Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-04-2013, 07:15 AM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(05-04-2013 06:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Ralph, you claim, without explanation, that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

I hope you agree that josephus was a first century historian. Please note that the Talmud was written at the very earliest in the second century, And much of it in the fifth century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Please provide some evidence that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

PS google doesn't distinguish between "judaean Talmud" (your words) and "Talmud"


I find it hard to fathom why you continue to engage with ralphlaurenperryellis.

He conflates, invents, and twists - he's all word games and nutty ideas.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 07:30 AM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(06-04-2013 07:15 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(05-04-2013 06:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Ralph, you claim, without explanation, that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

I hope you agree that josephus was a first century historian. Please note that the Talmud was written at the very earliest in the second century, And much of it in the fifth century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Please provide some evidence that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

PS google doesn't distinguish between "judaean Talmud" (your words) and "Talmud"


I find it hard to fathom why you continue to engage with ralphlaurenperryellis.

He conflates, invents, and twists - he's all word games and nutty ideas.

I don't remember this thread saying - needs more terse and deadly. Tongue

Ralph comes up with stuff that encourages me to learn things. These other guys come up with stuff that encourages me to obsess over my Gwynnies. That's why I like Ralph. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 08:15 AM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(06-04-2013 07:30 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(06-04-2013 07:15 AM)Chas Wrote:  I find it hard to fathom why you continue to engage with ralphlaurenperryellis.

He conflates, invents, and twists - he's all word games and nutty ideas.

I don't remember this thread saying - needs more terse and deadly. Tongue

Ralph comes up with stuff that encourages me to learn things. These other guys come up with stuff that encourages me to obsess over my Gwynnies. That's why I like Ralph. Tongue


This thread is screaming out for more terse and deadly.Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 11:56 AM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2013 02:00 PM by ralphellis.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(05-04-2013 02:05 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Hey Ralph, I've never read anywhere that Bar Kockbar was a Nazarene....in fact I've read he definitely wasn't.
My friend and author Douglas Lockhart has written extensively on the Nazarenes. You will find this summary interesting...

http://douglaslockhart.com/pdf/THE%20NAZ...20SECT.pdf

PS I've always understood the Jews returned to Jerusalem in the years after the first revolt. Do you have any evidence that they were permanently banned?


Actually, this article just about confirms that Bar Kockba was Nazarene, as I have suggested. It says:

It was a well-known historical fact that the Church at Jerusalem had been run by Nazoraeans right up until AD 135, that they had left the city only once in 102 years (due to the city's capture by Titus in AD 70)

AD 135 being the date of the Bar Kokhba uprising.



This is actually a very good article. It is one of the first I have seen that understands the true distinction between Jesus' Nazarene sect, and Saul's Simple Judaists (proto Christians) - and the animosity and battles between these two groups. It is the first I have seen (after myself) to correctly understand that the Roman persecution by Nero was against Nazoreans, rather than Simple Judaists. And it is likewise the first (after myself) to understand that the Nazoreans were following the Jesus bloodline. etc: etc: and etc:

Nice article.



.
Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 12:14 PM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(05-04-2013 06:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Ralph, you claim, without explanation, that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

I hope you agree that josephus was a first century historian. Please note that the Talmud was written at the very earliest in the second century.


As usual, I am outside the box here, and well ahead of the pack.

I just noted that the primary rabbi around whom the Talmud orbits, is Johanan ben Zakkai. Johannan is a first century rabbi who was in Jerusalem during the great siege in AD 70, but was smuggled out in a coffin and was delivered to Vespasian. He then bestowed the emperorship upon Vespasian, the same as Josephus did. He then became the leader of Judaism, after the fall of Jerusalem, the same as Saul-Josephus became the leader of Christianity.

I simply noted that Johannan's surrender to Vespasian, is exactly the same as Josephus' surrender to Vespasian at Jotapata. And the friends and concerns of Johannan are exactly the same as Saul-Josephus (Jesus of Gamala, the Boethus sisters, the siege of Jerusalem etc: ).

Think about it. After Jerusalem fell in AD 70, there was only one Jew that Vespasian and Titus trusted, and that was Josephus Flavius. And Josephus was given the 'university' and sanhedrin Jabneh as a scriptorium to produce his many books, and it was from Jabneh that much of the Talmud was derived - from Johannan ben Zakkai.


It is clear from all of this that Josephus Flavius has modeled much of the modern world around us - the most influential person in the last 3,000 years.

.. As Josephus, he helped instal Vespasian on the Throne of Rome, and wrote the secular history of Judaea.
.. As Saul-Paul he created Christianity almost single-handedly.
.. As Johannan ben Zakkai he created modern Judaism in his style.**

You have to hand it to the untrustworthy old quisling, he had good reason to be smug egotist.



** You will note that modern Judaism does not make roast animal sacrifices, as Josephus mocked them.



.
Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 12:24 PM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(06-04-2013 12:14 PM)ralphellis Wrote:  He then bestowed the emperorship upon Vespasian, the same as Josephus did.


More of your made-up shit.

He predicted that Vespasian would be emperor; he had no power to bestow it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 01:47 PM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2013 01:52 PM by ralphellis.)
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
.

>>So ...James was the brother of Jesus.
>>But didn't you claim King Izas (who you say is Jesus) was an "only begotten son?"

Indeed, but you need to understand Josephus' sense of humor. He was not simply duping his new converts, he of the great ego was laughing at their stupidity too.

This Only Begotten Son was Monogenes, in Greek, meaning "Only Child".
But when the child grew up he became Monobazus, in Greek, meaning "Only King" (or "Forsaken King")
Monobazus was, of course, the King of Adiabene (Edessa).

But I am sure there is another layer of wit in this cryptic code, because one can easily read:

Mono-Bazus meaning Only King
or,
Manu Bazus meaning King Manu of Edessa

Thus when Manugenes grew up he became Manubazus, or King Manu VI of Edessa. Ho, ho - all hail to the quicksilver-quilled wordsmith.






>>When I google "Izas-Monobazuz the elder" I get ONE reference.

You will have to read Josephus' Antiquities: http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2848/pg2848.txt

The king of Adiabene was King Monobazus, and his son was King Izates, who Josephus also calls Izas for short (in the Greek text). However, if you go through Josephus' accounts, Monobazus becomes Izates and Izates becomes Monobazus, in a sort of random fashion.

The answer to this riddle is that this royal family had the same names. It is like sorting out Emperor Vespasian and Emperor Titus, who also had exactly the same names - Titus Flavius Vespasianus.
So I have labeled the Adiabene family for convenience as:
Monobazus-Izas the elder (the father, reigned AD 14 - AD 50)
Izas-Monobazus I (James, reigned AD 50 - AD 57)
Izas-Monobazus II (Jesus, reigned AD 57 - AD 70)

But remember that these are merely Josephus' pseudonyms for this family, and we know this because the mother of the Adiabene and Edessan royal families was the same person - Queen Helena. (She was the wife of King Monobazus of Adiabene and the wife of King Abgarus of Edessa.) So historically their names were:

King Abgarus au Kama V (Monobazus-Izas)
King Manu V (James) (Izas-Monobazus V, with Manubazus probably meaning "King Manu")
King Izas Manu VI (Jesus EmManuuel) (Izas-Monobazus VI, with Manubazus probably meaning "King Manu")






>>I'm no expert on Josephus, but I can't see why "James" has to
>>be someone else. Why can't "James" be...um..."James."

Because he was not "James", he was "Yakob" (with Yakob being an old name of some of the pharaohs of Egypt).
See the problem? The gospels are littered with changes in language.

Besides, Saul-Josephus did not want you to know that the Edessan royal family and the biblical royal family were one and the same, so the names had to change a bit.

So Izas became Jesus, Manu became EmManuel, Shalmath became Almah. et: etc:





>>Please enlighten me on what a "Spira" is.

My misspelling. It is a cohort. It comes from Jesus' capture on the Mount of Olives:

Judas then, having received a spiera of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. Joh 18:3

But a spiera is 600 heavily armed legionnaires, so the question is why did it take a whole spiera to capture Jesus and just 12 disciples (and a naked boy)?** Answer? Jesus had 30,000 armed men with him, as Josephus clearly says.

Gospels:
And (Jesus) went to the Mount of Olives ... a band of men and officers from
the chief priests and Pharisees, came with lanterns and torches and weapons
... the disciples said. ‘shall we smite them with the sword?’ ... Then Jesus said
unto the chief priests, ‘do you come to us, like against a Zealot, with swords
and staves?’
Math 26:47, Mr 14:43 etc:

Josephus:
(The Egyptian) got together thirty thousand men ... on the Mount of Olives,
and was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place ... But Felix
prevented his attempt, and met him with his Roman soldiers.
War 2:262




>>I much prefer your idea that Josephus supervised the writing of
>>the gospels rather than writing them himself. I don't think there's
>>any linguistic evidence the four gospels were written by the same author.

There is a very good analysis by a Swedish lady. i will try and find it.




>>Who, if anyone, are the other brothers and sisters of Jesus
>>frequently mentioned in the Gospels?

James, Jude, Joset (Joseph) and Simon, plus two sisters.




>>Are you aware that the Emperor Domitian (81-96) sort some of these
>>men out and interviewed them, as he imagined they were descended
>>from David and therefore potential future messiahs?

They were the sons of Jesus and James (all the disciples had sister-wives, in the Egyptian tradition.)




>>Please explain Pontius Pilate's and Herod's and Caiaphas' appearances
>>in the gospels if the story is based in the 60's, not the early 30's.

Pilate had to be added to the text, to distance Jesus chronologically from the Jewish Revolt.

Not sure about Caiaphas, as I am fairly sure that Caiaphas and Cephas are the same title. The Nazorean creed was all about stones, or rather sacred meteorites, which is why Simon was called Peter Cephas (Simon the Stone Stone). It is also why the Jewish holy day is called Yom Kippur (the Day of the Stone).

In my analysis, many of the priests of Judaea would have had the title Cephas (the Stone) (just as Jesus was the rejected stone that became the corner-stone), because that is what the Nazarenes venerated -- the Elagabal stone (a sacred meterorite) that was eventually taken to Rome by Emperor Elagabalus (and a piece is still in Mecca to this day).




** The Church has not changed....


.
Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 01:59 PM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(06-04-2013 12:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(06-04-2013 12:14 PM)ralphellis Wrote:  He then bestowed the emperorship upon Vespasian, the same as Josephus did.


More of your made-up shit.
He predicted that Vespasian would be emperor; he had no power to bestow it.


Hair splitting.

It was a prophesy, and Vespasian could not become Emperor without a favourable oracle or prophesy, which is why the Roman historians tried to find as many as they could. But the greatest of these oracles was the Star Prophesy, and the bestowing of the Star Prophesy upon Vespasian was a crucial component in the bestowing the emperorship upon Vespasian.

And it has to be repeated that the Star Prophesy, the Star in the East, originally belonged to Jesus:

Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his Star in the East, and are come to worship him. Math 2:2




.
Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 07:28 PM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(06-04-2013 07:15 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(05-04-2013 06:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Ralph, you claim, without explanation, that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

I hope you agree that josephus was a first century historian. Please note that the Talmud was written at the very earliest in the second century, And much of it in the fifth century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Please provide some evidence that Josephus wrote "most of the Talmud"

PS google doesn't distinguish between "judaean Talmud" (your words) and "Talmud"


I find it hard to fathom why you continue to engage with ralphlaurenperryellis.

He conflates, invents, and twists - he's all word games and nutty ideas.

Chas...you make a good point.

Yet I don't make that mean that I dislike Ralph, or that I won't engage him. He's making me check my own facts and ideas. So, for me, although I disagree with him, I find the discourse interesting.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
06-04-2013, 07:35 PM
RE: Water to Wine was a well-known trick jug
(06-04-2013 07:28 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(06-04-2013 07:15 AM)Chas Wrote:  I find it hard to fathom why you continue to engage with ralphlaurenperryellis.

He conflates, invents, and twists - he's all word games and nutty ideas.

Chas...you make a good point.

Yet I don't make that mean that I dislike Ralph, or that I won't engage him. He's making me check my own facts and ideas. So, for me, although I disagree with him, I find the discourse interesting.


Chacun à son goût.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: