Michael McNeil

Monotheistic Paganism — or, just what _was_ it Christianity fought and faced? by T.M. [Thomas Martin] Lindsay Historian T.M. Lindsay describes the metaphysical structure of the cosmos — according to the new, Western (essentially _monotheistic_) Paganism which was powerful in the late antique Roman Empire — as it was ultimately planned and envisioned by (the last pagan) Emperor Julian: {quoting…} The Neoplatonic thought of a Trinity of existence took the central place of the Christian {Trinity} in this new pagan theology. Three worlds exist. First and highest is the realm of pure ideas where the Supreme Principle, the One, the Highest Good, the Great First Cause, lives and reigns. Below it is the intellectual world over which presides the same Supreme Principle, but now represented by an emanation from Itself, wholly spiritual, the Logos of the Platonic philosophy. The third is the world of sense existence, the universe of things seen and handled, and there, as beseems its surroundings, the ruler, the emanation from the Supreme Principle, assumes a visible form and can be seen while adored. {/unQuote} The latter, of course, being _Helios_ the (physical) sun in the sky. Superficially it would appear that the foregoing principles don't leave much room for traditional Greco-Roman gods and goddesses of Olympus, together with their religion. Going beyond superficial, let's examine that New Paganism which, during the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D., almost completely replaced the Old Religion(s) — particularly in regard of the _people_ (Roman and otherwise) of the Empire — leaving the old official faith(s) still technically in existance but lingering as mere _simulacra_ of their former religion(s). Following is listing of the pages of T.M. Lindsay's intensely interesting chapter in Vol. I of the _Cambridge Medieval History_ — from which the foregoing excerpt, together with following pages (i.e., Lindsay's entire chapter), were drawn. contents Part I: 1. New religions for Old 2. Cosmopolitan society 3. Oriental religions 4. Isis & Apuleius' _Metamorphoses_ 5. The New Paganism 6. Pagan inscriptions from Tombstones 7. Neoplatonism vis-à-vis Christianity 8. Growing strength of Christianity 9. Imperial repression of Christianity Part II: 10. Flavius Claudius Julianus; a.k.a. Julian 11. Julian's education 12. Julian's Occultism 13. Julian as Caesar (Vice Emperor) in Gaul 14. Julian as Augustus (Emperor) 15. Julian's policy toward Christianity Part III: 16. Julian's attempt to reform Paganism 17. Helios as visible manifestation of God 18. Julian's “Catholic Pagan State Church” 19. Uniting Pagan Piety with the Old Religion 20. Incongruity of the Union 21. Julian's Failure Part IV: 22. “Galilean, Thou hast conquered” 23. Survivals of Paganism in the East 24. Survivals of Paganism in Athens & Greece 25. Survivals of Paganism in the West 26. Survivals of Paganism in Literature 27. Relations between Pagans & Christians Postfix: 28. T.M. [Thomas Martin] Lindsay ____ pics: 1) Depiction of Jesus Christ. 2) Solar deity from Bath, England (Roman: Aquae Sulis, Britannia).

@BigLoveCovfefe @NASA Hardly. Nobody has managed it yet.

@MichaelEMcNeil @NASA Yeah and they are easy to disprove lol.

Hey @nasa this is more accurate than the fake garbage you are putting out.

@guccheeto @Smooney567 @ChrisMartzWX It's perfectly neither, as the mountain near me reveals.

@MichaelEMcNeil @Smooney567 @ChrisMartzWX So is it a perfect sphere or an oblate spheroid?

Lots of triggered replies.

@TrevorL415 Meanwhile, what “CGI” was capable of as of 1974…

The CGI is Real CGI Trump is standing by for a phone call. ☎️ None is really live Artemis : The PipeDream Reloaded

@guccheeto @Smooney567 @ChrisMartzWX Indeed. Yet, visibly only a perfect sphere alone.

@MichaelEMcNeil @Smooney567 @ChrisMartzWX What an oddly perfect spherical oblate spheroid

@_TruthZone_ That's you—fake “truth seeker.”

THE EARTH IS FLAT

@benwehrman That's right: adults believe in the globe—with good reason.

Children believe in Santa Claus 🎅 Adults believe in the globe 🌎 Lies at every level to keep you stuck in a fabricated fantasy world, where your very understanding of where you are—and therefore WHO you are—can be completely controlled.

@ML_Bokang @Maveapproach No, there aren't “way too many pics.” And you “know” nothing of the kind. And as for Dscovr's decade+ long earth photography, if it's all “paintings”, how does the artist manage to get all the depicted weather patterns right all over the globe? How does an “artist” even keep up?

@MichaelEMcNeil @Maveapproach Haha. There's way too many pics that that do show stars. Although at this point I know it's CGI/paintings. None of these are real. You haven't been up there to take a picture yourself have you?

The question is why do they always use a fish eye lens when showing the earth? By that logic you can make anything a circle.

@_nahbro_k @FELibrary_ It's so funny seeing would-be sorcerers like you, contorting yourselves while flinging your horrid & morbid incantations—which, not so long ago, used to be so “hyperpuissant” (as the French might say)—but now just stagnate round you as dark clouds dissipating into vapor.

@MichaelEMcNeil @FELibrary_ Ironic 😂I’m not the pedo trump supporter who’s probably also racist

A giant balloon goes back to the moon😂😂😂😂

@88prep @DarrenPlymouth Loser…

@MichaelEMcNeil @DarrenPlymouth Boomer...

You can literally see wires reflect in sunlight. For all the pro-moon-landing bots that have recently appeared from nowhere… The moon landings were obviously faked.

@TrevorL415 No, the SLS booster did not come down upon the Dominican Republic. Meanwhile, the Artemis II spacecraft is on its way past the moon.

If you were wondering where Artemis is right now?

Grok's reply: - Michael McNeil's post replies to a viral "NOT FLAT" Earth image thread by asking if the photo is actually from the ISS rather than the recent Artemis II mission. - The image shows a large, detailed Earth from low orbit framed by ISS hardware including the Canadarm2 robotic arm, solar arrays, and module structures visible through a spacecraft window. - Authentic Artemis II photos from ~41,000 miles depict a smaller crescent Earth in deep space, confirming this as a standard ISS view commonly repurposed in flat Earth discussions.

@demosthenia1914 @wil_da_beast630 @grok It's an actual picture from the international space station, not Artemis II—right, @grok?

Confirmed.

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) has long since provided highly detailed maps of both sides of the moon. —— pic: Animation of LRO photography, showing what the entire moon looks like with side lighting (as in half moon). False colors during that portion indicate altitude.

What will the crew of Artemis 2 find on the dark side of the moon?

@88prep @DarrenPlymouth Morons. What an idiotic take. The spacesuit radio antenna and indeed whole Apollo communications system is well documented.

@MichaelEMcNeil @DarrenPlymouth All you boomers who fell for the scam getting angry with cogdis now lmfao

@_nahbro_k @FELibrary_ Ha ha—sure, that's likely—not.

@MichaelEMcNeil @FELibrary_ Doesn’t matter when I die if I’m going somewhere good 😂

@_nahbro_k @FELibrary_ You're well on your way to never getting “old” as you put it—meaning a decade or two in advance of your tender years.

@MichaelEMcNeil @FELibrary_ Don’t worry I don’t wanna get old like you unc😂you need to worry abt not bootlicking and if your making it up there

When the overall scene or just objects within it is brightly lit up by the sun (in this case, the whole daylit earth is filling the field of view), then whether the sky be black or blue, stars won't and can't be visible—a feature of both eyes and cameras known as limited “dynamic range.” Stars are just too dim (orders of magnitude too dim) to be seen until one's eyes adapt to the dark—which takes minutes in (near) total darkness (surely everyone has experienced that!)—and a black sky doesn't count; the brightness of objects within it is what counts. Moreover, cameras are even worse than eyes at handling “high dynamic range” (HDR).

@MichaelEMcNeil @Maveapproach Where are the stars?

100% wrong—and arrogant about it to boot! On the contrary, when the overall scene or just objects within it is brightly lit up by the sun, then whether the sky be black or blue, stars won't and can't be visible—a feature of both eyes and cameras known as limited “dynamic range.” Stars are just too dim (orders of magnitude too dim) to be seen until one's eyes adapt to the dark—which takes minutes in (near) total darkness (surely everyone has experienced that!)—and a black sky doesn't count; the brightness of objects within it is what counts. Beyond that, cameras are even worse than eyes at handling “high dynamic range” (HDR).

@BiloDansTaMere @darkvdred You dip shit! Space is dark. You look up at NIGHT, when it's DARK, you see stars! You retards with no brain are nuts! Your common sense eludes you! 😒

CRECENT EARTH 😂😂😂😂😂😂 WITH NO STARS 😂😂😂😂😂