Posted on 01/25/2015 1:00:02 PM PST by SunkenCiv
It is astonishing that scholars of religion refer so little to the Manichaean faith, which in its day -- roughly from the third century AD through the fourteenth century -- was a fully fledged world religion, which interacted with Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Zoroastrianism and Judaism. At various times, its adherents could be found across the whole of Eurasia, from France to China. It also created a substantial body of scriptures and commentaries, most of which are now lost.
Manichaeanism (Manichaeism) is, I believe, the only example of a world religion that has arisen and then vanished entirely, seemingly without trace. (Although Zoroastrianism is much diminished, it does survive in scattered remnants). Bear that in mind the next time someone says that "You can't kill an idea."...
For centuries, our knowledge of Mani's faith was mainly dependent on comments in other rival traditions, which naturally tended to be hostile. In the 1930s, though, that situation was revolutionized by the amazing discovery of a collection of codices that told the Manichaean story in the words of believers themselves. Other texts have subsequently been found in Greek, Iranian and Uighur, reminding us of the extraordinary spread of the faith. Some of the most important discoveries have been made in Western China, in oasis settlements connected to the Silk Road.
The find of this collection, the Medinet Madi library, reminds us of how extraordinarily lucky we have been with such discoveries in modern times...
Although Mani himself was a Mesopotamian, who lived under the rule of the Persian Empire, he had followers in Egypt, who translated his sacred words into Coptic. In that form, the collections turned up in the 1920s near ancient Terenouthis.
(Excerpt) Read more at patheos.com ...
Death is a result of sin. With no sin, there can be only a sacrificial death. That's only happened once. If babies had no sin, they wouldn't die.
plus Christ makes special exception for them in the NT.
Chapter and verse. Did Herod make the same exception for them?
His daughter started a singing group. ;’)
Was her name “Martha”?...?..;)
;’)
Speaking of the Vandals, it may not be surprising that blonde hair and blue eyes is as common as it is among the Berbers.
I seem to recall that when I got my genes analyzed by Geno20 (NatGeo) they ID’d a pocket of Caucasian genes in North Africa...
...Caucasian genes in the side pocket...
That book is terribly expensive. Did you get a copy of it?
Also, I wouldn't say Arianism was a "more tolerant form" -- Arianism is similar to what the Jehovah's witnesses now believe, namely that Jesus is a "lesser" god, not of the same substance as the Father.
Nah, not my cup. I’m often mystified that academic tomes are not always made available for Kindle et al. Costs would be lower (since an inventory of one) and sales would be much higher. Instead, the authors rely on an outmoded system of mostly gubmint (taxpayer) financed patronage.
Library locator:
Hmm, also available for download, perhaps at a public or college library:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rsr.12234_29/pdf
That's why you also had the Reconquista (the defeat of the Moslems in Spain) as a Crusade, you had the Albigensian crusade against Gnostic Cathars and the Northern Crusades against the Baltic pagans
The Sunni-Shia wars have been going on since the 8th century. This is longer and older than the Catholic-Protestant wars.
Rome was put as a tetrachy with two "Augustii" in charge of western and eastern halves and each had a "Caesar" under it as a successor, taking care of half of each half - so the Empire was basically divided into 4
The Western half was under continuous pressure from Germanic tribes (Vandals, Suebi, Franks, Marcomanni, Alleman, Goths etc) and Irani (Alans etc). By 400 AD these Germanics were practically rulers but kept the pretense of the Roman Augustus in Roman for show
Alaric changed this by sacking Rome, destroying the awe
Net - by 430 AD, the Augustus in Rome was deposed and never replaced.
The different Germanic princes didn't aim to succeed to the Augustii, not even the Merovingians.
By the 8th century, Byzantine (Rome - Eastern Rome) was under threat and there was only one power in the West that could provide any succour -- that was the Franks.
What better way to bring them into the Roman system by making the king as a Caesar/Augustus?
The Eastern Roman Emperors didn't accept this, but they had no military say -- oh and by the by, you do realise that many Eastern Roman/Byzantine Emperors came to the Imperatorship by the sword, right? and were of Arab, Armenian, Slavic, Albanian etc. blood?
When Charlemagne was made the Western Roman emperor -- Note, the term "Holy" Roman Empire only came about in the 13th century, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria were under Moslem rule, so effectively split from both Constantinople and Rome -- and the Alexandrian and Antioch churchs had split earlier post Chalcedon
The Church was split primarily by politics mixed with nationalism (the Copts, Syriacs splitting as did the Assyrian Church of the East under the Sassanid Shahenshahs of Persia, then the Armenian Church)
By the time the schism occured in 1054, Westerners didn't speak Greek and Easterners didn't speak Latin -- they couldn't understand each other.
The schism, like the Protestant reformation must also be understood in terms of politics, ethnic rivalries, language and culture
Sorry, you ascribe too much to Rome.
Before the 12th century, the majority of heresies and splits occured in the East
you had the Coptic and Ethiopian Churches breaking away after Chalcedon
you had the Syrian Oriental and the Armenian Church breaking away
And you forget the 1000 lb gorilla -- the ancient Church of the East or the Assyrian Church -- which, in the 8th century based out of Ctesiphone near Baghdad was larger than Rome and Constantinople and had 1/3rd of ALL Christians in the world as adherents and was spread from Ctesiphon to Mongolia (Genghis Khan's wife was a Naiman, a Christian mongol tribe) to China and to India (the Marthomite church in Kerala)
And what about the Mandaean heresy in southern Iraq?
Also, Arianism, Apollinarius etc. arose in the East -- because the East was much more erudite, more scholars etc than the West
Rome "destroying" is quite the exaggeration -- the Cathars were clearly gnostics, not Protestants (who hold to the Nicene Creed)
And Manichaeism, as I pointed out above was not an offshoot of Christianity anymore than Bahaism -- it was a syncretic religion
This ‘competition’ you talk about really only dates from the 8th century — before that, before the Arab conquests, you had Alexandria and Antioch as more learned cities, so no direct competition. To the Constantinople people, there was no competition with this city in the far off, barbarian west
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.