Tuesday, 20 August 2013

The Air Beneath the Moon Part 1

So I have looked into the ancient sources, especially around the time of Paul and the early Christians, to see if the matrix of ideas and beliefs for Earl Doherty' sub-lunar (non-physical) incarnation theory of Jesus can be found in writings of the time. I have used computer searches to seek out key phrases for my quotes, to show that the elements of such a theory were known and discussed around the time of Paul. I have also included later quotes, if they confirm earlier comments.

Of course the authors quoted generally don't support a sub-lunar incarnation of Jesus - because it was Paul who crafted this original conception from that matrix of ideas.

I have used capitals for the key terms to emphasize their nature as specific, formal, named regions.

Disclaimer: I do support Earl's theory, and I often champion his views, and sometimes use his work for sources. I have occasionally been in touch with Earl, even recently when I suggested a few web fora to him. But this essay was written from my personal research of the sources; and occasional reference to Earl's works - any errors are mine.

Anyone is free to duplicate or post or distribute this essay, provide they attribute it to 'Kapyong'.


Ancient Greek philosophers divided the Universe into a broad dichotomy -

  • Above the Moon -
divine, eternal, immortal, unchangeable, ethereal, spiritual, pure, light, divine providence

  • Beneath the Moon -
material, changeable, mortal, corruptible, impure, dark, unreasoned, fortune, reproduction, destruction, perishable, ageing

Here are some quotes showing these various distinctions :
Cicero, The Dream of Scipio, 1st C.BC :
In the lowest Sphere the Moon revolves illumined by the rays of the Sun. Below [the Moon] in truth nothing exists which is not subject to death and decay, save indeed the Souls, which by the gift of the Gods are bestowed upon the human race. Above the Moon all things are eternal,

Plutarch, Isis and Osiris. 1st C. :
for that part of the world which undergoes reproduction and destruction is contained underneath the orb of the Moon, and all things in it are subjected to motion and to change

Plutarch, On the Failure of Oracles, 1st C. :
The power comes from the gods and demigods, but, for all that, it is not unfailing nor imperishable nor ageless, lasting into that infinite time by which all things between Earth and Moon become wearied out, according to our reasoning.

Philo, On Abraham, 1st C. :
...the light in heaven is unalloyed and free from any admixture of darkness, but in the sublunary atmosphere it is mingled with dark air.

Pliny Elder, History 2, 1st C. :
Above the Moon all is pure and lightsome continually.

Epiphanius, Panarion I, 4th C. :
As well [Pythagoras] distinguished between what is Above the Moon which he called immortal, and what is Below [the Moon], which he called mortal.

Epipanius, Panarion I, 4th C. :
Aristotle the son of Nicomachus [said] that things Above the Moon are subject to divine providence, but that what is Below the Moon is not ruled by providence but borne along by some unreasoned motion. But he says there are two worlds, the world above, and the world below, and that the world above is immortal while the world below is mortal.

Eusebius, Preparatio Evangelica 15, 4th C. :
Aristotle: the part of the world Beneath the Moon may be affected by change, and the things terrestrial therein are doomed to perish.

Julian, On the Mother of the Gods, 4th C. :
Attis, therefore, the intelligible Power, the holder together of things material Below the Moon, having intercourse with the pre-ordained Cause of Matter, holds intercourse therewith, not as a male with a female, but as though flowing into it, since he is the same with it.

Sallust, On the Gods and the World, 5th C. :
Fortune has power Beneath the Moon, since Above the Moon no single thing can happen by fortune.



Here is a simple diagram of this dichotomy :


The region Below the Moon or the 'sublunary region' has the Earth as it central part (these are usually seen as concentric spheres, rather than flat layers shown on my simple diagram) :
Chaldean Oracles, 2nd C. :
The Chaldæans assigned the place of the Image, the vehicle of the irrational soul, to the Lunar Sphere; it is probable that by the Lunar Sphere was meant something more than the orb of the Moon, the whole sublunary region, of which the terrestrial Earth is, as it were, the centre


Beneath the Moon are Air, Water and Earth - which undergo change :
Philo, On the life of Moses, 1st C. :
Now of the three elements, out of which and in which all the different kinds of things which are perceptible by the outward senses and perishable are formed, namely, the Air, the water and the Earth, the garment which reached down to the feet in conjunction with the ornaments which were attached to that part of it which was about the ankles have been plainly shown to be appropriate symbols; for as the tunic is one, and as the aforesaid three elements are all of one species, since they all have all their revolutions and changes Beneath the Moon.



Air is Beneath the Moon - and between the Earth and Moon

Air fills the empty regions Below the Moon, between the Earth and the Moon, separating them :
Philo, On the Creation, 1st C. :
For the Air is in a manner spread above the empty space, since having mounted up it entirely fills all that open, and desolate, and empty place, which reaches down to us from the regions Below the Moon.

Plutarch, On the Failure of Oracles, 1st C. :
Now if the Air that is between the Earth and the Moon were to be removed and withdrawn, the unity and consociation of the universe would be destroyed, since there would be an empty and unconnected space in the middle;

Nag Hammadi, Asclepius :
Listen, Asclepius! There is a great demon. The great God has appointed him to be overseer or judge over the souls of men. And God has placed him in the middle of the Air, between Earth and heaven. Now when the soul comes forth from (the) body, it is necessary that it meet this daimon.


The 'sublunar sphere' is a distinct sphere, separate to Earth, Moon, stars, etc. :
Porphyry, On Images, 3rd C. :
There are also nine Muses singing to his lyre, which are the (one) sublunar sphere, and seven spheres of the planets, and one of the fixed stars.


So, the Air is a separate, distinct region between the circle of the Moon and the Earth.

Air is, at least in part, adjacent to Earth.
Philo, The Special Laws, 1st C. :
the rulers being all the bodies which are in heaven, such as planets and fixed stars; and the subjects being all the natures Beneath the Moon, hovering in the Air and adjacent to the Earth.

Plutarch, The Plays of Homer, 1st C. :
The top part of the Air is finer and more distant from the Earth and its exhalations.


The Upper Air is just Beneath the Moon :
Julian, The Caesars, 4th C. :
But just Below the Moon in the upper Air he had decided to entertain the Emperors.


Good souls rest in the mildest parts of Air, unjust souls are punished elsewhere :
Plutarch, On the Face in the Moon, 1st C. :
Unjust and licentious souls pay penalties for their offences; but the good must for a certain appointed time, sufficient to purge away and blow to the winds, as noxious exhalations, the defilements which come from the body, their vicious cause, be in that mildest part of the Air which they call 'The Meadows of Hades'
 
 
So, there are at least two parts to the Air.

Shown in a diagram, it seems like this :


 
Completing The Picture
There are also the following spheres or worlds to add :
  • The underworld (Hades, Tartarus, Elysium)
  • The Planetary Spheres
  • The Empyrean (a late term for the highest sphere)
This gives a picture like so :



This is my summation of the classical view - but not everyone saw it exactly the same - some early writers locate Hades Under the Moon, at the Moon, or even on the far side.


The Air is filled with living beings and things and events

It should be clear that the Air is not the same as the mundane air i.e. atmosphere, (although it developed from it.) The atmosphere was generally seen as being the highest physical later of Earth, and perhaps co-mingling with the lower Air.

In the Air are many living beings - invisible souls, demons, spirits, angels - they can see us, but we generally cannot see them :
Philo, On Dreams, 1st C. :
This Air is the abode of incorporeal souls, since it seemed good to the Creator of the universe to fill all the parts of the world with living creatures. On this account he prepared the terrestrial animals for the Earth, the aquatic animals for the sea and for the rivers, and the stars for the heaven; for every one of these bodies is not merely a living animal, but is also properly described as the very purest and most universal mind extending through the universe; so that there are living creatures in that other section of the universe, the Air.

Philo, On the Giants, 1st C. :
Those beings, whom other philosophers call demons, Moses usually calls angels; and they are souls hovering in the Air.
...
It is therefore necessary that the Air also should be full of living beings. And these beings are invisible to us, inasmuch as the Air itself is not visible to mortal sight.

Plutarch, On the face in the Moon 28, 1st C. :
All souls, whether without mind or with it, when it has issued from the body is destined to wander in the region between Earth and Moon but not for an equal time.

Lucan, 1st C. :
205 Now darkness came upon their wondering gaze, Now daylight pale and wan, their helmets wreathed In pallid mist; the spirits of their sires Hovered in Air, and shades of kindred dead Passed flitting through the gloom.


Testament of Solomon, 1st-5th C. :
Testament of Solomon, son of David, who was king in Jerusalem, and mastered and controlled all spirits of the Air, on the Earth, and under the Earth.


Some demons Under the Moon are good :
Porphyry, On Abstinence from Animal food, 3rd C. :
Such souls as are the progeny of the whole soul of the universe, and who govern the great parts of the region under the Moon, these, being incumbent on a pneumatic substance or spirit, and ruling over it conformably to reason, are to be considered as good dæmons,


Some demons or 'powers' of the Air are bad, but can be conquered by the actions of Christian martyrs :
Augustine, City of God, 4th C. :
And these fables mystically signified that Juno was mistress of the Air, which they suppose to be inhabited by the demons and the heroes, understanding by heroes the souls of the well-deserving dead. But for a quite opposite reason would we call our martyrs heroes,--supposing, as I said, that the usage of ecclesiastical language would admit of it,--not because they lived along with the demons in the Air, but because they conquered these demons or powers of the Air,



Non-Physical Actions Occur in the Air

Various sorts of (non-physical) actions are performed by the beings in the Air - especially related to death, punishment, and birth.

Demons punish souls in lakes in the Air and reform them for birth :
Plutarch, Vision of Arideus, 1st C. :
when the souls of the dead come up from below, they form a fiery bubble as they cleave the air; ...

Moreover, he said, there were certain lakes that lay parallel and equidistant one from the other, the one of boiling gold, another of lead, exceeding cold, and the third of iron, which was very scaly and rugged. By the sides of these lakes stood certain Daemons, that with their instruments, like smiths or founders, put in or drew out the souls of such as had transgressed either through avarice or an eager desire of other men’s goods....

The last thing he saw was the souls being modified for rebirth. They were being wrenched and reshaped into all kinds of living creatures by specialist artisans, who were using a combination of tools and blows to join and force together some parts, twist others back, and obliterate and eliminate others altogether, so as to make the souls fit different characteristics and ways of life. And he saw among the others Nero's soul, which was in a bad way, not least because it had been run through with red-hot nails.


Transparent sacrifices occur in the bright Air, and it is filled with light for the manifestation of things below :
Macarius Magnes, Apocritus, 4th C. :
So invisible spirits which flew in the Air, which Isaiah sang of as flying serpents, demanded white and transparent sacrifices of birds, seeing that the Air chances to be bright, and filled with light for the manifestation of the things that are below.


Note the comment that gods have non-physical bodies and blood :
Cicero, On the Nature of the Gods :
it must be admitted that the gods have the outward aspect of man, though this is not body, but quasi-body, and does not contain blood, but quasi-blood.


So it is clear that higher beings and objects existed - not having physical bodies - but some OTHER sort of material.


All life on Earth is affected from the Air

Air is filled with the seeds of vitality, vital spirit, and is productive of life due to God's special favour :
Philo, On the Giants, 1st C. :
It is then natural that that medium by which all other animals, whether aquatic of terrestrial, are vivified should itself be empty and destitute of souls? On the contrary, even if all other animals were barren, the Air by itself would be bound to be productive of life, having received from the great Creator the seeds of vitality by his especial favour.

Pliny Elder, History 2, 1st C. :
For even that part also have our forefathers called the Sky, which otherwise they name Air: even all that portion of the whole, which seeming like a void and empty place, yields this vital spirit whereby all things do live. This region is seated Beneath the Moon,

Origen, Celsus 8, 3rd C. :
Celsus goes on to say: "Let any one inquire of the Egyptians, and he will find that everything, even to the most insignificant, is committed to the care of a certain demon. The body of man is divided into thirty-six parts, and as many demons of the Air are appointed to the care of it, each having charge of a different part, although others make the number much larger. "


Conclusion :

By Paul's time, the following beliefs were known and discussed :
  • There is a distinct region between the Earth and the Moon
  • This region, called 'Air', is Beneath the Moon
  • This Air separates the Earth from the Moon
  • The Air is occupied with invisible beings, spirits, souls, demons, even Gods
  • In the Air are non-physical things - lakes, thrones, crowns, gardens, graves, nails etc.
  • In the Air are non-physical beings, good and bad - souls, demons, spirits, even Gods
  • In the Air higher Beings take action - such as whipping, punishments, reforming souls
  • What happens In the Air is vital to us down on Earth.


Next, I will look specifically into the Christian view of such things as the firmament and heavens etc.

Alleged Evidence For Jesus


I see there has been some discussion about whether Jesus really existed as a historical person. I see many posters claim there is "Roman records" for Jesus, and other historical evidence. Being interested in history, I have checked this evidence, and present the results here as a list of writers or documents who are claimed to be evidence for Jesus, along with analysis of how significant they are.



JOSEPHUS (c.96CE)
 
The famous Testamonium Flavianum (the T.F.) in the Antiquities of the Jews is considered probably the best evidence for Jesus, yet it has some serious problems :
  • the T.F. as it stands uses clearly Christian phrases and names Christ as Messiah, it could not possibly have been written by the devout Jew Josephus (who remained a Jew and refused to call anyone "messiah" in his book, which was partly about how false messiahs kept leading Israel astray.),
  • The T.F. comes in several variant versions of various ages,
  • The T.F. was not mentioned by any of the early CHurch fathers who reviewed Josephus.
  • Origen even says Josephus does NOT call Jesus the Messiah, showing the passage was not present in that earlier era.
  • The T.F. first showed up in manuscripts of Eusebius, and was still absent from some manuscripts as late as 8th century.
  • The other tiny passage in Josephus aparrently refers to Jesus, son of Damneus. The phrase "so-called Christ" may have been a later addition by a Christian who also mis-understood which Jesus was refered to.

  • An analysis of Josephus by Earl Doherty can be found here:




    So,
    this passage is possibly a total forgery (or at best a corrupt form of a lost original.)


    But, yes,
    it COULD just be actual evidence for Jesus - late, corrupt, controversial but just POSSIBLY real historical evidence.


    TACITUS (c.112CE)

    Roughly 80 years after the alleged events (and 40 years after the war) Tacitus allegedly wrote a (now) famous passage about "Christ" - this passage has several problems however:
  • Tacitus uses the term "procurator", used in his later times, but not correct for the actual period, when "prefect" was used.
  • Tacitus names the person as "Christ", when Roman records could not possibly have used this name (it would have been "Jesus, son of Joseph" or similar.)
  • This passage is paraphrased by Sulpicius Severus in the 5th century without attributing it to Tacitus, and may have been inserted back into Tacitus from this work.

  • This evidence speaks AGAINST it being based on any Roman records -

    but merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time (c.f. Pliny.)

    So,
    this passage is NOT evidence for Jesus, it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about Jesus.
    http://oll.libertyfund.org/ToC/0067.php


    PLINY the Younger (c.112CE)

    About 80 years after the alleged events, (and over 40 years after the war) Pliny referred to Christians who worshipped a "Christ" as a god, but there is no reference to a historical Jesus or Gospel events.

    So,
    Pliny is not evidence for a historical Jesus of Nazareth,
    just evidence for 2nd century Christians who worshipped a Christ.



    SUETONIUS (c.115CE)
     
    Roughly 80-90 years after the alleged Gospel events, (about 75 years after the war) Suetonius refers to a "Chrestus" who stirred the Jews to trouble in Rome during Claudius' time, but:
  • this "Chrestus" is a Greek name (from "useful"), and is also a mystic name for an initiate, it is not the same as "Christos"
  • this Chrestus was apparently active in Rome, Jesus never was.
  • So,
    this passage is not evidence for Jesus, it's nothing to do with Jesus, it's evidence for Christians grasping at straws.
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/suetonius.html


    IGNATIUS (107CE? 130-170CE?)
     The letters of Ignatius are traditionally dated to c.107, yet:
  • it is not clear if he really existed, his story is suspicious,
  • his letters are notoriously corrupt and in 2 versions,
  • it is probable that his letters were later forgeries,
  • he mentions only a tiny few items about Jesus.
  • So,
    Ignatius is no evidence for Jesus himself, it is 2nd century evidence to a few beliefs about Jesus.


     
    QUADRATUS (c.125CE)
     
    Quadratus apparently wrote an Apology to Hadrian (117-138), but:
  • we have none of his works,
  • it is not certain exactly when he wrote,
  • all we have is 1 sentence quoted by Eusebius much later ("But the works of our Saviour were always present, for they were genuine:-those that were healed, and those that were raised from the dead, who were seen not only when they were healed and when they were raised, but were also always present; and not merely while the Saviour was on earth, but also after his death, they were alive for quite a while, so that some of them lived even to our day.")
  • So,
    Quadratus is not evidence for Jesus, but evidence of Christian beliefs from about a century later.

     

    THALLUS (date unknown)
    We have NO certain evidence when Thallus lived or wrote, there are NONE of Thallus' works extant.

    What we DO have is a 9th century reference by George Syncellus who quotes the 3rd century Julianus Africanus, who, speaking of the darkness at the crucifixion, wrote: "Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse".

    But,
    there is NO evidence Thallus made specific reference to Jesus or the Gospel events at all, as there WAS an eclipse in 29. This suggests he merely referred to a known eclipse, but that LATER Christians MIS-interpreted his comment to mean their darkness. (Also note the supposed reference to Thallus in Eusebius is a false reading.)

    Richard Carrier the historian has a good page on Thallus:


    So,
    Thallus is no evidence for Jesus at all,
    merely evidence for Christian wishful thinking.
     

    PHLEGON (c.140)
    Phlegon wrote during the 140s - his works are lost. Later, Origen, Eusebius, and Julianus Africanus (as quoted by George Syncellus) refer to him, but quote differently his reference to an eclipse. There is no evidence Phlegon actually said anything about Gospel events, he was merely talking about an eclipse (they DO happen) which LATER Christians argued was the "darkness" in their stories.


    So,
    Phlegon is no evidence for Jesus at all -
    merely evidence for Christian wishful thinking.


    VALENTINUS (c.140CE)
     
    In mid 2nd century the GNOSTIC Valentinus almost became Bishop of Rome, but:
  • he was several generations after the alleged events,
  • he wrote of an esoteric, Gnostic Jesus and Christ,
  • he mentioned no historical details about Jesus.
  • So,
    Valentinus is no evidence for a historical Jesus.


     
    POLYCARP (c.155CE)

    Polycarp wrote in mid 2nd century, but :
  • he is several generations after the alleged events,
  • he gives many sayings of Jesus (some of which do NOT match the Gospels),
  • he does NOT name any evangelist or Gospel.
  • So,
    Polycarp knew sayings of Jesus,
    but provides no actual evidence for a historical Jesus.
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/polycarp.html

     
    LUCIAN (c.170CE)
     
    Nearly one-and-a-half CENTURIES after the alleged events, Lucian satirised Christians, but :
  • this was several generations later,
  • Lucian does NOT even mention Jesus or Christ by name.
  • So,
    Lucian is no evidence for a historical Jesus, merely late 2nd century lampooning of Christians.
     

    GALEN (late 2nd C.)
    Late 2nd century, Galen makes a few references to Christians, and briefly to Christ.
    This is far too late to be evidence for Jesus.
     

    NUMENIUS (2nd C.?)
    In the 3rd century, Origen claimed Numenius "quotes also a narrative regarding Jesus--without, however, mentioning His name" - i.e. Numenius mentioned a story but said nothing about Jesus, but by Origen's time it had become attached to Jesus' name.

    This not any evidence for Jesus, it's just later wishful thinking.



    TALMUD (3rd C. and later)
    There are some possible references in the Talmud, but:
  • these references are from 3rd century or later, and seem to be (unfriendly) Jewish responses to Christian claims.
  • the references are highly variant, have many cryptic names for Jesus, and very different to the Gospel stories (e.g. that "Jesus" was born about 100BC, that he learned black magic in Egypt, that he worshipped a brick-bat, that he was stoned to death in Lydda, that he had 5 disciples Matai, Nekai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah.)
  • So,
    the Talmud contains NO evidence for Jesus, it merely has much later Jewish responses to the Gospel stories - responses which vary much from the Gospel accounts.
     

     
    MARA BAR SERAPION (date unknown)
    A fragment which includes -
    "... What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King?",

    in the context of ancient leaders like Socrates. It is NOT at all clear WHEN this manuscript was written, nor exactly who it is referring too, but there is no evidence it is Jesus.


     
    SUMMARY

    In short,
  • there are no Roman recods of Jesus,
  • there is no contemporary evidence for Jesus,
  • the claimed evidence is very weak - late, forged, suspect or not about Jesus at all.
  • the T.F. is probably the best "evidence", but it is at best corrupt, at worst forged.
  •  

    Monday, 19 August 2013

    Early Writers who should or could have mentioned Jesus

     
    A well-known list of early writers from Remsburg is much bandied about by sceptics. This list names a large number of early writers who lived about the time of Jesus, but who failed to mention him. Some of the names on the list do not belong, because they just could not be expected to have mentioned Jesus. The Remsburg list is also without dates and subjects and places, and is unclear in identifying some authors. So, I have updated and improved this list, taking it up to the mid 2nd century. Some of the writers listed need more details.

     


    How Likely was a mention of Jesus?
     

    The issue is really HOW LIKELY they would be to mention Jesus.

    Factors which increase the expectation that Jesus would be mentioned in a work include :
  • a large work (i.e. one which has large index of names)
  • a work on an issue somehow related to Jesus or the Gospel events,
  • a work whose genre tends to frequently mention or allude to many subjects and people,

    •  
    I have thus classified these writers into broad categories -
  • writers who surely SHOULD have mentioned Jesus (5),
  • writers who PROBABLY SHOULD have mentioned Jesus (4,3),
  • writers who COULD have mentioned Jesus (2,1, or even 0.5),
  • writers who WOULDN'T have mentioned Jesus (0)

  • I have given each writer a WEIGHT out of 5 as indicated.


    Of course, one writer who didn't mention Jesus means nothing.

    But,

    when DOZENS of writers from the period in question fail to mention anything about Jesus (or the the Gospel events or actors), this argues against historicity.



    The argument is sometimes made that these writers could not possibly have mentioned Jesus - because he was a minor figure and unrelated to the issues at hand. This assumes that no such writer ever mentions a minor figure in passing, that they never make an aside about other events or figures who are not specially related to the subject. Of course, this is not true, as the evidence below shows that many of the writers mentioned make many references to many other minor figures and often make excurses about other subjects and events and people.

    I have also included astronomers on the list who might have mentioned the Star of Bethlehem and/or the darkness at the crucifixion - if they had heard of them.

     


    Summary of Results
     

    The results of my current classifications is:

    1 writer who surely SHOULD have mentioned Jesus (Philo.)

    4 writers who PROBABLY SHOULD have mentioned Jesus (Seneca, Plutarch, Justus, Juvenal.)

    31 writers who COULD have mentioned Jesus.

     
    (19 writers who could not be expected to.)
     




    Writers who should have mentioned Jesus
     


    PHILO (20 BCE - 50 CE)

    Philo Judaeus wrote very many books about Jewish religion and history in the 30s and 40s of the 1st C. CE, lived in Alexandria, and visited Jerusalem.

    Philo was contemporary with Jesus and Paul,
    Philo visited Jerusalem and had family there,
    he developed the concept of the Logos and the holy spirit,
    he was considered a Christian by some later Christians,
    he wrote a great deal about related times and peoples and issues.

    If Jesus had existed, Philo would almost certainly have written about him and his teachings.
    Rating: SHOULD have mentioned Jesus or his teachings, but did not.
    Weight: 5




    Writers who probably should have mentioned Jesus

     
    SENECA (4 BCE - 65 CE)

     
    Lucius Annaeus Seneca wrote many philosophic (Stoic) and satirical books and letters (and Tragedies) in Rome.

    Seneca wrote a great deal on many subjects and mentioned many people. He was a Stoic, a school of thought considered sympathetic to Christian teachings.

    In fact,
    early Christians seemed to have expected him to discuss Christianity - they FORGED letters between him and Paul.

    How else to explain these forgeries, except as Christian responses to a surprising VOID in Seneca's writings?

    Rating: PROBABLY SHOULD have mentioned Jesus or his teachings, but did not.
    Weight: 4



    PLUTARCH (c. 46 CE - 120 CE)

    Plutarch of Chaeronea wrote many works on history and philosophy in Rome and Boetia in about 90-120 CE.

    Plutarch wrote about influential Roman figures, including some contemporary to Jesus,
    Plutarch wrote on Oracles (prophesies),
    Plutarch wrote on moral issues,
    Plutarch wrote on spiritual and religious issues.

    If Plutarch knew of Jesus or the Gospel events, it is highly likely he would have mentioned them.
    Rating: PROBABLY SHOULD have mentioned Jesus or his teachings, but did not.
    Weight: 4
     



    JUSTUS (late 1st C.)

    Justus of Tiberias wrote a History of Jewish Kings in Galilee in late 1st century.

    Photius read Justus in the 8th century and noted that he did not mention anything: "He (Justus of Tiberias) makes not one mention of Jesus, of what happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did."

    It is surprising that a contemporary writer from the very region of Jesus' alleged acts did not mention him.

    Rating: PROBABLY SHOULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 3



    JUVENAL (late 1st C. - early 2nd C.)

    Decimus Junius Juvenalis wrote sixteen satires in Rome in early 2nd century.

    Lucian the Roman satirist DID ridicule Christians (as gullible, easily lead fools) in mid 2nd century. By the later time of Lucian, Christianity obviously was known to the wider Roman community. Whereas Juvenal wrote at a time when Christianity had only just started to rate a few tiny mentions (Pliny the Younger, Tacitus.)

    Rating: PROBABLY SHOULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 3




    Writers who could have mentioned Jesus
     
     
    DAMIS (mid 1st C. - early 2nd C.)

    Damis apparently wrote most of what we know about Apollonius of Tyana who was a philosopher and mystic exactly contemporary with Jesus, and who was rather similar to Jesus - enough for some authors to argue they were one and the same person.

    If Damis/Apollonius had known of Jesus, he could have easily have been mentioned as a competitor. A story in which Apollonius bested Jesus in debate would not be un-expected.

    Rating: COULD easily have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 2




    PLINY THE ELDER (23 CE - 79 CE)

    Gaius Plinius Secundus wrote a large Natural History in Rome c.70CE

    Pliny wrote a great deal - his Natural History mentions HUNDREDS of people, major & minor - writers, leaders, poets, artists - often with as much reason as mentioning Jesus. (Of course like many other writers he talks about astronomy too, but never mentions the Star of Bethlehem or the darkness.)

    It is not at all un-reasoble for this prolific writer to have mentioned Jesus or the Gospels events.

    Rating: COULD easily have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 2

     

    MARTIAL (40 CE - c. 103 CE)

    Marcus Valerius Martialus wrote satires in Rome in late 1st century.

    Martial wrote a large body of poems about all sorts of things. He mentions many people, places, stories and issues - major and minor, within and without Rome, such as :
  • Stoic suffering of discomfort and death,
  • virgin's blood,
  • Roman funerary practices,
  • the way accused men look in court,
  • Roman soldiers mocking their leaders,
  • anointing the body with oil,
  • Molorchus the good shepherd,
  • Tutilius a minor rhetorician, Nestor the wise,
  • the (ugly) Temple of Jupiter,

    This shows Martial mentions or alludes to many and varied people and issues.
    He could easily have mentioned Jesus (or the Gospel events).

    Rating: COULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 2


     
    PETRONIUS (c. 27 CE - 66 CE)

    Gaius Petronius Arbiter or Titus Petronius wrote a large novel (a bawdy drama) the "Satyricon" c.60CE.

    Petronius mentions all sorts of people and events in this large work, including :
  • a CRUCIFIXION !
  • a scene where guards are posted to stop a corpse being stolen,
  • a tomb scene of someone mistaking a person for a supernatural vision,
  • gods such as Bacchus and Ceres,
  • writers such as Sophocles and Euripides and Epicurus,
  • books such as the Iliad,
  • Romans such as Cato and Pompey,
  • people such as Hannibal, and the Governor of Ephesus,
  • female charioteers, slaves, merchants, Arabs, lawyers
  • baths, shipwrecks, meals...

    This large work, cover MANY topics, including a CRUCIFIXION, and it was written just as Peter and Paul had come to Rome, allegedly. It could easily have mentioned Jesus.

    Rating: COULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 2



    PAUSANIAS (2nd C.)

    Pausanias wrote the massive Guide to Greece in mid 2nd century.

    Pausanias' work is vast and the index covers over 70 pages of small print, I estimate a couple of THOUSAND names are mentioned. He mentions a large number of minor figues from within and without Greece.

    He even mentions a Jewish prophetess - a figure so minor she is essentially unknown: "Then later than Demo there was a prophetic woman reared among the Jews beyond Palestine; her name was Sabbe." Phokis, Book X, 12, [5]

    Pausanias also mentions the Jewish rebellion under Hadrian.

    Rating: COULD easily have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 2



    EPICTETUS (55 CE - 135 CE)

    Epictetus is known for several books of Stoic religious and philosophic discourses in the early 2nd century. One of his disciples was Arrian, and thanks to him much of Epictetus' works are extant.

    Epictetus DID apparently mention "the Galileans", which could be a reference to :

    the early Christians,
    or
    the revolt under Judas the Galilean in early 1st century.

    Either way, this shows quite clearly that Epictetus could refer to a figure such as Jesus.

    Rating: COULD easily have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 2



    PERSIUS (34 CE - 62 CE)

     
    Aulus Persius Flaccus wrote six fairly long satires in Rome in the mid 1st century, of a rather philosophic nature.

    The argument that no Roman satirist could be expected to mention Jesus, is proven wrong by the case of a Roman satirist who DID mention Jesus (but only as echoes of later Christian beliefs.)

    Persius wrote a reasonably large body of work that mentions many people and issues.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 2


    AELIUS ARISTIDES (117 CE - 181 CE)

    Aelius Aristides the mid 2nd century Greek Orator spoke and wrote a History of Rome and other subjects - he seems to refer to the Christians as "impious men from Palestine" (Orations 46.2)

    If he could mention people from Palestine, he could easily have mentioned Jesus.

    Rating: COULD easily have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 1



    FRONTO (c. 100 CE - 170 CE)

    Marcus Cornelius Fronto of Rome wrote several letters in mid 2nd century.

    According to Minucius Felix, he scandalised rites practiced by Roman Christians - so he could easily have mentioned Jesus.

    Rating: COULD easily have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 1


     
    DIO CHRYSOSTOM (c. 40CE - c. 120 CE)

    Dio Chrysostom (Cocceianus Dio, or Dion Prusa) wrote many works and gave many speeches in various Roman and Greek centres in late 1st century, of which 80 survive e.g. the Euboicus.

    Dio wrote a large number of works in the late 1st century - he certainly could have mentioned Jesus, if he knew of him.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 1



    MARCUS AURELIUS (c. 212 CE - 180 CE)

    Marcus Aelius Aurelius Antoninus wrote the Stoic Meditations in mid 2nd century - he (apparently) refers once to the Christians in XI, 3.

    Rating: COULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 1



    HIEROCLES (2nd C.)

    Hierocles of Alexandria wrote on Stoic philosophy in late 1st century.

    Rating: COULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 1



    MAXIMUS of TYRE (2nd C. CE)

    Cassius Maximus Tyrius, a Greek NeoPlatonic philosopher, wrote many works in mid 2nd century.

    Rating: COULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 1



    MUSONIUS RUFUS (1st C. CE)

    C. Musonius Rufus views on Stoic philosophy in Rome were collected in mid 1st century.

    Rating: COULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    LUCIUS APULEIUS (c. 125 CE - c. 180 CE)

    Lucius Apuleius wrote the Metamorphoses in mid-late 2nd C. (the Golden Ass or Transformations of Lucius) and many other spiritual, historical, and philosophic works - several survive.

    Rating: COULD have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    AULUS GELLIUS (c. 125 CE - c. 180 CE)

    Aulus Gellius wrote Attic Nights (Nights in Athens) in mid-late 2nd C., a large compendium of many topics and which mentioned many people.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5




    ARRIAN (c. 86 CE - 160 CE)

    Arrian wrote a History of Alexander c.120CE.

    The subject is not related, but Arrian wrote a very large work which mentioned HUNDREDS of people, some not from Alexander's time.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    APPIAN (c. 95 CE - c. 165 CE)

    Appian wrote a large Roman History (from the Gracchi to Caesar) in mid 2nd century.

    It's not particularly likely that this specific writer would mention Jesus.
    But,
    he wrote a LARGE work which mentions HUNDREDS of people.
    Appian does mention some issues of HIS day (mid 2nd century), e.g. a decision by Hadrian.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    THEON of SMYRNA (fl. 100 CE)

    Theon of Smyrna wrote on astronomy/philosophy in early 2nd century.

    Theon wrote about philosophy. If Jesus and his teachings were known, it is entirely plausible for to mention them.

    Theon also wrote about astronomy. If he had heard about the Star of Bethlehem or the Darkness (as an event, or from the Gospels) he could easily have mentioned it.

    Apologists frequently cite Phlegon and Thallus, astronomers who mentioned eclipses (but NOT Jesus or the Gospel events, that is merely later Christian wishful thinking) as evidence for Jesus.

    An astronomer could easily be expected to mention those incidents, especially when apologists claim other astronomers of the period did exactly that. The silence of early astronomers about the Star of Bethlehem or the crucifixion darkness argues these "events" were unknown until later.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    QUINTILIAN (c. 35 CE - c. 100 CE)

    Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, wrote the "Education of an Orator" in Rome in late 1st century.

    One of the things Jesus was allegedly noted for was his PUBLIC SPEECHES - e.g. the Sermon on the Mount, which supposedly drew and influenced large crowds.

    If Quintilian had heard of Jesus or the Gospels events, he could have mentioned the allegedly famous speeches of Jesus.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    LUCIUS ANNAEUS FLORUS (late 1st C. CE - early 2nd C. CE)

    Lucius Annaeus Florus wrote an Epitome of Roman History.

    Although not directly on subject, Florus wrote a large work which mentions many names. He could have mentioned Jesus if he had known of him.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    LUCAN (39 CE - 65 CE)

    Marcus Annaeus Lucanus wrote the Pharsalia (Civil War) in Rome in mid 1st century.

    In his large poem, the Pharsalia, he mentions some events from later times, and he covers many different issues and people in passing.

    He:
  • mentions an event from 56CE,
  • refers to places as far afield as Sicily and Kent,
  • refered to Stoic religious beliefs about the end of the world,
  • refers to many books and myths and persons and events not part of the main story.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    STATIUS (c. 45 CE - c. 96 CE)

    Publius Papinius Statius wrote numerous minor and epic poems (e.g. Ode to Sleep and the Thebaid) in Rome in late 1st century.

    Statius wrote many works on several subjects, he could have mentioned Jesus.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    HERO of ALEXANDRIA (c. 10 CE - c. 70 CE)

    Hero(n) of Alexandria wrote many technical works, including astronomy in mid-late 1st C.

    If he had known of the Gospel stories about Jesus, he could have mentioned them.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5
     



    GEMINUS (fl. 1st C. CE)

     
    Geminus wrote on mathematics and astronomy in Greece in 1st C. CE.

    If he had known of the Gospel stories about Jesus, he could have mentioned them.

     
    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5

     


    ALBINUS (fl. c. 150 CE)

    Albinus taught on (neo-)Platonism in early 2nd century, a little survives.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    ARISTOCLES (1st C. CE)

    Aristocles of Messene wrote On Philosophy, late 1st century.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    APOLLODORUS (1st C. CE?)

    Pseudo Apollodorus compiled a large Mythology in mid 2nd century.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    HEPHAESTION (2nd C. CE)

    Hephaestion of Alexandria wrote many works in mid 2nd century.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5



    SEXTUS EMPIRICUS (c. 160 CE - 210 CE)

    Sextus Empiricus wrote Outlines of Scepticism in late 2nd century.

    Rating: COULD possibly have mentioned Jesus, but did not.
    Weight: 0.5

     

    Writers who could not be expected to mention Jesus

     

    Paterculus
    Ptolemy
    Valerius Maximus
    Pomponius Mela
    Quintus Curtus Rufus
    Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella
    Favorinus
    Phaedrus
    Babrius
    Silius Italicus
    Marcus Manilius
    Cleomedes
    Dioscorides
    Sextus Julius Frontinus
    Nicomachus of Gerasa
    Menelaus of Alexandria
    Menodotus of Nicomedia
    Tiberius Claudius Herodes Atticus
    Valerius Flaccus
     

     


     

    Thursday, 1 November 2012

    The Chess Set

    I became interested in chess when I was four years old - after I saw a beautiful carved chess set at friend's house - large pieces of lovely soft wood with felt base that were wonderful to touch, to hold, to caress even.

    My Dad taught me to read when I was about five - that is - he taught me my letters. I naively hoped that knowing the letters would open all books to me. It wasn't until I tried reading Alan Moorehead's The Fatal Impact, that I realised what it really meant to 'learn to read'.

    So I read The Gingerbread Man many times, and then Dad got me a slim volume called How to Play Chess - easy to read, and small in size, and telling me how to play Chess using simple images with moving icons and linked text. I loved it - it was just what I needed - an early positive reading experience.

    Obviously I needed my own set, so there came the day when Mum took me to town to buy my first chess set. Because Chess was God's game, we had to ascend a huge distance up these vast wooden stairs at David Jones' Dept store, but eventually we reached a heaven filled with Chess sets of all sorts of sizes, styles, and materials.

    Of course I'd only seen one set before - the set that drew me in, that first attracted me, and so I wanted a copy of that perfect exemplar, and simply sought out the one that looked most similar to that original; with a bemused salesman tagging along with Mum.

    But it turned out that the pieces of my new set were not quite identical to my exemplar - the bishops had no slot cut in the head. This omission was so serious to me that I insisted my Dad cut slots to match. I mutilated my new set to match the one that I fell in love with. But the cut slots were not very deep, and used a very thin blade, and now over the years the slots have grown over - nature returning the pieces to their rightful state.

    I would play Chess with the neighbourhood kids, but somehow it didn't seem to work out that well, and Mum was always rushing in to break us up, reminding us that Chess was a non-contact sport.

    Friday, 19 October 2012

    The day the lights were all green

    Many years ago, I did a weekend course - one of those personal development courses, this one was about getting into a relaxed alpha state and useing creative visualisation to learn about oneself or about other things, or to help bring about useful future outcomes. By that I mean getting into the alpha state (rested meditative state) and visualising in the mind's-eye the outcome desired. This technique is pure 'magical-thinking' to a psychiatrist, but it seems to work for me often enough. I can get car-park spots when I need them to this day.

    I learned a lot from this course and it was that weekend I had my great Cosmic Consciousness experience, but that's not for now.

    On this particular day, my friend Jeff Gray and I were heading to a meeting for the course and we were a little late - late enough that a bad ran of traffic would get us there after the arranged time, but a good run of traffic would see us there on time.

    So we set off together on our motorbikes, side-by-side in that unspoken road-dancing camadarie of bikers riding together.

    As we approached the first set of lights, I did my thing - I imagined in my mind's eye the light being green for us, and so it was. I said nothing to Jeff about it.

    The second set I did the same, and once more, it was green. 'Wonderful' I thought to myself, perhaps Jeff is helping?

    The third set of lights were perfect green for us too and I guessed that Jeff and I were both doing the very same thing, although not a word was spoken about this until this very day. Two of us using our mental magic in unison to get green lights when we needed them.

    And so it was that on a long ride from Scarborough to Welshpool, a long ride right across the city, at least half an hour, through maybe 50 lights, that literally every single one was green for us. Not a single pause for a light slowed us down. And sure enough we arrived perfectly on time.


    That's real magic :-)


    Tuesday, 24 April 2012

    Three Strikes and You're Out of Luck

    Falling
    Back in my twenties I met a nice young couple, the young bloke was in a band, and his girlfriend would go along in support. They say that a woman often chooses her next man before leaving the last one, and I was getting on pretty well with her. So there came a day when we were hanging around the pub while he played, and we shared a drink in the quiet lounge, away from where he was playing. Things were 'going very well', as Kaylee said about Simon Tan in Firefly.

    It seems she had chosen me as her next man, and she looked me right in the eye, and cast her romantic net over me, she wanted to catch me. At that moment I actually experienced falling - suddenly the ground seemed to drop out from under me and I felt in my gut like I was falling into a bottomlesss pit. This feeling only lasted for a few moments, but now I know why they say 'falling in love'. I literally felt that falling experience. And the result? I let her slip through my fingers.


    Morning Coffee
    As a young man I studied Japanese and like many of us Japanese students, we met many Japanese tourists, a natural match - we wanted to practice Japanese and learn, they wanted to interact with sympathetic Aussies. I met one particularly nice young Japanese lass and we shared some nice experiences, including a drive to Northam. I pulled out a joint and had a smoke as we drive along this narrow country rode - but she was terrified as I drove along this winding tiny aussie rode while stoned.

    One night we went to a party together, it was a nice relaxed event, some music, some dancing, some talking, some dart games - it was a pleasant night. After a bit, I felt my energies flagging somewhat, so I thought a coffee might be nice, and I asked her "would you like a coffee?" She looked at me in horror, a confused pause of disgust and amazement. I had no idea what was wrong, so I repeated : "I'm going to the kitchen to make a coffee, would you like one too?". Her relief was obvious and palpable and she happily agreed, her shock and horror faded, and we shared a coffee in the kitchen. It was not until later that I realised what had happened - it was common in young Japanese culture to ask something like "shall we share morning coffee together?" as a way of politely asking for sex. Of course, we never did share morning coffee.


    See you later
    One day while working at the casino, I had a dinner date with a female friend - I don't remember who asked who out, but she was a nice friend and I was happy to spend dinner with her. During the dinner, one of my female work-mates dropped by to say hello, and my date made a point of saying "hey - he's mine for tonight". Well, I was sexually conservative, inexperienced, unconfident, and I didn't really grasp what she meant or intended, and didn't have the confidence to open up about what the evening may involve. I also had a girlfriend in another city and wasn't sure if I had told her - and I would never even consider being unfaithful. I said nothing. Afterwards, we went back to my room, and she had packed her nightie. We got into bed, said goodnight and simply went to sleep. Next morning we politely said goodbye, and that was that. To this day I think of that lost paramour and hope I meet again - not to have sex, but to apologise for my letting her down without explanation.

    Saturday, 21 April 2012

    Cosmic Consciousness

    In my twenties I went along to a spiritual growth weekend course - largely based on relaxing into an alpha state and using creative visualisation to learn, or to project a desired outcome. It was a positive experience, and I learnt about myself and the power of visualisation.

    And, at the time I was also into astronomy, I had a nice 8inch Meade telescope, and often used it to view the Moon and planets and stars - even Halley's comet when it came past again in the 80s.
    I liked to follow the movement of the planets, imagining their orbits and their distance from us. The two planets inside our orbit and thus never seen in the darkest hours - Mercury close to the sun, moving fast and rarely visible; Venus a little slower, a little further out and thus more visible, both the morning 'star' and the evening 'star', depending on it's position.

    Then the outside planets which could be seen by naked eye even the darkest hours of the night - Mars, slightly red; Jupiter large and bright and slightly yellow/brown, Saturn less close, with the rings a wonderful sight in the 'scope . I got to know their orbits and movements fairly well over this period - and one night I had a wonderful experience of sight and understanding.

    As I looked at several planets, the sun just having set - I saw it - I saw the solar system. I could see the sun was just below the horizon, I could see several planets and their relative distances, and their movement through their orbits. It all fit in my head, and I apprehended the whole solar (almost) system in my mind. It was a wonderful moment of seeing large.

    And this moment of seeing large lead to one of the great experiences of my life in the alpha course shortly afterwards.

    One of the exercises in this personal development weekend was to visualise one's consciousness growing larger and larger, to imagine one's 'self' was larger than merely the physical body we wear. First we imagined our consciousness expanding to fill the room - to be the room. Then to expand further and be the suburb, then be the city, then Australia, then the solar system. And it really 'clicked' for me - I surmise that the experience I had had in seeing the solar system was the trigger that made it work so well for me. It worked - I was the solar system. I went further, and I was the galaxy, then the whole universe. I had the experience of Cosmic Consciousness, one the sublimely great moments of this incarnation. My consciousness encompassed all of creation.

    Afterwards, coming back to the room I was filled with energy and joy to such an extent I could not stop grinning with joy for a good hour or more - indeed my face ached from smiling so long.
    Thank you Luc.