lamar
Bronze Member
- Aug 30, 2004
- 1,341
- 46
Re: Basic Spanish signs and symbols you have found
Dear Gollum;
"In hoc signo vinces" means "By this (sign) we shall conquer". The phrase happens to be a Latin translation of the Greek phrase "εν τούτωι νίκα". As an aside, when I was still in school, the professor in my Latin class gave an exam and "In hoc signo vinces" happened to be one of the phrases on the test. I did not know the correct translation, so I instead wrote next the phrase, this English translation, "Wherever particular people congregate". The prof scratched his head for some time, trying to ascertain exactly how I arrived at such an incorrect, yet precisely worded translation. When asked, I pulled out a pack of Pall Mall cigarettes (red, naturally) and pointed to the lettering on the front of the pack. He laughed for years about that.
If the Society of Jesus wished to use the phrase "In hoc signo vinces" instead of the Latin letters IHS, they would have used the letters "ετν" which are the Greek letters for the original phrase. The letters IHS are the Latinized form of the letters "ΙΗΣ" which are the first 3 letters of the name "Jesus". The complete name is "ΙΗΣΟΥΣ" in classical Greek. In later times IHS was intrepreted as meaning "Iesus Hominum Salvator" or "Jesus, the savior of man(kind)". Still later, people have hypothesized that IHS means "In His Service" or "I Have Suffered". None of these interpretations are correct, however.
When the classical Greek letters becomes Latinized, that is, the original Greek wording remains the same, however the Greek alphabet is translated into the Latin alphabet, the name "ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ" in Greek becomes "IHSOYS XPISTOC" in old Latin or "IHCOYC XPICTOC" in Vulgate Latin. This means JESUS CHRIST using classical Greek words in order to pronounce the name in classical Greek while using the Latin alphabet to to aid in the correct pronounciation of the name. Please note that the letters "C" and the "S" in Latin are both pronounced the same, therefore they are often used interchangeably. This is why both IHS and IHC represent the same Christogram in Western Christianity.
Also, the Jesuits were not the first Christiansto use the Christogram IHS. This particular Christogram is one of the oldest Christograms in Christianity, with only the Chi-Rho being older. Chi-Rho, also called the Labarum, has been in constant use since the Emperor Constantine I and it signifies the first two letters of the name "ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ" in Greek, which in fact spells CHRIST. The X is superimposed below the P.
The mostly common Christogram used today is the abbreviation "Xmas". The X, also called the Chi in Greek, is the first letter of the name CHRIST, so literally it means CHRIST mas.
In regards to Fr. Charles Polzer, he never laid claim to any possession formerly in control by the Jesuits as there were never any possessions in control by the Jesuits. It's extremely difficult for a Jesuit priest to levy a valid claim against a goverment or national entity when:
A) The Society of Jesus never owned or operated any mines throughout it's history, from inception of the Order to the present day
and
B) The mine(s) never existed in the first place.
Fr. Polzer was never expelled from Mexico or anywhere else. As a point of fact, Fr. Polzer was honored on several occasions by the Mexican government for all of the exemplary work he performed there, and he was also knighted by the King Juan Carlos of Spain for his lifetime of accomplishments.
I do find it fascinating that conspiracy theorists tend to level outrageous claims against people who happen to be convienently deceased and therefore are unable to defend themselves. I challenge anyone to offer the first piece of factual evidence to back up their claim that Fr. Polzer attempted to make a claim against the Mexican government for a mine or anything else. This will not happen as no evidence exists, as the story is a complete fabrication.
With respect to all who wish to see this topic remain on course, this shall be my last post on said topic, however I do wish to make a request. I would like to ask that all posters on this thread please refrain from using the Jesuits as conspirators in a plot which never occurred, or which they had no part in, or attempt to portray them as radicals, either as individuals or as a group.
To all, "Palma non sine pulvere".
Your friend;
LAMAR
Dear Gollum;
"In hoc signo vinces" means "By this (sign) we shall conquer". The phrase happens to be a Latin translation of the Greek phrase "εν τούτωι νίκα". As an aside, when I was still in school, the professor in my Latin class gave an exam and "In hoc signo vinces" happened to be one of the phrases on the test. I did not know the correct translation, so I instead wrote next the phrase, this English translation, "Wherever particular people congregate". The prof scratched his head for some time, trying to ascertain exactly how I arrived at such an incorrect, yet precisely worded translation. When asked, I pulled out a pack of Pall Mall cigarettes (red, naturally) and pointed to the lettering on the front of the pack. He laughed for years about that.
If the Society of Jesus wished to use the phrase "In hoc signo vinces" instead of the Latin letters IHS, they would have used the letters "ετν" which are the Greek letters for the original phrase. The letters IHS are the Latinized form of the letters "ΙΗΣ" which are the first 3 letters of the name "Jesus". The complete name is "ΙΗΣΟΥΣ" in classical Greek. In later times IHS was intrepreted as meaning "Iesus Hominum Salvator" or "Jesus, the savior of man(kind)". Still later, people have hypothesized that IHS means "In His Service" or "I Have Suffered". None of these interpretations are correct, however.
When the classical Greek letters becomes Latinized, that is, the original Greek wording remains the same, however the Greek alphabet is translated into the Latin alphabet, the name "ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ" in Greek becomes "IHSOYS XPISTOC" in old Latin or "IHCOYC XPICTOC" in Vulgate Latin. This means JESUS CHRIST using classical Greek words in order to pronounce the name in classical Greek while using the Latin alphabet to to aid in the correct pronounciation of the name. Please note that the letters "C" and the "S" in Latin are both pronounced the same, therefore they are often used interchangeably. This is why both IHS and IHC represent the same Christogram in Western Christianity.
Also, the Jesuits were not the first Christiansto use the Christogram IHS. This particular Christogram is one of the oldest Christograms in Christianity, with only the Chi-Rho being older. Chi-Rho, also called the Labarum, has been in constant use since the Emperor Constantine I and it signifies the first two letters of the name "ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ" in Greek, which in fact spells CHRIST. The X is superimposed below the P.
The mostly common Christogram used today is the abbreviation "Xmas". The X, also called the Chi in Greek, is the first letter of the name CHRIST, so literally it means CHRIST mas.
In regards to Fr. Charles Polzer, he never laid claim to any possession formerly in control by the Jesuits as there were never any possessions in control by the Jesuits. It's extremely difficult for a Jesuit priest to levy a valid claim against a goverment or national entity when:
A) The Society of Jesus never owned or operated any mines throughout it's history, from inception of the Order to the present day
and
B) The mine(s) never existed in the first place.
Fr. Polzer was never expelled from Mexico or anywhere else. As a point of fact, Fr. Polzer was honored on several occasions by the Mexican government for all of the exemplary work he performed there, and he was also knighted by the King Juan Carlos of Spain for his lifetime of accomplishments.
I do find it fascinating that conspiracy theorists tend to level outrageous claims against people who happen to be convienently deceased and therefore are unable to defend themselves. I challenge anyone to offer the first piece of factual evidence to back up their claim that Fr. Polzer attempted to make a claim against the Mexican government for a mine or anything else. This will not happen as no evidence exists, as the story is a complete fabrication.
With respect to all who wish to see this topic remain on course, this shall be my last post on said topic, however I do wish to make a request. I would like to ask that all posters on this thread please refrain from using the Jesuits as conspirators in a plot which never occurred, or which they had no part in, or attempt to portray them as radicals, either as individuals or as a group.
To all, "Palma non sine pulvere".
Your friend;
LAMAR
