Ralph Ellis. You guys heard of him? Making BIG claims.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-03-2013, 05:02 AM (This post was last modified: 10-03-2013 08:49 AM by ralphellis.)
RE: Ralph Ellis. You guys heard of him? Making BIG claims.
(10-03-2013 04:12 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I checked out Thomas Verenna's "review" of Joseph Atwill's book. He doesn't know what he's talking about, and he's rude and derogatory.

Atwill's book is great.

Ralph, I'm sure you're bigger than him.


And I don't know why he was quite so rude and derogatory. Myself and Atwil are sort of on the 'same side' as Verenna, as far as I can see. But Verenna is so wedded to his theory of the Jesus-Myth, that he cannot accept any possibility of Jesus being a historical character - even though it is fellow rationalists who are making the claims.

At best he is a very strange character. At worst, he is an utter narcisist who's high opinion of himself far outstrips his ability.



Strange as it seem, but I have come across another Verenna many years ago (are they the same person? ). This character befreinded me, said my work was great, and then plagiarised 70 verbatim pages of my book, which was published by Random House (the world's largest publisher, I believe). A tangled court case ensued, where his book was withdrawn and pulped, and the author was exposed as a complete fraud whose 'research' consisted of plagiarising a total of twelve authors.

But how on Earth did he get a $300,000 publishing contract in the fist place, when getting a publisher is sooo difficult??

But then, knock me down with a feather, the same guy then gets another contract with another publisher and prints a biography of his time in the Gulf War as an SAS commander, the UK's elite force (sounding similar?) But then a day after publication the entire print run was withdrawn and pulped, because it transpired that he was not even a regular soldier, let alone an SAS commander, and had never been anywhere near Iraq. You could not make it up. Thousands of authors struggle to find a publisher, while a lying plagiarist gets two !! (And two books pulped !!)

All this is documented in the UK's national papers.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/jun/22/1





.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ralphellis's post
10-03-2013, 05:37 AM
RE: Ralph Ellis. You guys heard of him? Making BIG claims.
From the Jesus never existed website –

"Christ! Mandylion or 'Holy Face of Edessa'

Would You BELIEVE IT?!
Self-portrait by the artist Jesus Christ!

Legend has it that Jesus sent his portrait (which miraculously appeared on a cloth pressed to his face) to King Agbar of Edessa."

From Brian Le Port...

"The Church According to Eusebius: Observation Two
Standard | Posted on December 27, 2006 by Brian LePort

Did Jesus Write a Letter to Agbar, a King in Mesopotamia?

It has long been assumed that there has never been a article of writing that can be attributed directly to Jesus himself. During the fourth century when Eusebius began to collect documents and record his history he believed that he had two documents, one from a king named Agbar to Jesus and one from Jesus to Agbar, that were copies of a correspondence between these two men. Supposedly the letter from Jesus reads:

Happy are you who believed in me without having seen me! For it is written of me that those who have seen me will not believe in me, and that those who have not seen will believe and live. As to your request that I should come to you, I must complete all that I was sent to do here, and on completing it must at once be taken up to the One who sent me. When I have been taken up I will send you one of my disciples to cure your disorder and bring life to you and those with you.


Several paragraphs later Eusebius writes that he actually has a copy
of this, “valuable document, literally translated from Syriac.”

In a footnote by G.A. Williamson, who has translated Eusebius’ work,
he writes, “It should be noted that the original Syriac, of which we
possess a copy, does not say that Jesus wrote the letter, but that He
gave a verbal message to Ananias, who wrote it down. In other respects
Eusebius’ version is more reliable than our text of the Syriac, which
has been corrupted by copyists. (p. 70)

Concerning the latter half of this footnote, where Williamson
acknowledges that Eusebius would have had an earlier, and therefore
likely more authentic, copy of this letter raises a couple of
questions. First, if the copy Eusebius had did say that Jesus wrote it
why assume that this was not an error? How many copies did Eusebius
have to compare and contrast? Is there any hint that he had the
originals? This is unlikely. Second, from what we know of Christian
scribal history, why would the scribes attribute something actually
written by Jesus to another? If Jesus did indeed write this, and it
wasn’t merely something he said that was written down by one Ananias,
wouldn’t there be an effort to make sure that the authorship of Jesus
was preserved. Finally, if this were actually written by the hand of
Jesus, wouldn’t there have been some effort to canonize this document?
Shouldn’t we have copies of it today due to its significance? If
Christian theology would come to call Jesus the ‘Word of God’ wouldn’t
anything hand written by Jesus have been preserved and included in the
canonical ‘word of God’?

It is therefore unlikely that Jesus actually did write this document
for I believe that there would have been more of an effort to preserve
the document and even a motion to canonize it had this been agreed upon
by the early church.

This was taken from Book One of Eusebius’ work."

I've searched a lot for someone who takes the King Agbar/Jesus correspondence seriously...all I get is YOU, Ralph (LOL)

That doesn't mean you're wrong, but...WHY? Where's the evidence?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-03-2013, 05:46 AM
RE: Ralph Ellis. You guys heard of him? Making BIG claims.
(10-03-2013 05:02 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  
(10-03-2013 04:12 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I checked out Thomas Verenna's "review" of Joseph Atwill's book. He doesn't know what he's talking about, and he's rude and derogatory.

Atwill's book is great.

Ralph, I'm sure you're bigger than him.


And I don't know why he was quite so rude and derogatory. Myself and Atwil are sort of on the 'same side' as Verenna, as far as I can see. But Verenna is so wedded to his theory of the Jesus-Myth, that he cannot accept any possibility of Jesus being a historical character - even though it is fellow rationalists who are making the claims.

At best he is a very strange character. At worst, he is an utter narcisist who's high opinion of himself far outstrips his ability.



Strange as it seem, but I have come across another Verenna many years ago (are they the same person? ). This character befreinded me, said my work was great, and then plagiarised 70 verbatim pages of my book, which was published by Random House (the world's largest publisher, I believe). A tangled court case ensued, where his book was withdrawn and pulped, and the author was exposed as a complete fraud whose 'research' consisted of plagiarising a total of twelve authors.

But how on Earth did he get a $300,000 publishing contract in the fist place, when getting a publisher is sooo difficult??

But then, knock me down with a feather, the same guy then gets another contract with another publisher and prints a biography of his time in the Gulf War (sounding similar?) But then a day after publication the entire print run was withdrawn and pulped, because it transpired that he was not a regular soldier and had never been anywhere near Iraq. You could not make it up. Thousands of authors struggle to find a publisher, while a lying plagiarist gets two !! (And two books pulped !!)

All this is documented in the UK's national papers.



.
"And I don't know why he was quite so rude and derogatory. Myself and
Atwil are sort of on the 'same side' as Verenna, as far as I can see.
But Verenna is so wedded to his theory of the Jesus-Myth, that he cannot
accept any possibility of Jesus being a historical character - even
though it is fellow rationalists who are making the claims."

Exactly! He was very rude to yourself and to Joseph Atwill. I guess some people just don't like it when their view of the world is challenged.

Right now you are challenging my views on the history, but I'm not getting all upset, throwing a hissy fit, and being rude to you now am I?

I haven't even been bothered trying to get a publisher. I don't really know what I'm doing, but I got the impression that they don't really do much anyway.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-03-2013, 07:44 AM (This post was last modified: 10-03-2013 08:43 AM by ralphellis.)
RE: Ralph Ellis. You guys heard of him? Making BIG claims.
(10-03-2013 05:37 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I've searched a lot for someone who takes the King Agbar/Jesus correspondence seriously...all I get is YOU, Ralph (LOL)

That doesn't mean you're wrong, but...WHY? Where's the evidence?


Most researchers have a habit of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The 'Letters from Jesus' are themselve quite patently fakes - fat, juicy, Eusebius fakes. But the fact that Eusebius had to fake the chronology, means that the Doctrine of Addai was a pre-existing document. So while the modified chronology and the dubious content of the letters themselves are patently forgeries, that does not mean that the context of this 'gospel' is incorrect. If Jesus was in Jerusalem and his father in Edessa (a situation which was enforced by Roman decree), it is axiomatic that letters would have been written and ambassadors from Edessa would have gone to Jerusalem.

Incidentally, the main reason for King Abgarus sending ambassadors to Jerusalem was actually to placate the Romans over King Abgarus' visit to Parthia (the Edessan ambassadors went to see Cassius Longinus, who happened to be close to Jerusalem at the time, and the visit to Jesus was said to be a secondary affair). Abgarus had been sorting out a dynastic dispute in Parthia, but the Romans thought he was planning a Revolt. And since Josephus Flavius mentions this very same event, we have reason to believe that the Doctrine of Addai is based upon real events.


.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 06:30 AM
RE: Ralph Ellis. You guys heard of him? Making BIG claims.
I just came across this thread yesterday. Is Ralph Ellis still posting here? I wanted to ask him some questions particularly what he thinks the religion of the fourth sect was. Did it resemble what we read in the New Testament? Was it influenced by Zoroastrianism? He says it is Gnosticism in one video. It is a very interesting theory and very cogently put by him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 06:53 AM
RE: Ralph Ellis. You guys heard of him? Making BIG claims.
(23-01-2014 06:30 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I just came across this thread yesterday. Is Ralph Ellis still posting here? I wanted to ask him some questions particularly what he thinks the religion of the fourth sect was. Did it resemble what we read in the New Testament? Was it influenced by Zoroastrianism? He says it is Gnosticism in one video. It is a very interesting theory and very cogently put by him.

For fuck's sake, let this thread die. Just click on Ellis' profile, and if his last visit is fairly recent, send the dude a private message. Also be forewarned, Ellis is deep in crank territory.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: