Comments for Roger Pearse

Comment on Dishonesty at Wikipedia: “they don’t like it up ‘em, sir” by address

address — Wed, 22 May 2013 13:18:21 +0000

That’s the bad news… and yes, it’s pretty bad!
! The Schedule will have how to order p90x nutrition plan you focusing on Cardio a lot more
than resistance. When one crab breaks away from the pack, program will really work as promised.
One particular thing here is regimen enables one to become proficient and
nicely guided throughout the 90-days.

Comment on From my diary by Seth

Seth — Wed, 22 May 2013 05:52:24 +0000

I am curious to find out what blog system you’re working with? I’m experiencing some minor
security issues with my latest site and I’d like to find something more secure. Do you have any suggestions?

Comment on Hunting the wild (mis)quotation by Kevin

Kevin — Mon, 20 May 2013 23:04:58 +0000

I don’t know how pingbacks work, but normally pingbacks do work from my blog. Your site appears not to have the pingback from the article I posted, which links back to here.

If it comes through, or if you don’t want links posted here, just delete this comment. I don’t want to spam your comments, I just want to help the search engines to elevate this information because it’s so obfuscated by the tide of misinformation out there.

http://www.onefaithonechurch.com/index.php/a-fraud-the-so-called-constantine-creed/

Comment on Hunting the wild (mis)quotation by Kevin

Kevin — Mon, 20 May 2013 23:04:33 +0000

There’s a whole agenda of painting the church as apostate and anti-Semitic, dating to Constantine, in support of what can only be described as a modern-day Judaising campaign. There is a pseudo-history in which the early church is said to have continued to observe the Mosaic patterns right up to Constantine, and then [the evil] Constantine revised history and created “Christianity” as we know it.

It’s essentially Jewish anti-missionary propaganda, but it hooks people in because they often don’t know their history, nor even what the Biblical account actually means. People are accustomed to a fairly simplistic Christian dogma, essentially formed in the Middle Ages in the Reformation, which answers very different questions to those of New Testament times.

The Christian message has, for many, been turned from “both Jews and Gentiles are justified and included in the elect people of God exclusively through the agency of Christ”, into “believe in Jesus or go to hell”. Clearly, such a message is ill-equipped to navigate the kind of Judaising concerns that Paul was actually engaging with, and leaves people vulnerable to, “why don’t you observe the Sabbath?”

In addition, Constantine understandably made a number of edicts outlawing other religions when Christianity was Established in the Empire. The exclusions, imprecations, anathemas and criticisms against the Jewish practices (and, of course, against the pagans, too!), are now read, through Jewish sensibilities, as “anti-semitic”, instead of as “exclusivist Christian”, which is the spirit in which they were written.

There is, I fear, no greater hindrance to proper understanding than anachronism. This, of course, is why your efforts, here and in your other work in antiquities, are so valuable.

Comment on Hunting the wild (mis)quotation by Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse — Mon, 20 May 2013 17:45:47 +0000

Thank you for taking the time to write, Kevin. Glad that it helps. I don’t see, myself, how it helps anyone to argue with forged evidence. But I suspect that some of those who do so act mainly out of spite, rather than any form of rational activity. At least, I can think of no other reason why people would show no interest in whether the raw facts are right.

Comment on Serapis and Osiris-Apis by Igor

Igor — Sun, 19 May 2013 21:29:45 +0000

Thank You very much. If I come in possess of any kind of information about this matter I will inform You here
Thank You for Your time.

Comment on Hunting the wild (mis)quotation by Kevin

Kevin — Sun, 19 May 2013 10:25:41 +0000

Roger,

Thank you for this. I see that this fabrication is widely copied about the Internet, and the purveyors of it seem uninterested in learning whether or not it is genuine. I poked around for a little while trying to find *any* credible source for it, and ended up here.

Again, my gratitude. Your work has helped me to disabuse some well-meaning folks who had swallowed the “Constantine Creed” whole.

Comment on Wikipedia and the hoax articles by Amanda Lupa

Amanda Lupa — Fri, 17 May 2013 22:34:19 +0000

I’d like to point out discussion regarding the Flavius hoax:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_Greece_and_Rome/Archive_16#Who_is_Gaius_Flavius_Antoninus.3F

Comment on List of CSEL volumes at Google Books by Sites to see | David Scott Writings

Sites to see | David Scott Writings — Fri, 17 May 2013 19:45:38 +0000

[...] (217 vols., 1844-1855) – Patrologia Graeca, or PG, PG, PG, Index (161 vols., 1857-1866) –Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum or CSEL – Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (50 vols.) or Bonn Corpus – Thomas Aquinas [...]

Comment on Review: Tony Burke, “Ancient Gospel or Modern Forgery? The Secret Gospel of Mark in Debate” by Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse — Fri, 17 May 2013 14:00:53 +0000

Thank you! It seemed unreasonable to do less, and one could have done more. Interesting to see, all the same.