Rest and Motion:
Impiety in the alleged writings of the Church Fathers
October 29, 2013
Apprentice Tyler
1
Jean Hardouin’s “Prolegomena” is an introduction to a never realized work demonstrating concisely that the alleged writings of the venerated Church Fathers are atheistic. Unfortunately, it is only in the final chapters of that arduous book that Hardouin attempts to bring together his various ideas in a coherent manner.
Hardouin states the church fathers writings are esoterically impious and atheistic and he makes frequent references to “rest and motion” and that Nature is the only God of the impious crew. The frequent repetition of “motion and rest” was lost upon this Apprentice. Fortunately, Master suggested Plato’s dialogue of Parmenides to bring life to Hardouin’s ideas of impiety. Since scholars do not agree on the interpretation of this lesser known Platonic work, we believe we are on firm ground in assigning an esoteric nature to Parmenides.
The page references are from “The Republic and other works” by B. Jowett, 1989.
Hardouin states the church fathers writings are esoterically impious and atheistic and he makes frequent references to “rest and motion” and that Nature is the only God of the impious crew. The frequent repetition of “motion and rest” was lost upon this Apprentice. Fortunately, Master suggested Plato’s dialogue of Parmenides to bring life to Hardouin’s ideas of impiety. Since scholars do not agree on the interpretation of this lesser known Platonic work, we believe we are on firm ground in assigning an esoteric nature to Parmenides.
The page references are from “The Republic and other works” by B. Jowett, 1989.
Deny the immortal soul
Any one "who maintains the existence of absolute essences, will admit that they cannot exist in us.. for then they would be no longer absolute.” [376]
“Then the nature of the beautiful in itself, and ..and all other ideas which we suppose to exist absolutely, are unknown to us?” “It would seem.” [377]
“Then the nature of the beautiful in itself, and ..and all other ideas which we suppose to exist absolutely, are unknown to us?” “It would seem.” [377]
Deny that God has knowledge of man
If "God has this perfect authority and perfect knowledge, his authority cannot rule us, nor his knowledge know us or any human thing...so by parity of reason they, being gods, are not our masters, neither do they know the the things of men.”[378]
Motion "and rest, of generation and destruction even of being and not-being.” [380]
Motion "and rest, of generation and destruction even of being and not-being.” [380]
Deny the Incarnation
“Then its coming into being in anything is still more impossible…” [383]
Deny the Trinity
“And sameness has been shown to be of a nature distinct from oneness? That has been shown.” [385]
Deny that God interacts in the world
“Then the one, being of this nature, cannot be in time at all…” [387]
“Then it does not partake of time and is not in any time?” [388]
“Then it does not partake of time and is not in any time?” [388]
Deny the existence of God
“Then one cannot be anywhere…” [382]
“Then the one cannot possibly partake of being?” That is the inference.” [388]
“Then there is no name, nor expression, nor perception, nor opinion, nor knowledge of it?” Clearly not.” [388]
“The one then, being of this nature, is of necessity both at rest and in motion?...True.” [394]
Parmenides is a dry and, at times, painful dialogue. I could not finish it. Although I am of the opinion the the remainder of the dialogue, which attempts to show the denial of the hypothesis, will further disclose impiety. Of course, I am not claiming impiety in Plato’s writings, I am using this dialogue to demonstrate that the repetition of “motion and rest” have their origin in atheistic thought and to perhaps substantiate Hardouin’s claim that the Church Fathers have no God, but Nature.
Hardouin claims the impious gang placed the writings of the Church Fathers in libraries to be found later. Since the “Prolegomena” was published after Hardouin’’s death, one wonders if the impious gang did not write this prologue in his name. One premise of this introduction is that the Latin Vulgate Bible was too well known and, therefore, could not be tampered with by the impious crew. The Council of Trent appeals to the well known Vulgate and decrees that this same ancient Vulgate be used in the publication of a new edition.
As of this writing, no ancient and universally known Vulgate has come to light, so the Roman Church waits to fulfill this decree.
“Then the one cannot possibly partake of being?” That is the inference.” [388]
“Then there is no name, nor expression, nor perception, nor opinion, nor knowledge of it?” Clearly not.” [388]
“The one then, being of this nature, is of necessity both at rest and in motion?...True.” [394]
Parmenides is a dry and, at times, painful dialogue. I could not finish it. Although I am of the opinion the the remainder of the dialogue, which attempts to show the denial of the hypothesis, will further disclose impiety. Of course, I am not claiming impiety in Plato’s writings, I am using this dialogue to demonstrate that the repetition of “motion and rest” have their origin in atheistic thought and to perhaps substantiate Hardouin’s claim that the Church Fathers have no God, but Nature.
Hardouin claims the impious gang placed the writings of the Church Fathers in libraries to be found later. Since the “Prolegomena” was published after Hardouin’’s death, one wonders if the impious gang did not write this prologue in his name. One premise of this introduction is that the Latin Vulgate Bible was too well known and, therefore, could not be tampered with by the impious crew. The Council of Trent appeals to the well known Vulgate and decrees that this same ancient Vulgate be used in the publication of a new edition.
As of this writing, no ancient and universally known Vulgate has come to light, so the Roman Church waits to fulfill this decree.
Parmenides