Talk:Hypsistarians

Suggested sources

For discussions and references to further literature see: A. D. Nock, Essays on religion and the ancient world, Oxford 1972, 416-430; M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, London 1974, 1.295ff.; G. Bertram in G. Kittel (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Grand Rapids 1964-76, 8.618-619. 68.40.135.98 (talk) 06:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There's a book called The Supreme Gods of the Bosporan Kingdom: Celestial Aphrodite and the Most High God by Yulia Ustinova (Leiden, The Netherlands: BRILL 1999)). This clearly indicates that the term was prevalent in the Greek colonies of the Black Sea, which would have had links to the Asia Minor, although the kingdom is located in the north east of the Black Sea (a diffferent Bosphorus!). Given that the sources quoted in the Catholic Encyclopedia article and it asserts that the belief in the 'most high god' is as early as 2nd century BCE, we seem to be ignoring this data. Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 17:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Clean-up

This article is generally a crude rehash of the Catholic Encyclopedia Article. I was able to detect this before even having read the Catholic Encyclopedia article (the various citations). This needs to be cleaned up quite a bit. -- Ambrosiaster (talk) 06:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Needs proper citations

There are several areas which require some references, and some areas which sound like original research. 72.66.50.207 (talk) 02:13, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah

We're all Hypsistarians, as every painting is a canvass. I'm with Goethe, except...what can yo do with a blank canvass? Paint on it, I guess. Geometrical designs only? Cherubim? Anyhow, it's an interesting article and it certainly deserves to be well researched. Somebody get on and do it, please! McZeus (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Undue leap to conclusion

Stmt is rather preposterous and really needs citation:

The existence of these Hypsistarians must have been partially responsible^{[citation needed]} for the astounding swiftness of the spread of Christianity in Asia Minor, yet not all of them accepted the new faith, and small communities of monotheists, neither Christians nor Jews, continued to exist, especially in Cappadocia.

It seems like a reasonable leap of mind, unless one is editing a desert dry net encyclopedia, and unless one sits with the competing theory that the main converting group to christianity were the hellenized jews and their contacts. The statement is wild speculation, and undue synthesis given the background material. I dislike it. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 08:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

It was from the Catholic Encyclopedia. However: the encyclopedias of old sometimes didn't have much of a quality, and here and there contained POVvy poor writing style intermixed with wild speculations. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 08:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Until the publication of Pagan Monotheism in late antiquity and similar books, it was assumed that Pagan Monotheism was an oxymoron. A great deal of work has confirmed the identity of Hypsistarians as part of a general move in antiquity towards monotheism. Theres no requirement to assert the identity of Hypsistarians as Jewish sympathisers also known as Theophobes (God-fearers). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.221.10.38 (talk) 16:17, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

New sources?

Evidence has been found that now proves the worship of the Hypsistos (Theos/Zeus Hysistos) in Greece predates Christianity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.137.36.230 (talk) 09:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, please add to talk pages at end. then "evidence" should make it possible to provide WP:IRS. :It would be surprising if the word "most high" had not been applied to the most high of the Greek gods. That in itself doesn't imply monotheism, but as a superlative rather the opposite, polytheism. Even in Hebrew texts "most high" is largely pseudo-polytheistic in reference. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I saw this earlier when I was double checking a unsourced claim that the temple predated contact with the Israelites. Conquest, possibly, but before contact seems doubtful. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:27, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not totally impossible, monotheism can exist very early - the Rig Veda is essentially monotheistic for example, the imperial Shangdi cult in Qing China was also essentially monotheistic so you'd expect to find some para-monotheism in ancient Greece too. And is Christianity monotheistic with its three-in-one, antigod and arhat-saints. But the point as far as WP:RS goes for this articles is the texts refed by the Catholic encyclopedia seem to contain Hellenistic Jewish markers. Given how papyrology has marched on from 1911 till now the article might as well be from Chaucer's period. It's a curio in itself. And going to need a lot of work.

Btw Ian, do you know much about ANE texts, are you aware of a WikiProject ANE? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, most primitive religions featured some concept of a high-god, but my impression was that the monotheistic trends in Greek religion tend to be around 500 BCE and after. Since the Greeks were influenced by the Canaanites, Hebrew influence seems reasonable to me.

I'm a bit familiar with ANE stuff (the most in my RL social circles, but that's mostly Otaku and D&D players), but due to a lack of funds (for newer books which I don't have to return) and time I'm afraid that I probably wouldn't be of too much use. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:17, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Finds in Dion, Greek Macedonia have confirmed the existence of Hypsistarians prior to the normal appearence in texts around 200bce. This confirms the indigenous origin of Greek monotheism, before the completion of the Septugant. Xenophanes 570bce is regarded as the first western monotheist and the Greek philosophical tradition followed suit. Until the discovery of the sanctuary of Zeus Hypsistos at Dion it was thought Monotheism was the sphere of philosophy only. Claims that Hypsistarian sanctuaries were also used by Hebrews as synagogues has been successfully refuted. A further point made in 'Pagan Monotheism in late antiquity confirms the Hypsistarians were exclusive monotheists and not merely Henotheists. When I get more time I'll get references but the article needs a revision in the light of the new findings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.221.10.38 (talk) 15:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

The term 'Most-High' is only ever applied to Zeus and never to any other Greek God and only in the context of a distinct cult. It is a specific title indicating the monotheistic sect of Hypsistarians and is not a mere superlative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.25.109.197 (talk) 10:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hipsters

is there an etymological connection, or is it just an easy back-construction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.76.179.81 (talk) 04:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

No relationship whatsoever; the root of Hypsistarian is cognate with the English word "up"... AnonMoos (talk) 08:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

merge?

I really wonder if this would be better as a paragraph under another article - Hellenistic monotheism, or something? In ictu oculi (talk) 22:34, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion on that, but it seems like it does need to be "de-1911-ed" a little more thoroughly... AnonMoos (talk) 05:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

An article for Hellenistic Monotheism would be interesting and could also inclide Hermetism, the cults of Magna Mater, Isis as well as Sol Invictus & etc etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.25.109.197 (talk) 08:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

For some of those, many worshippers were probably more henotheists or "monolatrists" than monotheists in a strict sense... AnonMoos (talk) 16:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I would prefer keeping it an independent article barely above a stub that someday could be expanded and improved rather than mixing it into a few sentences of a broad article that is only vaguely relevant and in which the subject of this article would be lost in the greater discussions of irrelevant matters. By analogue, if we have a one paragraph mention of blue marbles in 10 pages discussing red marbles, will anyone remember anything about the blue ones? If there is to be a future Hellenistic monotheism article, it would be better to summarize it there, use a {{See also|Hypsistarians}} and discuss it in greater detail on an improved article here. Also to be considered...Goethe discussed them and identified with them...I don't recall that he discussed much about other HM sects.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

first sentence.

"Hypsistarians, i.e. worshippers of the Hypsistos (Greek: Ὕψιστος, the "Most High" God)" Would these people today, if they were speaking English, call themseves "worshippers of the Hypsistos" or "worshippers of the Most High (God)"? I suspect the latter, and would suggest the sentence be changed accordingly. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 18:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

further research needed to clarify Hypsistarian/Caelicolist connection

Hypsistarians are probably referred to under the name Coelicoloe in a decree of the Emperors Honorius and Theodosius II (AD 408).

It took a while because the name and year are wrong, but I was able to source the specific imperial decrees referenced in this statement by reviewing this list which ultimately cites Coleman-Norton's Roman State and Christian Church and Pharr's translation of The Theodosian Codes and Novels. Two decrees (specifically CT 16.5.43 (407 AD) and CT 16.8.19 (409 AD) do mention the Caelicolae, which is a Latin word that can either mean "heaven inhabitant" or "heaven worshipper" per A Latin Dictionary (which is what Wiktionary cites anyhow). My issue is that I don't currently have institutional access and there is definitely scholarship out there on the origin of the Caelicolists and how they relate to other monotheist sects, especially some that were published after 1910. Additionally, the Catholic Encyclopedia entry cited in the article references several non-English language books all published in the 1890s that might be available in online academic libraries. If anybody wants to do some more digging you could probably definitively determine whether this is a legitimate academic claim or citogenesis. MosasaurWorld (talk) 06:26, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Nice piece of research already, thank you so much! (Btw. I like the word "citogenesis" ;) ) I'm going to correct the statement regarding the year. I'm not sure I have enough free time to find a source for (or against) the caelicolae=hypsistarians claim, but I do want to try. Corneille pensive (talk) 16:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

"Citogenesis" comes from an xkcd comic... AnonMoos (talk) 17:50, 15 December 2024 (UTC)