in the Nile delta. She was "twice wise." That was Isis. A great religion was founded on her womb, her works, and her teachings.
Isis is always a part of the picture. The name Israel means Isis-Royal, the royal line of Isis. The name Israel is a compound of three gods names, Isis the mother goddess + Ra the sun god + El who was the ancient forerunner of Osiris before he was Osiris. The line of kings who sprung from the womb of Isis ruled the world for about 3000 years. In his book, The Pagan Christ, Tom Harpur says "Comparative religious scholars have made lists of thirty to fifty such avatars or saviors, including Osiris, Horus, Krishna, Bacchus, Orpheus, Hermes, Balder, Adonis, Hercules . . . Thor . . . and many more."
That list of thirty to fifty avatars and saviors includes only men – no women. The first two on the list are Osiris and Horus, but it leaves out Isis who resurrected Osiris from the dead, and who gave birth to Horus! She doesn’t count because she was a woman even though the whole Egyptian religion, and the entire bloodline of divine kings, sprung from her womb, her works, and her teachings! Isis was every bit as real a person as was Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Buddha, Confucius, Muhammad, Zarathustra, or any of the other great avatars of history. In fact, she was before all of them! Nevertheless, she has been reduced to a fictional character in academia and Western culture generally. The authors of the Bible AFTER about 600 BC rewrote their entire history going all the way back to Adam's rib just to get Mother Goddess Isis out of their ancestry and replace her with their patriarchal war god, Yahweh/Jehovah.
El, the Great God of Canaan seated on the throne of the kingdom of Ugarit. Ugarit was an important port/city/state on the Mediterranean coast in what is now Syria. This artifact dates to about 1400-1200 BCE. This is a commemorative stone portrait of the marriage of Ugarit into the Egyptian empire.
This is a stone plaque of the god El seated on his throne. It came from the ruins of the ancient city of Ugarit, which dates back to about 6000 BC. (That was 2000 years before Biblical God created the universe.) This particular artifact is not that old. It shows Egyptian influence. Notice the UrRae winged solar disk without serpents above the scene and notice that the ancestral god El is being offered a serpent. That serpent probably represents a pharaoh's daughter, a 'Daughter of Isis,' being introduced into the royal bloodline of that Ugarit kingdom.
El accepts a serpent
The original Isis was probably born a natural genius. She was twice wise. Our words genius and Genesis are both derived from "genes of Isis." They sought to procreate a new line of genius royalty from the genius child. With the rise of Isis' descendants, the serpents of Isis were added to the old UrRae winged solar disk. That new symbol and the new bloodline of Isis came to rule much of the world.
El, the Great God of Canaan
Hawk~Serpent~Sun motif Soaring above Assur and the Two-Eyed Goddess
The book, The Origin of Consciousness, by Julian Jaynes. Jaynes was a psychiatrist who did a lot of brain research. In it, he goes into the origins of civilizations in his quest of the origins of consciousness. In a chapter titled: The Origin of Civilization, he argues that the first god was a dead king who was revered after his death.
The book has very few illustrations, but in a chapter titled Gods, Graves, and Idols, he has an illustration of a Hittite "god" and a king. He dates the scene to about 1250 BC. In his description he says "The god Sharrums holds his steward-king, Tudhaliya, in his embrace. The pretzel like hieroglyph for deity is seen as the head in the god's ideogram on the upper left and repetitively on the god's crown. It is also seen in the king's ideogram on the upper right, indicating. I think, that the king too was heard in hallucinations by his subjects."
The god Sharrums holds his steward-king, Tudhaliya, in his embrace.
He talks about the hieroglyphs of the king's name and so forth, but he misses this figure at the very top of the illustration altogether.
If that figure had been an ordinary Christian cross,
or an Orthodox cross
or a Coptic cross
he would surely have noticed all of that, but the UrRe is invisible.
The Invisible Religion
But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves. For thou shalt worship no other God: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God
Exod. 34: 13,14
That is all powerful patriarchal monotheism.
Ye shall utterly destroy all the places wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree: And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the craven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place.
Duet. 12: 2,3.
He goes on to say that "...the Incas themselves, like a synthesis of Egypt and Assyria...Inca himself was the god king, a pattern so similar to Egypt's that less conservative historians of American antiquity have felt that there must have been some diffusion. But I suggest that given man, language, and cities organized on a bicameral basis, there are only certain fixed patterns into which history can fit."
"When the Inca died, his concubines and personal servants first drank and danced, and then were strangled to join him in his journey to the sun, just as had previously happened in Egypt, Ur, and China."
This author, with his excellent education, sees all of those similarities across all of those cultures and yet refuses to see them as a connected culture. Those "less conservative historians of American antiquity" who have seen the connection are people who have been shunned and dismissed out of the halls of academia for their heresies. This is like trying to understand the history of Western civilization of the last 1500-2000 years without Christianity in it. All you would see would be an endless, meaningless, clash of tribes and nations. It would make no sense at all and that's exactly what we have with Isis' religion. This is what militant, patriarchal, jealous-god, monotheism has brought us – non understanding of our own origins.
The first dragon imagery in the world.
The addition of the serpents represents a religious/political/genealogical renaissance that was a major event in the cultural, religious, linguistic, and genetic, evolution of the human race. It has a name. It's name is UrReUs. That name is a compound of three gods' names. Ur the hawk god + Re the sun god + Isis the serpent goddess. That UrReUs religion was widespread in the ancient world before the dawn of Monotheism, Hinduism, Buddhism, or any of the other religions we know in the world today. Languages and cultures all over the world have some roots going back to that ancient culture.
The Ur Ray religion and El genealogy spread across the Mediterranean region. Then a genius child was born in the Nile delta. That was Isis. Those people were cattle breeders who routinely saved their best animals for breeding stock. Essentially, they did the same thing with the genius child. Whether or not the descendants of El were practicing eugenics before the birth of Isis is difficult to discern, but from Isis onward they definitely were practicing eugenics. That's how she became the Mother Goddess of Egyptian civilization and worldwide empire.
Isis with the Uraeus at the Vatican
In those days there was no distinction between religion and politics – and religion was largely ancestor worship. Your ancestry was all important to your station in life. El, the patriarch of it all was a deified ancestor. El was the original "god." Daughters of Pharaohs, who were "Daughters of Isis," who were pedigreed descendants of the original genius child, were married into the ruling families of tribes and nations all over the planet.
The old UrRe religion spread throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. The new Uraeus religion went worldwide.
2020.10.12 21:14 BT03210 La famille de Bourbon fête ses onze siècles dans son berceau de l'Allier
2020.10.12 19:26 StevenStevens43 The confessio of Saint Palladius
Saint Patrick:submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]
In this article i am going to attempt to prove the real identity of Saint Patrick beyond reasonable doubt.
I am also going to deal with the criticisms against the Irish legends regards to Saint Patrick, whilst perhaps investigating the political landscape of the time, in order to get a better understanding and grasp on the subject.
So to begin with, i will begin with modern day historians and scholars first debunk of the Irish legends.
According to professional scholars and historians, the Irish apparently involved themselves in a giant conspiracy to deceive mankind by attempting to push back the date of Niall of the nine hostages to accomodate as early an arrival time for the hero Saint Patrick, as possible.
Historicity and dates
:pp. 78–79 to conclude that the events of the later half of the 5th century have been extended backwards to accommodate as early a date as possible for the arrival of Saint Patrick, with the effect of pushing Niall back up to half a century. Hughes says "Niall himself must have died not before the middle of the fifth century".Link for photo-_stained_glass,_Saint_Patrick-_detail.jpg)
Now before tackling the above claim, i should probably begin with Niall Nogiallach, the Irish high king, who was accused of kidnapping Saint Patrick.
a Latin Life of Saint Patrick, says that Niall led Irish raids on Roman Britain, and in one of those raids Patrick and his sisters were abducted.Confessio of Patrick:
And according to Saint Patrick's autobiography, he was indeed kidnapped in Britain by Irish raiders and taken back to Ireland to work as a slave on a farm before escaping after a period of six years.
According to the autobiographical Confessio of Patrick, when he was about sixteen, he was captured by Irish pirates from his home in Britain and taken as a slave to Ireland, looking after animals; he lived there for six years before escaping and returning to his family.Link for photo-_geograph.org.uk-_834986.jpg)
Alleged location of Saint Patricks slavery
87 Years of age:
Now what brought them to the conclusion that the Irish have conspired to bring Nialls lifetime backward, was the fact that at least one of Niall Nogiallach's sons lived to the ripe old age of 87 years of age, which seems an implausible long-time span for a single individual.
Historicity and dates
However, the early annals record the activities of his sons between 429 and 516, an implausibly long time-span for a single generation, leading scholars like Kathleen Hughes and Francis J. Byrne:pp. 78–79Niall death:
Now, regards to Niall's death, depending upon which Irish source you choose to follow, you will pretty much get a date somewhere between 382 AD and 411 AD.
Historicity and dates
Niall is presumed, on the basis of the importance of his sons and grandsons, to have been a historical person,:70 but the early Irish annals say little about him. The Annals of Inisfallen date his death before 382, and the Chronicon Scotorum to 411. The later Annals of the Four Masters dates his reign to 379–405, and the chronology of Geoffrey Keating's Foras Feasa ar Éirinn to 368–395.Nath I:
And for one of his sons, Nath I, a death date between 428 AD and 445 AD.
In the Annals of Ulster there is an entry for the year 445 which originally consisted solely of Nath Í's name. A later writer, presuming this to be his death notice, added the detail that he was struck by lightning in the Alps, circumstances also recounted in the Lebor Gabála, Keating and the Annals of the Four Masters, the latter of which dates it to 428.Link for photo
Nath I mac
Loegaire mac Neill:
And pretty much all sources tend to agree that Niall's other son, died 462 AD.
So, at first glance, i do not see anything untoward.
Loegaire mac Neill
Lóegaire (floruit fifth century) (reigned 428–458 AD, according to the Annals of the Four Masters of the Kingdom of Ireland)(died c. 462), also Lóeguire, is said to have been a son of Niall of the Nine Hostages. The Irish annals and king lists include him as a King of Tara or High King of Ireland. He appears as an adversary of Saint Patrick in several hagiographies.Link for photo
Loegaire mac Neill
Scholarly leaders have concluded that Niall's death must not be before the middle of the fifth century, and they date his death at 452 AD.
Though, they do not explain why his death must be around 450 AD, nor how they managed to conclude he died in 452 AD.
Historicity and dates
Hughes says "Niall himself must have died not before the middle of the fifth century". Byrne, following James Carney, is a little more precise, dating his death to c. 452.But.....:
Now, as for Saint Patrick, modern day historians and scholars that love to narrate gaelic legends to us, attribute the irish annals to setting a 432 AD arrival date for Saint Patrick..... But, they were compiled in the mid 6th century at the earliest, and therefore the only reliable opinion on the matter is that of the university professors of Oxford and Cambridge.
The Irish annals for the fifth century date Patrick's arrival in Ireland at 432, but they were compiled in the mid 6th century at the earliest.Palladius:
However, we know exactly when Saint Patrick arrived in Ireland, as it is recorded by the Bishops of Rome.
And he arrived in approximately 431 AD.
He sent Palladius) to Ireland to serve as a bishop in 431. Bishop Patrick continued this missionary work.Pope Celestine I:
And we even know exactly why he was sent to Ireland.
It was to go to war with Pelagianism.
The new Heresy.
Pope Celestine I
Pope Celestine I (Latin: Caelestinus I) was the bishop of Rome from 10 September 422 to his death on 1 August 432. Celestine's tenure was largely spent combatting various ideologies deemed heretical. He supported the mission of the Gallic bishops that sent Germanus of Auxerre in 429, to Britain to address Pelagianism, and later commissioned Palladius) as bishop to the Scots of Ireland and northern Britain. In 430,Pelagianism:
So what was Pelagianism?
Well, it was the type of Christianity that had been adopted by the Irish and Brits.
A cross between the teachings of Aleister Crowley and Jesus Christ.
Pelagianism is a heterodox Christian theological position which holds that the original sin did not taint human nature and that humans have the free will to achieve human perfection without divine grace. Pelagius (c. 355 – c. 420 CE), a British ascetic,Link for photo
And Pelagianism was a Christian faith based upon the teachings of Pelagius, thought to be of British origins, around 354 AD, but also thought to have spent sometime being brought up in Ireland.
Pelagius was born about 354-360. He is said by his contemporaries, such as Augustine of Hippo, Prosper of Aquitaine, Marius Mercator, and Paul Orosius, to have been of British origin. Jerome apparently thought that Pelagius was Irish, suggesting that he was "stuffed with Irish porridge"Link for photo
Now, there was definitely a time when most contemporary historians and scholars simply brushed off any Irish legends as complete hogwash.
But today, they are coming up with all kinds of conspiracy theories to explain why the Irish gave Saint Patrick an arrival date of 432 AD.
Can you guess why it was?
Well, it was because the Irish apparently wanted to minimise the reputation of Palladius, whilst maximising the reputation of Saint Patrick, suggesting they believe that Patrick's work was actually Palladius's.
The date 432 was probably chosen to minimise the contribution of Palladius), who was known to have been sent to Ireland in 431, and maximise that of Patrick.Patrick the elder:
And they say this, despite the fact that Palladius was known by the Irish as "Patrick the Elder".
 A variety of dates are given for his death. In 457 "the elder Patrick" (Irish: Patraic Sen) is said to have died: this may refer to the death of Palladius, who according to the Book of Armagh was also called Patrick.Saint Palladius:
But not only was he known as Patrick the elder, he was also known as Saint Patrick, by Scots and Irish.
Palladius, Bishop of Ireland)
Palladius (fl. A.D. 408–431; died c. A.D. 457/461) was the first bishop of the Christians of Ireland, preceding Saint Patrick; the two were perhaps conflated in many later Irish traditions. He was a deacon and member of one of the prominent families in Gaul. Pope Celestine I consecrated him a bishop and sent him to Ireland "to the Scotti believing in Christ".Link for photo#/media/File:St_Palladius_Fordoun.jpg)
Saint Patrick's church, Aberdeen, Scotland
The Irish preferred a later date for Saint Patrick:
Now do you remember previously the historians and scholars were accusing the Irish of trying to bring Niall backward to accomodate the arrival of Patrick?
Well, apparently they did this at the same time as believing Patrick died in around 550 AD.
That is despite the fact that the Irish annals recorded an arrival date for Patrick of 432 AD.... "But"!
And in actual fact, it is the modern day historians that support the earlier arrival for Patrick. AHA!
While some modern historians accept the earlier date of c. 460 for Patrick's death, scholars of early Irish history tend to prefer a later date, c. 493. Supporting the later date, the annals record that in 553 "the relics of Patrick were placed sixty years after his death in a shrine by Colum Cille" (emphasis added). The death of Patrick's disciple Mochta is dated in the annals to 535 or 537,Roman Britain:
Now let us look at some similarities between the two Saint Patricks.
Saint Patrick junior was born in Roman Britain, though there are no records of this, and his actual birthplace is unknown.
His date of birth is also unknown.
Though Pelagius, was known to have been born in Roman Britain as well, and around 354 AD..
Patrick was born in Roman Britain. His birthplace is not known with any certainty;Link for photo
Saint Patrick in his Roman robe
Were as Patrick the elder was born in Gaul to nobles and high ranking church officials.
The Palladii were thought to be amongst the most noble families of Gaul, and several of them held high ranks in the Church of Gaul.#cite_note-moran-1)Saint Germanus:
Saint Patrick junior claims that he was ordained in to Priesthood by Saint Germanus.
But, no date is given for this.
Saint Germanus of Auxerre, a bishop of the Western Church, ordained him to the priesthood.Link for photo
Saint Patrick the elder was ordained in 415 AD.
He seems to have been ordained as a priest around 415.Germanus Deacon:
It is believed by historians that Saint Patrick the elder was a deacon for Saint Germanus.
Historian Kathleen Hughes) regards it as more probable that he was a deacon of St Germanus, and that Germanus sent him to Rome,#cite_note-5)Link for photo
Saint Patrick learning from Saint Germanus
Saint Patrick junior is said to have arrived in Wicklow (Irleand).
Acting on his vision, Patrick returned to Ireland as a Christian missionary. According to J. B. Bury, his landing place was Wicklow, Co. Wicklow,Arklow:
Saint Patrick elder landed in Arklow.
And it is the exact same place.
Arklow (/ˈɑːrkloʊ/; ARK-loh; from Old Norse Arnkell-lág 'meadow of Arnkell', Irish: An tInbhear Mór, meaning "the great estuary") is a town in County Wicklow on the east coast of Ireland.Link for photo
And the missioners that arrived with Saint Patrick junior, are actually now believed to have arrived with Saint Patrick the elder.
Auxilius, Secundinus, and Iserninus are missioners identified with St. Patrick, but more recent research associates them not with Patrick but with Palladius.#cite_note-8)North Britain:
Saint Patrick the elder did not last long in Ireland, before a king of Ireland banished him.
Irish writers who chronicled the life of St Patrick state that St Palladius preached in Ireland before St Patrick, although he was soon banished by the King of Leinster, and returned to North Britain.#cite_note-butler-9)Was not taken as a slave:
A lesser known fact, is that Saint Patrick junior did not last long in Ireland either, before being banished, as he was suspected of financial irregularities, and lying about who he was, and they did not believe his story about being kidnapped and taken as a slave.
Much of the Declaration concerns charges made against Patrick by his fellow Christians at a trial. What these charges were, he does not say explicitly, but he writes that he returned the gifts which wealthy women gave him, did not accept payment for baptisms, nor for ordaining priests, and indeed paid for many gifts to kings and judges, and paid for the sons of chiefs to accompany him. It is concluded, therefore, that he was accused of some sort of financial impropriety, and perhaps of having obtained his bishopric in Ireland with personal gain in mind.Bishop of Ireland:
Saint Patrick junior returned to a different part of Ireland, where he set himself up as a Bishop.
. Patrick eventually returned to Ireland, probably settling in the west of the island, where, in later life, he became a bishop and ordained subordinate clerics.Date of death:
There is only speculation as to when Saint Patrick junior died.
 A variety of dates are given for his death. In 457 "the elder Patrick" (Irish: Patraic Sen) is said to have died: this may refer to the death of Palladius, who according to the Book of Armagh was also called Patrick. In 461/2 the annals say that "Here some record the repose of Patrick";:19Link for photo
Saint Patrick buriel place
Palladius bishop of Ireland:
Though for Saint Patrick elder bishop of Ireland, the date appears to be a bit more definite.
Palladius bishop of Ireland#Ireland)
Palladius (fl. A.D. 408–431; died c. A.D. 457/461Link for photo
Saint Patrick cathedral, New york
And for Pelagius, it is a very definite 418 AD.
Pelagius (c. AD 354 – 418)Link for photo
Calvinist depiction of Pelagius
There are however Irish accounts that depict Saint Patrick as actually being a bit of a warlord.
7th Century writings
The Patrick portrayed by Tírechán and Muirchu is a martial figure, who contests with druids, overthrows pagan idols, and curses kings and kingdoms. On occasion, their accounts contradict Patrick's own writings: Tírechán states that Patrick accepted gifts from female converts although Patrick himself flatly denies this.Accept faith or die:
The Irish annals depict Saint Patrick of telling Irish high king Logaire mac Neill, to accept the faith or die.
Lóegaire is warned by the saint that he must accept the faith or die.Link for photo
Saint Patrick banishing the snakes
Modern day historians and scholars however question whether this is an accurate depiction of Saint Patricks time.
7th Century writings
The martial Patrick found in Tírechán and Muirchu, and in later accounts, echoes similar figures found during the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity. It may be doubted whether such accounts are an accurate representation of Patrick's time,Constantinius:
They question this, even though this period is during a period when the Roman military are in their death throws and desperately attempting to keep a Roman military presence in Britain, and appear to be so desperate, they even have Saint Germanus lead a military revolt against Saxons and Picts.
Visit to Britain
Constantius also recounts the miraculous healing of the blind daughter of 'a man with tribunician power'. This use of the word tribune may imply the existence of some form of post-Roman government system. However, in Constantius' lifetime tribune had acquired a looser definition, and often was used to indicate any military officer, whether part of the Imperial army or part of a town militia.Link for photo
Germanus of Auxerre
Noblest in Gaul:
It is quite clear that to Irish ears, accept the faith or die, will translate to accept the faith of the Pope, or Saint Germanus and his very close relative and Roman military leader Constantinius and his army are coming over.
Germanus was the son of Rusticus and Germanilla, and his family was one of the noblest in Gaul in the latter portion of the fourth century.Link for photo
Saint Patrick statue
Jugglers and mimes:
Now after all this, i simply cannot believe that a scholar or historian can still believe their own conclusions.
Even with Loegaire mac Neills biography they accuse the Irish of giving him an exessively long 87 year life span in order to accomodate Saint Patrick.
Sons of Niall
Both writers had Patrick come to Ireland in Lóegaire's reign and meet with him. Since the annals provided two death dates for Patrick, 461 and 493, Lóegaire's reign was made to fit these, and in general the earlier date. For the later date, Lóegaire's son Lugaid appears to have served the same adversary role.Pope Leo I:
Now, whilst Saint Germanus is in Britain fighting Picts and Saxons in armed military conflict, Pope Leo I is ordaining the beliefs that Catholics will follow.
For the first time ever, during the reign of Pope Leo I, Mary becomes the Mother of God, And Jesus becomes born to a virgin, and becomes both the lord and son of King David.
Have they never considered for even one moment, that it might actually have been the anti-Pelagius missionaries that changed the dates to suit the arrival of Saint Palladius?
Teaching on Christ
To Leo the Great, Mariology is determined by Christology. If Christ were divine only, everything about him would be divine. Only his divinity would have been crucified, buried and resurrected. Mary would only be the mother of God, and Christians would have no hope for their own resurrection. The nucleus of Christianity would be destroyed. The most unusual beginning of a truly human life through her was to give birth to Jesus, the Lord and Son of King David.Link for photo
Pope Leo I
And Pelagius was actually held in very high esteem by many.
Not everyone was against him.
In fact, Augustine, considered a pillar of the church, referred to him as a Saint.
He was well educated, fluent in both Greek and Latin, and learned in theology. He spent time as an ascetic, focusing on practical asceticism. He was well known in Rome, both for the harsh asceticism of his public life and the power and persuasiveness of his speech. His reputation earned him praise early in his career even from such pillars of the Church as Augustine, who referred to him as a "saintly man."Link for photo
I would say it is far more likely that it is a case of those that accepted the faith of the pope, accepting changing the dates of Irish history to accomodate shifting the early years of Saint Pelagius over to that of Saint Palladius.
2020.10.12 08:04 Oshojabe CMV: The argument that 'the word "homosexuality" did not appear in a Bible translation until 1946' is irrelevant
The word "God" did not appear in a English translation of the entire Bible until the 1300s with the publication of the Wycliffe Bible.Now, does this statement mean that Wycliffe added the concept of God to the Bible? No, it only narrowly means that the specific English word "God" did not appear in a complete Bible translation until the 1300's. The Hebrew, Greek and Latin texts that later translations would be based on all had concepts more or less corresponding to our word "God" in them.
French (Louis Segond - 1910) Lévitique 18:22 Tu ne coucheras point avec un homme (man) comme on couche avec une femme. C'est une abominationNow all of these are pre-1946 across four languages and none of them say "young boy." This seems to be decent evidence that a pedophilia interpretation was not widespread among European languages prior to 1946.
Spanish (Reina-Valera - 1909) Levítico 18:22 No te echarás con varón (male, man) como con mujer: es abominación.
English (KJV - 1611) Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankinde, as with womankinde: it is abomination
Esperanto (Londona Biblio - 1926) Levidoj 18:22 Kaj kun virseksulo (male) ne kuŝu, kiel oni kuŝas kun virino: tio estas abomenaĵo.
2020.10.11 20:37 kassie_oh Do LI casting directors make an effort to matchmake or do they cast solely based on appearance/drama potential?
2020.10.10 04:05 abclucid “Religion is a Tool Used To Divide Us”
“If skeptics were willing to give the Gospels the same ‘benefit of the doubt’ they are willing to give other ancient documents, the Gospels would easily pass the test of authorship”Frank Tippler, mathematical physicist, cosmologist, joint appointment in the Departments of Mathematics and Physics at Tulane University:
“When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics”Alister McGrath, theologian, scientist, Anglican priest:
“Atheism, I began to realize, rested on a less-than-satisfactory evidential basis. The arguments that had once seemed bold, decisive, and conclusive increasingly turned out to be circular, tentative, and uncertain.”Rick Oliver, member of American Federation of Herpetoculturalists, California Science Teachers Association, and New York Academy of Science:
“Christianity offers a worldview that leads to the generation of moral values and ideals that are able to give moral meaning and dignity to our existence”
“I remember how frustrated I became when, as a young atheist, I examined specimens under the microscope. I would often walk away and try to convince myself that I was not seeing examples of extraordinary design, but merely the product of some random, unexplained mutations”Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918 – 2008), Russian writer, winner of 1970 Nobel Prize in literature. Reveals life under the the state atheism and communism of the Soviet Union:
“Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened”Antony Flew (1923-2010), once leading atheist philosopher, part of analytic and evidentialist schools of thought. Strong advocate of atheism, criticizer of the idea of life after death, free will defense to the problem of evil, and the concept of God. 2003 signer of the Humanist Manifesto. Converted to deism in 2004, held to an Aristotelian notion of God:
”It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”Francis Collins, geneticist respected for discoveries of disease genes and leadership of the Human Genome Project. Director of the National Institutes of Health. Author of numerous books on science, medicine, and spirituality:
“I now believe there is a God…I now think it [the evidence] does point to a creative Intelligence almost entirely because of the DNA investigations. What I think the DNA material has done is that it has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements to work together.”
“…we have all the evidence we need in our immediate experience and that only a deliberate refusal to “look” is responsible for atheism of any variety.”
“I believe God did intend, in giving us intelligence, to give us the opportunity to investigate and appreciate the wonders of His creation. He is not threatened by our scientific adventures.”Peter Hitchens, well-known English journalist, author, and brother of anti-theist Christopher Hitchens:
“The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. He can be worshipped in the cathedral or in the laboratory. His creation is majestic, awesome, intricate and beautiful – and it cannot be at war with itself. Only we imperfect humans can start such battles. And only we can end them.”
“I thought this gesture [burning his Bible] was a way of showing that I had finally rejected all the things that I had been brought up to believe, and I went on to behave for the next 20 years of my life exactly as if I didn’t believe in him [God], and that’s how I discovered in the end that what I had rejected was right.”Philip Vander Elst, freelance writer and lecturer of over 30 years in politics and journalism. Works for Areopagus Ministries:
“The current intellectual assault on God in Europe and North America is in fact a specific attack on Christianity – the faith that stubbornly persists in the morality, laws, and government of the major Western countries. . . .The God they fight is the Christian God, because he is their own God. . . .God is the leftists’ chief rival. Christian belief, by subjecting all men to divine authority and by asserting in the words ‘My kingdom is not of this world’ that the ideal society does not exist in this life, is the most coherent and potent obstacle to secular utopianism. . . . the Bible angers and frustrates those who believe that the pursuit of a perfect society justifies the quest for absolute power.”
“…when it comes to the millions of small and tedious good deeds that are needed for a society to function with charity, honesty, and kindness, a shortage of believing Christians will lead to that society’s decay.”
“So, confronted by all these facts and arguments – philosophical, scientific, and historical – I surrendered my sword of unbelief to God, and asked Jesus to forgive my sins and come into my life during the hot, dry summer of 1976. In the years that have followed, I have never regretted that decision, despite many ups and downs and trials of my faith.”Craig Keener, leading scholar, professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary, expert in Christian Origins:
“I thought that atheism was “smart.” When my grandmother argued for a first cause, I replied by postulating an infinite regression of causes (my arrogance left me unaware that my response violated modern physics!) Yet unknown to me, my father’s mother, sister, and the sister’s family were praying for our family. When I was 13, reading Plato raised for me the question of life after death, but Plato’s answers did not seem adequate. I began to realize that only an infinite Being could guarantee the hope of eternal life. Yet if such a Being existed, there seemed no reason why that Being would care about me, even if that Being were perfectly loving enough to give life to some. I was incurably selfish and undeserving of a loving Being’s attention; it seemed to me that if I pretended to love, it was only for the self-serving purpose of getting that Being’s attention. Yet shortly before I turned 15, I began to secretly cry out, “God, if You are there—please show me.”
2020.10.08 20:21 ThyTwank Latino Cultures
2020.10.07 06:58 StevenStevens43 King Art Oenfer III & the barbarica conspiratio
King Art Oenfer & Son:submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]
In this article, i will be looking in to some more of Geoffrey of Monmouth's claims, and the criticisms against him.
However there is crucial information in a previous article i wrote, which should be read first, before coming back to read this one.
I shall leave the link below.
King Art Oenfer & Son <<<< Link for article
Link for photo
Art Oenfer III:
Now i will begin this article with Geoffrey's first claim.
He claims that the legendary Octavius is the same person as the legendary Eudaf Hen in Welsh tradition.
He also claims that Octavius was a direct answer of King Arthur.
But that is why you need to read the article i linked to, in order to understand how this may actually be Art Oenfer.
Eudaf Hen (Eudaf "the Old") is a figure of Welsh tradition. He is remembered as a King of the Britons and the father of Elen Luyddog and Conan Meriadoc in sources such as the Welsh prose tale The Dream of Macsen Wledig and Geoffrey of Monmouth's Latin chronicle Historia Regum Britanniae. He also figures into Welsh genealogies. Geoffrey of Monmouth calls him Octavius, a corruption and faux-Latinization of Old Welsh/Breton Outham (later spelled Eudaf). According to the medieval Welsh genealogy from Mostyn MS. 117, Eudaf was a direct ancestor of King Arthur.Octavius:
Geoffrey also claims that Octavius is the half brother of Constantine I.
Geoffrey of Monmouth
Geoffrey of Monmouth, in his Historia Regum Britanniae, renders the name in pseudo-Latin form as Octavius and introduces him as a half-brother to Constantine I,Link for photo
Constantine the Great
However, as Constantine I was already mentioned by Geoffrey of Monmouth as being the son of Constantinius and Helen, it is very doubtful that the exact same author is going to attribute the exact same story to Constantinius's son.
Geoffrey of Monmouth
 and Geoffrey of Monmouth repeated the claim in his 1136 History of the Kings of Britain. Geoffrey related that Constantius was sent to Britain by the Senate after Asclepiodotus (here a British king) was overthrown by Coel of Colchester. Coel submitted to Constantius and agreed to pay tribute to Rome, but died only eight days later. Constantius married his daughter Helena and became king of Britain.Constans I:
Quite simply, i think historians and scholars have gotten mixed up with one of the sons of Constantine the Great, Constans I, who is of course, also a Constantine.
Flavius Julius Constans (c. 320 – 350) was Roman emperor from 337 to 350. He defeated his brother Constantine II) in 340, but anger in the army over his personal life (homosexuality) and favouritism towards his barbarian bodyguards led the general Magnentius to rebel, resulting in the assassination of Constans in 350.Link for photo
Constans I is the son of Constantine the Great, to his second wife Fausta.
Constans was probably born in 320. He was the third and youngest son of Constantine the Great and Fausta, his father's second wife.Fausta
By (User:Mbzt), 2012, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=18368658
And he has a half Brother named Crispus, from Constantine the Great's first marraige, to Minervina.
Crispus's year and place of birth are uncertain. He is considered likely to have been born between 299 and 305, possibly as early as 295, somewhere in the eastern Roman Empire. The earliest date is most likely, since he was being tutored in 309–310 by Lactantius. His mother Minervina was either a concubine or a first wife to Constantine.Link for photo.png)
Coin of Crispus
However, both Fausta and Crispus were executed by Constantine the great.
The reason for this is thought to be because Crispus was having an affair with Fausta.
In 326, Fausta was put to death by Constantine, following the execution of Crispus, his eldest son by Minervina. The circumstances surrounding the two deaths were unclear. Various explanations have been suggested; in one, Fausta is set jealously against Crispus, as in the anonymous Epitome de Caesaribus, or conversely her adultery, perhaps with the stepson who was close to her in age, is suggested.Damnatio memoriae:
Therefore, the reason historians and scholars have no records of a line-age descended from this half brother relationship between Constans I & Crispus, is because Constantine the Great took out a Damnatio memoriae, which wiped Crispus and Fausta from the history records.
However he also took the Damnatio memoriae out on Crispus's wife Helena and their Son, who's name we do not even know, because they were deleted from official documents.
There is however nothing to suggest that Helena and her son, were also executed.
Crispus, his wife Helena and their son also suffered damnatio memoriae, meaning their names were never mentioned again and deleted from all official documents and monuments. The eventual fate of Helena and her son is a mystery.Caesarion:
So, just like Caesarion, son of Julius Caesar, and the last Egyptian pharoah and the rightful heir to the Roman throne, was murdered by Octavian to prevent him becoming Roman emperor, the son of Helena, whos memory and existence is written out of records, is actually the rightful heir to the Roman throne, being the only son of Constantine the Great's first son.
Ptolemy XV Philopator Philometor Caesar (Koinē Greek: Πτολεμαῖος, Ptolemaĩos; 23 June 47 BC – 23 August 30 BC), better known by the nickname Caesarion (Καισαρίων Caesariō), was the last pharaoh of ancient Egypt, reigning with his mother Cleopatra from 2 September 44 BC until her death by 12 August 30 BC, and as sole ruler until his death was ordered by Octavian, the later Roman emperor Augustus.Link for photo
So what about this claim from Geoffrey, that Constantine was made Roman emperor requiring him to leave Britain in the hands of a proconsul?
Geoffrey of Monmouth
Eventually Constantine is made Roman Emperor, requiring him to leave Britain in the hands of a proconsul. Octavius (Eudaf Hen), rebels against Roman rule, killing the proconsul and proclaiming himself king.Constantinian dynasty:
Well quite simply, from the 290's AD, right up until the date of June 363 AD, the British high kingship has been held by the Constantines in one form or other.
Whether it be Constantine. Constans. Constantinius.
Until the death of Julian Constantius, Britain had been in the hands of the Constantinian dynasty.
Julian[i]#citenote-3) (Latin: Flavius Claudius Julianus; Greek: Ἰουλιανὸς, Ioulianòs; 331 – 26 June 363) was Roman emperor from 361 to 363, as well as a notable philosopher and author in Greek.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian(emperor)#citenote-4) His rejection of Christianity, and his promotion of Neoplatonic Hellenism in its place, caused him to be remembered as Julian the Apostate by the Christian Church.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian(emperor)#citenote-gibbon-5)[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian(emperor)#cite_note-6)Link for photo#/media/File:Iulianus_Flavius_Claudius._Giuliano_l'Apostata.jpg)
Saxonici Nectaridus & Fullofaudes:
So this consul can only be one of two people.
Emperor Valentinian I's senior military officer's. Saxonici Nectaridus, and Fullofaudes.
The great conspiracy
In 367, Valentinian received reports from Britain that a combined force of Picts, Attacotti and Scots had killed the Comes litoris Saxonici Nectaridus and Dux Britanniarum Fullofaudes.Link for photo
Now, according to words attributed to Geoffrey, Constantine (who must be valentinius) responds by sending by sending troops under the command of his great uncle Trehern.
Geoffrey of Monmouth
Constantine responds by sending three legions to Britain under the command of his great-uncle Trahern, the brother of the late King Coel.Count Theodosius the Elder:
This can only be the person that has replaced the assassinated British military governors, Count Theodosius the Elder.
Flavius Theodosius (died 376), known as Count Theodosius (Latin: Comes) or Theodosius the Elder, was a senior military officer serving Emperor Valentinian I and the Western Roman Empire. His son was the Emperor Theodosius I. He was granted the title of Comes Rei Militaris per Britanniarum (Commander of the Troops of the Diocese of the Britains)Flavius Octavius:
Now, rather surprisingly, and very interestingly, Theodosius's ancestry does actually appear to recognise Octavius as his nephew, and Flavius Constantinus as Octavius's cousin.
Theodosiuses relatives and near relatives
Nephews: Flavius Magnus Maximus Augustus / Flavius Octavius / Flavius ConstantinusEmpress Justina:
And if you are wondering why this is, it is because they are all closely related, through Roman empress, and wife of Valentinian I, Justina.
In fact, Timothy Barnes claims that Justina could be Octavius's daughter.
If that were true, then Flavias Octavius Constantine would be Valentinian I's father in law.
Justina (c. 340 – c. 388) was the second wife of the Roman Emperor Valentinian I (reigned 364–375) and the mother of Valentinian II (reigned 375–392), Galla), Grata and Justa.War:
So what evidence is there to support the claim that Octavius has gotten in to a war with his uncle Theodosius, and alleged Son in law?
As alleged by Geoffrey, below.
Geoffrey of Monmouth
Trahern lands at "Kaerperis" and captures it, forcing Octavius to conscript all the island into the army to combat the Roman legions. Octavius engages Trahern in a field outside Winchester and is victorious.Maximus:
Well, to begin with, there is the son of Justina's sister, Maximus, as i copied and pasted two quotes above.
Maximus has a brother in law named Valentinus who has committed a horrendous crime and was sent in to exile in Britain were he appears to have gotten himself engaged in Octavius's revolt and Count Theodosius the Elder is attempting to put it down.
In 369 AD, Maximinus' brother in law, Valentinus) committed an unrecorded but very serious crime. Maximinus was able to have Valentinus' sentence commuted from execution to exile and he was sent to Britain where he began planning a revolt that had to be put down by Count Theodosius.King Gunbert:
The next part of Geoffrey's history has Trahern/Theodosius defeat Ovtavius in Alba, and Octavius flees to an ally in Norway.
Geoffrey of Monmouth
Trahern flees to Alba (Scotland) and pillages the land, and Octavius comes after him. They meet at Westmorland, and Octavius was defeated and forced out of Britain. Trahern takes the crown himself, while Octavius seeks aid from King Gunbert of Norway.Ermanaric empire:
Well, a likely Scandinavian king for Octavius to run to would be Ermanaric.
The Gothic Alexander with an empire that is crushing the Romans already.
Not to mention the likely coincidental 100% anagram of the word American.
According to Jordanes' Getica, Ermanaric ruled the realm of Oium. He describes him as a "Gothic Alexander" who "ruled all the nations of Scythia and Germania as they were his own".House of Amal:
And Ermanaric is leader of the house of Amal, which was set up to oppose the Roman empire.
And from Theodemir, to Theodahad, the name "Theo" has been the most prominant name throughout the quite long history of the Ermanaric empire.
The Amali – also called Amals, Amalings or Amalungs – were a leading dynasty of the Goths, a Germanic people who confronted the Roman Empire during the decline of the Western Roman Empire. They eventually became the royal house of the Ostrogoths and founded the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy.Barbarica conspirato:
Now this brings me to the Great conspiracy.
The great conspiracy
The Great Conspiracy was a year-long state of war and disorder that occurred in Roman Britain near the end of the Roman rule of the island. The historian Ammianus Marcellinus described it as a barbarica conspiratioLink for photo
Raids in to Northern Gaul
The great conspiracy:
In the year 367 AD Picts from Caledonia, invaded Northern Gaul from the North of Hadrians wall.
Joined by Attacotti, and Hibernians from Wales, Cornwall and Ireland respectively, and Saxons and Franks landing in Northern Gaul from Southern Gaul, in what appears to have been a highly co-ordinated military campaign.
In the winter of 367, the Roman garrison on Hadrian's Wall rebelled, and allowed Picts from Caledonia to enter Britannia. Simultaneously, Attacotti, the Scotti from Hibernia, and Saxons from Germania landed in what might have been coordinated and pre-arranged waves on the island's mid-western and southeastern borders, respectively. Franks and Saxons also landed in northern Gaul.Northern Gaul:
Valentinian I, fearing losing Northern Gaul altogether, made his way to the island of Britain.
The great conspiracy
At the same time, Frankish and Saxon forces were raiding the coastal areas of northern Gaul. The empire was in the midst of the Great Conspiracy – and was in danger of losing control of Britain altogether. Valentinian set out for Britain, sending Comes domesticorum Severus ahead of him to investigate. Severus was not able to correct the situation and returned to Gaul,Niall Noígíallach:
The Hibernian raids were probably led by Niall of the nine hostages Noigiallach, who is said to have taken Saint Patrick hostage during one of his raids on Romano-Britain.
Keating, quoting a Latin Life of Saint Patrick, says that Niall led Irish raids on Roman Britain, and in one of those raids Patrick and his sisters were abducted.Link for photo-_stained_glass,_Saint_Patrick-_detail.jpg)
And this is written in Patrick's confessions.
According to the Confession of Saint Patrick, at the age of sixteen he was captured by a group of Irish pirates. They took him to Ireland where he was enslaved and held captive for six years. Patrick writes in the ConfessionLink for photo,_August_2009.JPG)
Saint Patrick's historic district
And the Caledonians likely by Crimthann Mor.
Crimthann mac Fidaig
Crimthann Mór, son of Fidach /ˈkriːvən ˈmɔːr mæk ˈfiːaɪ/, also written Crimthand Mór, was a semi-mythological king of Munster and High King of Ireland of the 4th century. He gained territory in Britain and Gaul, but died poisoned by his sister Mongfind. It is possible that he was also recognised as king of Scotland.Dind tradui:
Crimthann Mor is credited with building a fortress in Cornwall, named Dind tradui.
Crimthand Mór mac Fidaig built a great fortress in Cornwall known as Dind Traduí or Dinn Tradui (Dun Tredui/e, fortress of the three ramparts). There appears to be little doubt that it existed,Link for photo
Cornish harbour thought to have been used as an Irish port
The Saxons are likely led by Sachell balb, Nialls Father in law.
According to the saga "The Adventures of the Sons of Eochaid Mugmedon", he is said to have had two wives: Mongfind, daughter of Fidach, who bore him four sons, Brion), Ailill, Fiachrae and Fergus; and Cairenn Chasdub, daughter of Sachell Balb, king of the Saxons, who bore him his most famous son, Niall.Wales & Cornwall:
The Hibernians likely used Wales and Cornwall to invade Northern Gaul.
It was at this time that Wales received an infusion of settlers from southern Ireland, the Uí Liatháin, Laigin, and possibly Déisi, the last no longer seen as certain, with only the first two verified by reliable sources and place-name evidence. The Irish were concentrated along the southern and western coasts, in Anglesey and Gwynedd (excepting the cantrefi of Arfon and Arllechwedd), and in the territory of the Demetae.Link for photo
The initial end result was not good for the Brits.
The Romans actually managed to do something that no other emperor before Valentinius had been able to do, and that was conquer Caledonia.
In memory to Valentinus the defeated rebel, Caledonia was renamed Valentia.
The great conspiracy
In 369, Theodosius set about reconquering the areas north of London; putting down the revolt of Valentinus), the brother-in-law of a vicarius, Maximinus). Subsequently, Theodosius restored the rest of Britain to the empire and rebuilt many fortifications – renaming northern Britain 'Valentia)'.Alamanni:
With that resolved, Valentinian I turned his attentions to defeating the Alamanni (Amal dynasty).
The great conspiracy
Severus and Jovinus were to accompany the emperor on his campaign against the Alamanni.Trahern death:
The only problem is, Geoffrey had said that Trahern gets killed by Octavius's allies, allowing Octavius to reassume the Alba throne.
So what happened?
Geoffrey of Monmouth
In Britain, supporters of Octavius ambush Trahern and kill him near London, allowing Octavius to return to Britain.November 17, 375 ad:
Well the first to go would be Valentinian I, when during a heated argument with some Alamanni, he burst a blood vessel in his skull.
The attitude of the envoys so enraged Valentinian that he suffered a burst blood vessel in the skull while angrily yelling at them, provoking his death on November 17, 375.Days later:
Next to go was Theodosius.
. In 375, when Emperor Valentinian suddenly died, Theodosius was still in Africa. Orders arrived for Theodosius to be arrested; he was taken to Carthage, and put to death in early 376. The reasons for this are not clear, but it is thought to have resulted from a factional power struggle in Italy after the sudden death of Emperor Valentinian in November 375.Helen:
Now yet again we have a Helen.
This time it is Geoffrey of Monmouth stating that Octavius has agreed in 383 AD to allow his daughter Helen to marry Roman emperor Magnus Maximus.
Geoffrey of Monmouth
Eventually, Caradocus, Duke of Cornwall, suggests that Octavius marry his only daughter Helen to the new Roman Emperor, Maximianus (Magnus Maximus), thereby uniting the British and Roman crowns. Octavius agrees, and Caradocus' son Mauricius is sent to Rome with the proposal.Magnus Maximus:
So what is the truth in this?
Well Maximus is credited with freeing Wales.
Role in Breton and British rule
Maximus's bid for imperial power in 383 coincides with the last date for any evidence of a Roman military presence in Wales,Link for photo_A_king,_possibly_Magnus_Maximus,_holding_a_sceptre.jpg)
Unfortunately this is one claim that can neither easily be verified, nor contradicted, as quite simply, his family was massacred, and nothing is known regarding who his wife was.
Though, he did have a wife, apparently.
Fate of family
What exactly happened to Maximus's family after his downfall is not recorded. He is known to have had a wife, who is recorded as having sought spiritual counsel from St. Martin of ToursNiall death:
In 395 ad it is thought that Niall lost his life during a raid on Romano Britain.
Byrne suggests that Niall's death took place during a raid on Roman Britain.
2020.10.05 05:07 StevenStevens43 Constantine the Arian
Arianismsubmitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]
In this article, i am going to investigate the claim made by Everett Ferguson, below.
According to Everett Ferguson, "The great majority of Christians had no clear views about the nature of the Trinity and they did not understand what was at stake in the issues that surrounded it."Link for photo
So where better to begin, than with possibly the worlds most famous self confessed positive Christian?
Religious views of Adolf Hitler
In his book Mein Kampf and in public speeches prior to and in the early years of his rule, Hitler expressed himself as a Christian. Hitler and the Nazi party promoted "Positive Christianity", a movement which rejected most traditional Christian doctrines such as the divinity of Jesus, as well as Jewish elements such as the Old Testament. In one widely quoted remark, he described Jesus as an "Aryan fighter" who struggled against "the power and pretensions of the corrupt Pharisees" and Jewish materialism. In his private diaries, Goebbels wrote in April 1941 that though Hitler was "a fierce opponent" of the Vatican and Christianity, "he forbids me to leave the church. For tactical reasons."Link for photo
Constantine the Great:
However, there may have been an equally famous Arian Christian.
Constantine the Great.
Ten years later, however, Constantine the Great, who was himself baptized by the Arian bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia,[10Link for photo
Constantine the great
Constantine the Great issued the edict of Milan during the pontification of Pope Miltiades, which legalised Christianity.
Pope Miltiades (Greek: Μιλτιάδης, Miltiádēs), also known as Melchiades the African (Μελχιάδης ὁ Ἀφρικανός Melkhiádēs ho Aphrikanós), was the bishop of Rome from 311 to his death on 10 or 11 January 314. It was during his pontificate that Emperor Constantine the Great issued the Edict of Milan (313), giving Christianity legal status within the Roman Empire.Link for photo
The baptism of constantine
However, Constantines edict did not just legalise Christianity.
It also legalised all religions and outlawed the persecution of any religious sect.
Constantine was the first emperor to stop the persecution of Christians and to legalize Christianity, along with all other religions/cults in the Roman Empire. In February 313, he met with Licinius in Milan and developed the Edict of Milan, which stated that Christians should be allowed to follow their faith without oppression.[page needed] This removed penalties for professing Christianity, under which many had been martyred previously, and it returned confiscated Church property. The edict protected all religions from persecution, not only Christianity, allowing anyone to worship any deity that they chose.Link for photo
Pope Sylvester I and Constantine the Great
However Constantines new policy may have appeared to be a little anti-semitic, and he came in for a little criticism.
It became illegal for Jews to seek converts or attack other Jews that had converted to another religion, and also became illegal for Jews to own christian slaves or to enforce Jewish tradition on others.
Though, some may argue that these laws were for everyone, not only Jews.
Constantine made some new laws regarding the Jews; some of them were unfavorable towards Jews, although they were not harsher than those of his predecessors. It was made illegal for Jews to seek converts or to attack other Jews who had converted to Christianity. They were forbidden to own Christian slaves or to circumcise their slaves.Non-theism:
Constantine the Great also had to get involved in a heated and ongoing confrontation between Christian traditionalists and non-theistic Arians such as himself, and he seeked to resolve this dimplomatically by setting up the First council of Nicaea.
The reign of Constantine established a precedent for the emperor to have great influence and authority in the early Christian councils, most notably the dispute over Arianism. Constantine disliked the risks to societal stability that religious disputes and controversies brought with them, preferring to establish an orthodoxy. His influence over the Church councils was to enforce doctrine, root out heresy, and uphold ecclesiastical unity; the Church's role was to determine proper worship, doctrines, and dogma.Link for photo
First Nicaea council
First council of Nicaea:
The first nicaean council was set up to resolve the disputes diplomatically and attempt to come to a universal understanding that would be observed by all parties throughout Christendom.
The First Council of Nicaea was the first ecumenical council of the church. Most significantly, it resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent local and regional councils of bishops (synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy—the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.Link for photo
Constantine the Great and the bishops of Arian and Rome
Persecution of Arians:
The end result was an overwhelming victory for the traditionalists, that concluded that the non-theist Arians should be banished.
One purpose of the Council was to resolve disagreements arising from within the Church of Alexandria over the nature of the Son in his relationship to the Father: in particular, whether the Son had been 'begotten' by the Father from his own being, and therefore having no beginning, or else created out of nothing, and therefore having a beginning. St. Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius took the first position; the popular presbyter Arius, from whom the term Arianism comes, took the second. The Council decided against the Arians overwhelmingly (of the estimated 250–318 attendees, all but two agreed to sign the creed and these two, along with Arius, were banished to Illyria).[Link for photo
Disheartened constantine the Great
Even today, the decree that Arianism is heretical, still stands.
Arianism continued to be viewed as "the heresy or sect of Arius". As such, all mainstream branches of Christianity now consider Arianism to be heterodox and heretical.Link for photo
Arius the Heretic
So what is this Arian religion that is classed as Heretic?
Well, it is a large umbrella.
It denies Jesus christ as being anything more than a man.
Jesus could even be a euhemerical figure depicting the universe, with the father being an intelligent designer, rather than the universe coming about by chance, like Atheists may believe.
They may also believe in the existence of a man named Jesus that spoke a lot of truth.
Arianism is also used to refer to other nontrinitarian theological systems of the 4th century, which regarded Jesus Christ—the Son of God, the Logos)—as either a begotten creature of a similar or different substance to that of the Father, but not identical (as Homoiousian and Anomoeanism) or as neither uncreated nor created in the sense other beings are created (as in Semi-Arianism).Link for photo.svg)
Arius is arguing about the beginning of the universe.
His argument would probably better have been discussed with Albert Einstein, a quantum mechanic professor, or some other physicist, rather than with Bishops of Rome.
Arius stated: "If the Father begat the Son, then he who was begotten had a beginning in existence, and from this it follows there was a time when the Son was not."Northern regions:
Now Arian was a religion that may have had roots in Egypt, but it became the Christian religion of the Northern regions.
the Lombards were also Arians or Semi-Arians until the 7th century. Visigothic Spain was Arian until 589. Many Goths adopted Arian beliefs upon their conversion to Christianity. The Vandals actively spread Arianism in North Africa.Lombards:
Northern groups such as the Lombards, from North Germany and Southern Scandinavia.
The medieval Lombard historian Paul the Deacon wrote in the History of the Lombards (written between 787 and 796) that the Lombards descended from a small tribe called the Winnili, who dwelt in southern Scandinavia (Scadanan) before migrating to seek new lands. Roman-era authors however reported them in the 1st century AD, as one of the Suebian peoples, in what is now northern Germany, near the Elbe river.Link for photo.png)
Goths and visigoths:
And of course the Goths have their ancestral roots in Gothland, southern Sweden, though later expanded in to Germania and other regions.
The Goths (Gothic: 𐌲𐌿𐍄𐌸𐌹𐌿𐌳𐌰, romanized: Gutþiuda; Latin: Gothi) were a Germanic peopleLink for photo
And of course the Vandals.
A Germanic peoples.
The Vandals were a Germanic people who first inhabited what is now southern Poland.Link for photo
Constantine exonerated Arius:
Though, Constantine did respect the decision of the Roman bishops, and even carried out their decrees, he did however exile some of them regards to other matters.
Ten years later, he charged them with "murder, illegal taxation, sorcery, and treason", and exonerated Arius.
Ten years later, however, Constantine the Great, who was himself baptized by the Arian bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia, convened another gathering of Church leaders at the regional First Synod of Tyre in 335 (attended by 310 bishops), to address various charges mounted against Athanasius by his detractors, such as "murder, illegal taxation, sorcery, and treason", following his refusal to readmit Arius into fellowship. Athanasius was exiled to Trier (in modern Germany) following his conviction at Tyre of conspiracy, and Arius was, effectively, exonerated.Link for photo
Constantine burning Arian books
Unfortunately, this just made them all the more determined, and they upped the anti, and Arius was once again condemned as a Heretic.
Athanasius and other trinitarian Church leaders crusaded against Arian theology, and Arius was again anathemised and condemned as a heretic once more at the Ecumenical First Council of Constantinople of 381 (attended by 150 bishops).Gothic bible:
Though they failed to prevent the publication of the Gothic bible.
Link for photo
Constantine & Paganism:
Constantine was also equally tolerant of the Roman pagan traditions.
Constantine might not have patronized Christianity alone. He built a triumphal arch in 315 to celebrate his victory in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (312) which was decorated with images of the goddess Victoria), and sacrifices were made to pagan gods at its dedication, including Apollo, Diana), and Hercules.Link for photo
Constantine crowning his successor
Another committed supporter of Arianism, was Constantine the Greats son and successor, Constantine II.
He was soon involved in the struggle between factions rupturing the unity of the Christian Church.#citenote-ReferenceA-5) The Western portion of the Empire, under the influence of the Popes in Rome, favoured Catholicism over Arianism, and through their intercession they convinced Constantine to free Athanasius, allowing him to return to Alexandria.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_II(emperor)#cite_note-9) This action aggravated Constantius II, who was a committed supporter of Arianism.Link for photo#/media/File:Campidoglio,Roma-_Costantino_II_cesare_fronte.jpg)
The Constantines were actually supporters of the antipopes.
Constantius was sympathetic to the Arians, and when he could not persuade Liberius to his point of view sent the pope to a prison in Beroea. At the end of an exile of more than two years in Thrace, after which it seems he may have temporarily relented, or been set up to appear to have relented – partially evidenced by three letters, quite possibly forgeries, ascribed to Liberius, the emperor recalled him under extreme pressure from the Roman population who refused to recognize the puppet "pope" Felix. As the Roman See was "officially" occupied by Antipope Felix II,Link for photo#/media/File:Solidus_Constantine_II-heraclea_RIC_vII_101.jpg)
Constantin II's coin of Sol
In fact, Constantine II actually attempted to have an Arian acting as Pope, and an Arian acting as antipope, with the intention of merging the two.
Antipope Felix, an archdeacon of Rome, was installed as Pope in AD 355 after the Emperor Constantius II banished the reigning Pope, Liberius, for refusing to subscribe to a sentence of condemnation against Saint Athanasius.Pope Julius I:
Under Pope Julius I, the persecution of Arians continued, and the setting of 25th December was made Jesus Christ's official birthdate.
Pope Julius I
Pope Julius I was the bishop of Rome from 6 February 337 to his death on 12 April 352. He is notable for asserting the authority of the pope over the Arian Eastern bishops, as well as setting 25 December as the official birthdate of Jesus.Link for photo_-_James_Tissot.jpg)
Jesus and the pharisees
And it is suspected that the reason for this, was because Sol invictus of Saturnalia was also said to be born and celebrated on December 25th.
Some have speculated that part of the reason why he chose this date may have been because he was trying to create a Christian alternative to Saturnalia. Another reason for the decision may have been because, in 274 AD, the Roman emperor Aurelian had declared 25 December the birthdate of Sol InvictusLink for photo
2020.10.04 05:08 StevenStevens43 The first British martyr
The Gens Constantinius theory:submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]
In this article i am going to be investigating more contemporary criticisms of Geoffrey of Monmouth's history, who up until now, i have actually found to be amazingly accurate, when compaired to actual contemporary accounts.
However the first part of the claims made in quote below, i already covered in the previous article.
So rather than me go over them again, please simply click on the link below this message, and read that article first, then come back and read this one, as i will be continuing where i left off.
The Gens Constantinius theory <<<< Link for article
Asclepiodotus appears in medieval British legend as a native king of Britain. Geoffrey of Monmouth's History of the Kings of Britain (1136) portrays him as a duke of Cornwall who is raised to the kingship in opposition to Allectus, a Roman who oppressed the people of Britain. He defeats and kills Allectus near London, and besieges the rest of his forces in the city. The Romans eventually surrender on condition of safe conduct out of Britain, which Asclepiodotus is willing to grant, but his allies the Venedoti attack them and cut off their heads, which are thrown into the river Gallobroc.Julius Asclepiodotus:
So i will begin with introducing Julius Asclepiodotus.
Julius Asclepiodotus was a Roman praetorian prefect who, according to the Historia Augusta, served under the emperors Aurelian, Probus and Diocletian, and was consul in 292. In 296 he assisted the western Caesar) Constantius Chlorus in re-establishing Roman rule in Britain, following the illegal rules of Carausius and Allectus.Persecution of Christians:
Now the first critcism i come across, is that "however" his rule is contemporary with the persecution of Christians under Diocletian.
I actually do not really understand this criticism, but i will attempt to make sense of it by taking a look at Diocletian.
. Asclepiodotus is then officially crowned king, and rules justly for ten years. However, his rule is contemporary with the persecutions of Christians under Diocletian,Diocletian:
Diocletian (/ˌdaɪ.əˈkliːʃən/; Latin: Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus; born Diocles; 22 December c. 244 – 3 December 311) was a Roman emperor from 284 to 305.Link for photo_-_Foto_G._Dall'Orto_28-5-2006.jpg)
Rule of four:
So the first thing i note from above quote, is that Diocletian was a real emperor.
He also reigned from 284 to 305 AD, so if Asclepiodotus began a 10 year reign in 296 AD, then that would have been during the reign of Diocletian.
And i also not from quote below, that Diocletian was the first ever Roman emperor to split the Roman empire in to four quarters, by awarding four Nomarchs to each rule a quarter, under his imperical highship.
So if the scholars and historians are trying to suggest that Asclepiodotus ruling as a client king during the reign of Constantinius, contradicts him ruling contemporary to Diocletian, then it does not.
But i do not actually know what their issue is with Diocletian, as they do not say, and i do not even know, if they know themselves.
Diocletian delegated further on 1 March 293, appointing Galerius and Constantius as Caesars), junior co-emperors, under himself and Maximian respectively. Under this 'tetrarchy', or "rule of four", each emperor would rule over a quarter-division of the empire. Diocletian secured the empire's borders and purged it of all threats to his power.Link for photo
The four quarters
And again, in quote below, we see that the great persecution of Christians begins around 302 AD under Diocletian, and this is still during the reign of Asclepiodotus.
Diocletian returned to Antioch in the autumn of 302. He ordered that the deacon Romanus of Caesarea have his tongue removed for defying the order of the courts and interrupting official sacrifices. Romanus was then sent to prison, where he was executed on 17 November 303. Diocletian believed that Romanus of Caesarea was arrogant, and he left the city for Nicomedia in the winter, accompanied by Galerius.Link for photo
Martyrs of the Great persecution
And apparently, because Geoffrey places the martyrdom of Saint Alban during the same period as this, this just somehow puts the icing on the cake of how unbelievable and ill researched it is.
Though, they do not explain how or why.
and Geoffrey places the martyrdom of Saint Alban at this time.Link for photo.jpg)
So let us see if looking in to Saint Alban can shed some light.
But the first thing i notice from below, is that contemporary historians and scholars do not actually have a precise date for the martyrdom of St Alban, who is believed to be the first british christian martyr, though they estimate it sometime around 3rd or 4th Century, which does not contradict the period of Asclepiodotus's reign.
Saint Alban (/ˈɔːlbən, ˈæl-/; Latin: Albanus) is venerated as the first-recorded British) Christian martyr, for which reason he is considered to be the British protomartyr. Along with fellow Saints Julius and Aaron, Alban is one of three named martyrs recorded at an early date from Roman Britain ("Amphibalus" was the name given much later to the priest he was said to have been protecting). He is traditionally believed to have been beheaded in the Roman city of Verulamium (modern St Albans) sometime during the 3rd or 4th century, and his cult has been celebrated there since ancient times.Link for photo
Martyrdom of Saint Alban
I think i know what their issue might be.
It is perhaps because Constantinius was himself rumoured to have been a Christian.
He was also married to Saint Helena for a period.
Therefore it is unlikely there would have been any martyrdoms committed in Britain whilst Constantinius was in charge.
Helena, Helena Augusta, or Saint Helena (/ˈhɛlənə/; Greek: Ἁγία Ἑλένη, Hagía Helénē; Latin: Flavia Iulia Helena Augusta; c. 246/248 AD – c. 330 AD), was an Empress) of the Roman Empire, and mother of Emperor Constantine the Great. Born outside of the noble classes,#cite_note-Valesiani-2) a Greek, possibly in the Greek city of Drepana, Bithynia in Asia Minor, she became the consort of the future Roman Emperor Constantius Chlorus and the mother of the future Emperor Constantine the Great.Link for photo#/media/File:Elena_Colosseo_Rome_Italy.jpg)
However, Constantinius did divorce Helena for "political" reasons.
In 289 political developments forced him to divorce Helena). He married Theodora, Maximian's daughter. They had six children:Link for photo
Constantinius and Helena
Constantine left most of the persecuting to Galerius.
Though Constantinius himself did destroy a few churches and carried out a few persecutions, however much unwillingly.
Elevation to Caesar
From 303 – the beginning of the Diocletianic Persecution – Constantius began to enforce the imperial edicts dealing with the persecution of Christians, which ordered the destruction of churches). The campaign was avidly pursued by Galerius, who noticed that Constantius was well-disposed towards the Christians, and who saw it as a method of advancing his career prospects with the aging Diocletian. Of the four Tetrarchs, Constantius made the least effort to implement the decrees in the western provinces that were under his direct authority, limiting himself to knocking down a handful of churches.Link for photo
Perhaps the historians and scholars think it is unbelievable that Asclepiodotus would be successful in massacring Romans?
The Romans eventually surrender on condition of safe conduct out of Britain, which Asclepiodotus is willing to grant, but his allies the Venedoti attack them and cut off their heads, which are thrown into the river Gallobroc.Gallic Roman empire:
However the Romans being talked about here, are the remnants of the Gallic Roman empire which dissolved on European mainland in 274 AD, though continued a bit longer in Britain.
The Gallic empire
The Gallic Empire (Latin: Imperium Galliarum)[note 1] or the Gallic Roman Empire are names used in modern historiography for a breakaway part of the Roman Empire that functioned de facto as a separate state from 260 to 274.Link for photo
Perhaps the Venedoti being Allies of Asclepiodotus is unbelievable?
Though i do not see why not.
The region of Vendoti was known as Venedotia to the Latins.
Though it referred to specific area in anglesey which had an Irish colony.
Therefore this Irish tribe were the allies of Asclepiodotus.
Not unbelievable in the slightest.
The region became known as Venedotia in Latin. The name was initially attributed to a specific Irish colony on Anglesey, but broadened to refer to Irish settlers as a whole in North Wales by the 5th century.Link for photo
The little island next to Gwynedd
Perhaps King Coel taking his crown in 306 AD is unbelievable?
Coel, duke of Colchester, leads a revolt against him, kills him, and takes his crown.Link for photo
Old king cole
However, Coel, was likely one of the three Collas that were also high kings of Ireland, prior to their overthrow and exile to Alba.
and as High-King of Ireland for four years, until Fiacha's son Muiredach Tirech banished the Three Collas, exiling them and three hundred followers to Alba (Scotland).DNA analysis:
DNA analysis has confirmed the Three Collas in fourth Century Ireland.
The three Collas
. Recent DNA analysis confirms the history of the Three Collas in fourth-century Ireland, but questions their descent from Eochaid Doimlén and Cairbre Lifechair.Summary:
I think it would actually be dishonest to suggest that the most likely time for Saint Albans maryrdom would actually not have been during the reign of Asclepiodotus, whos reign was contemporary with the Great persecution.
It would also be dishonest to continue to claim that the three Collas are a figment of Irish peoples imaginations.
Particularly when we have DNA analysis, and also contemporary accounts that the Venedotia were Irish.
I also need to apologise, as i completely failed to work out exactly where contemporary historians and scholars are coming from.
2020.10.02 10:36 hearmeout25 I'm Tired of the Despair in America - there is a Solution to our Nation's Sickness! Listen Up Church!