Augustus1
GOD THE FATHER GOD THE SON, JULIUS CAESAR & AUGUSTUS CAESAR! There is yet another very famous depiction of the Ascension, a Reiderian plate created around 400 CE and currently displayed in the Bavarian National Museum in Munich, where the false prophet Jesus grasps the hand of God in heaven a perversion of the church , an incident that is nowhere mentioned in the New Testament. However, in reality it originated from a vision of Caesar, whose last dream during the night before his assassination prefigured his later apotheosis and ascension: Caesar flew above the clouds and clasped the hand of Jupiter Julius Caesar was betrayed and killed on 15 March, resurrected on the third day as god on the Liberalia, 17 March, and was interred on 19 March, the last day of his funus. On the evening before the Ides of March Caesar had his last supper in the house of Lepidus, where he told his friends that a sudden death was the best death. On this occasion he drank wine, which was later regarded as a prophecy and foreshadowing of his sacrifice and assassination on the next day, his spilled blood, especially since his wife Calpurnia also dreamt about the looming tragedy. The Resurrection of Julius Caesar
on the day of the Liberalia Due to the rays shooting from behind his head, Caesar is usually interpreted to be a sun god. In reality these rays are not the rays of the sun, but go back to the sidus Iulium (“Julian star”), the great comet of 44 BCE. Caesar was officially consecrated in 42 BCE, which was the apotheosis of the Roman imperial cult that also included the ascension of the god. But the comet, which appeared in July 44 BCE during Caesar’s funeral games, was seen by the people as Caesar’s soul in heaven, a popular ascension before the senatorial consecratio one and a half years later (Dio On the following coin we see Divus Iulius on the left holding a spear and a Victoria. He is crowned with the Julian star by the Son of God (Divi filius) Octavian (with shield). During this time Octavian crowned all statues of Divus Iulius with replicas of the comet
The study of propositions and their use in argumentation.
The major task of logic is to establish a systematic way of deducing the logical consequences of a set of sentences. In order to accomplish this, it is necessary first to identify or characterize the logical consequences of a set of sentences. The procedures for deriving conclusions from a set of sentences then need to be examined to verify that all logical consequences, and only those, are deducible from that set. Finally, in recent times, the question has been raised whether all the truths regarding some domain of interest can be contained in a specifiable deductive system.
From its very beginning, the field of logic has been occupied with arguments, in which certain statements, the premises, are asserted in order to support some other statement, the conclusion. If the premises are intended to provide conclusive support for the conclusion, the argument is a deductive one. If the premises are intended to support the conclusion only to a lesser degree, the argument is called inductive. A logically correct deductive argument is termed valid, while an acceptable inductive argument is called cogent. The notion of support is further elucidated by the observation that the truth of the premises of a valid deductive argument necessitates the truth of the conclusion: it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. The truth of the premises of a cogent inductive argument, on the other hand, confers only a probability of truth on its conclusion: it is possible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false.
Logic is not concerned to discover premises that persuade an audience to accept, or to believe, the conclusion. This is the subject of rhetoric. The notion of rational persuasion is sometimes used by logicians in the sense that, if one were to accept the premises of a valid deductive argument, it would not be rational to reject the conclusion; one would in effect be contradicting oneself in practice. The case of inductive logic will be considered below.
From the above characterization of arguments, it is evident that they are always advanced in some language, either a natural language such as English or Chinese or, possibly, a specialized technical language such as mathematics. To develop rules for determining the validity of deductive arguments, the statements comprising the argument must be analyzed in order to see how they relate to one another. The analysis of the logical forms of arguments can be accomplished most perspicuously if the statements of the argument are framed in some canonical form. Additionally, when stated in a regimented format, various ambiguities or other defects of the original statements can be avoided.
When they are stated in a natural language, some arguments appear to give support to their conclusions or to confute a thesis. Such a defective, although apparently correct, argument is called a fallacy. Some of these errors in argument occur often enough that types of such fallacies are given special names. For example, if one were to attack the premises of an argument by casting aspersions on the character of the proponent of the argument, this would be characterized as committing an ad hominem fallacy. The character of the proponent of an argument has no relevance to the validity of the argument. There are several other fallacies of relevance, such as threatening the audience (argumentum ad baculum) or appealing to their feelings of pity (argumentum ad misericordiam).Such as logic could denote that as Julius Caesar the father and his son Augustus worked on the calendar, as any inventor it is then named after them i.e. BC,AD. A legitimate title given to Augustus Caesar {son of god} for it is well known that Julius Caesar was made a god at the time of his death, also the valid father son and Holy Spirit. Thus by proving the obvious you disprove an illogic erroneous belief and uncover the unholy or untrue practise of christens worship. For it is considerably easier to prove then is to deny Augustus Caesar as the righteous Son of God!
on the day of the Liberalia Due to the rays shooting from behind his head, Caesar is usually interpreted to be a sun god. In reality these rays are not the rays of the sun, but go back to the sidus Iulium (“Julian star”), the great comet of 44 BCE. Caesar was officially consecrated in 42 BCE, which was the apotheosis of the Roman imperial cult that also included the ascension of the god. But the comet, which appeared in July 44 BCE during Caesar’s funeral games, was seen by the people as Caesar’s soul in heaven, a popular ascension before the senatorial consecratio one and a half years later (Dio On the following coin we see Divus Iulius on the left holding a spear and a Victoria. He is crowned with the Julian star by the Son of God (Divi filius) Octavian (with shield). During this time Octavian crowned all statues of Divus Iulius with replicas of the comet
The study of propositions and their use in argumentation.
The major task of logic is to establish a systematic way of deducing the logical consequences of a set of sentences. In order to accomplish this, it is necessary first to identify or characterize the logical consequences of a set of sentences. The procedures for deriving conclusions from a set of sentences then need to be examined to verify that all logical consequences, and only those, are deducible from that set. Finally, in recent times, the question has been raised whether all the truths regarding some domain of interest can be contained in a specifiable deductive system.
From its very beginning, the field of logic has been occupied with arguments, in which certain statements, the premises, are asserted in order to support some other statement, the conclusion. If the premises are intended to provide conclusive support for the conclusion, the argument is a deductive one. If the premises are intended to support the conclusion only to a lesser degree, the argument is called inductive. A logically correct deductive argument is termed valid, while an acceptable inductive argument is called cogent. The notion of support is further elucidated by the observation that the truth of the premises of a valid deductive argument necessitates the truth of the conclusion: it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. The truth of the premises of a cogent inductive argument, on the other hand, confers only a probability of truth on its conclusion: it is possible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false.
Logic is not concerned to discover premises that persuade an audience to accept, or to believe, the conclusion. This is the subject of rhetoric. The notion of rational persuasion is sometimes used by logicians in the sense that, if one were to accept the premises of a valid deductive argument, it would not be rational to reject the conclusion; one would in effect be contradicting oneself in practice. The case of inductive logic will be considered below.
From the above characterization of arguments, it is evident that they are always advanced in some language, either a natural language such as English or Chinese or, possibly, a specialized technical language such as mathematics. To develop rules for determining the validity of deductive arguments, the statements comprising the argument must be analyzed in order to see how they relate to one another. The analysis of the logical forms of arguments can be accomplished most perspicuously if the statements of the argument are framed in some canonical form. Additionally, when stated in a regimented format, various ambiguities or other defects of the original statements can be avoided.
When they are stated in a natural language, some arguments appear to give support to their conclusions or to confute a thesis. Such a defective, although apparently correct, argument is called a fallacy. Some of these errors in argument occur often enough that types of such fallacies are given special names. For example, if one were to attack the premises of an argument by casting aspersions on the character of the proponent of the argument, this would be characterized as committing an ad hominem fallacy. The character of the proponent of an argument has no relevance to the validity of the argument. There are several other fallacies of relevance, such as threatening the audience (argumentum ad baculum) or appealing to their feelings of pity (argumentum ad misericordiam).Such as logic could denote that as Julius Caesar the father and his son Augustus worked on the calendar, as any inventor it is then named after them i.e. BC,AD. A legitimate title given to Augustus Caesar {son of god} for it is well known that Julius Caesar was made a god at the time of his death, also the valid father son and Holy Spirit. Thus by proving the obvious you disprove an illogic erroneous belief and uncover the unholy or untrue practise of christens worship. For it is considerably easier to prove then is to deny Augustus Caesar as the righteous Son of God!