Poll: What's Jesus about?
Son of God, etc
Lowly preacher bigged up
Total myth, never existed
Based on real people and events to create a religion
King Arthur
[Show Results]
 
What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-06-2014, 01:12 AM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
There seems to be some support for the idea that Arthur was based on a "Christian" idea as well as pagan myths. One interpretation of his name is that it simply comes from "Aryan" "Thor". He is, perhaps, based on a Celtic/Aryan leader.

For those who can't get enough of this, here is an interesting discussion of it, with a very good comment at the bottom which I recommend everyone reads. Laugh out load

http://www.mythencyclopedia.com/Ar-Be/Ar...gends.html

Why is King Arthur missing from the historical record? Ralph Ellis claims that Jesus was sent into exile in Britain (in Fortress Dewa in Chester). Since it was heresy to write or sing that King Jesus had survived the cross and been sent into exile (a heresy punishable by death), the Medieval troubadours invented the tales of King 'Arthur'. (Christ means 'king', and so Christ Jesus means King Jesus.)

In reality, the tales of the deeds of King Arthur in England were actually tales of the knightly King Jesus in Judaea. And so the twelve knight so the round table were simply the twelve disciples of the last supper table (the disciples were all armed, by the way, as the New Testament makes clear).


So why the name change from Jesus to Arthur? Well, Jesus was considered to be the Sun at the center of the zodiac - which is why he had twelve disciples (twelve constellations), and why the symbol of Christianity was the fish (Pisces). The round table was actually a zodiac, with Jesus as the Sun-deity sitting at its center, surrounded by his twelve constellations (disciples).

However, you don't need to draw a Sun-centered zodiac, you can also draw a stellar zodiac, with the northern constellations at the center (as you would see on a standard planisphere). The central astronomical body then changes from the Sun to Ursa Major - the Great Bear. But the Great Bear is Artur, or Arthur. And so King Jesus the Sun of God became King Jesus the Great Bear, or King Arthur in Arthurian legend.


Read more: http://www.mythencyclopedia.com/Ar-Be/Ar...z33YepcxBv
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2014, 02:00 AM
What we have to deal with.
I thought I might as well post this here.

This is a set of images of the Near East. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/14/E778.full

The reason I am posting this is that I have come across a number of posters here who have a very dismissive attitude about some "dusty footed Jew" wandering around Judea. The whole area "the Near East" is something most people don't even think about or know anything about. The reason is that our history has been handed down to us via the Romans who, as it turns out, moved the center of their Empire to what is now Istambul in Turkey, back in about 300 AD, where it remained until they were kicked out in 1452 by the Ottomans. Why did the Ottomans want to do that? Because the "near east" was the center of a world civilization.

Most of Europe was covered by a glacier up to 9,000 years ago (don't quote me) When you look at things like the Standard of Ur, you see a civilization which looks much like later medieval civilizations with a king, soldier with chariots, musical instruments, stone architecture and the myths we still have in our religious documents. http://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/hi...2400-b-c-e

This area was a green, fertile area and it was occupied by the ancestors of modern Europeans who were predominantly sheep farmers, so places like Syria, which we write of today as a pointless dustbowl was heavily occupied by "Europeans".

Has anyone ever heard of Cappadocia? Underground cities: http://www.cappadociaonline.com/under.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2014, 09:46 AM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(03-06-2014 02:00 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I thought I might as well post this here.

This is a set of images of the Near East. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/14/E778.full

The reason I am posting this is that I have come across a number of posters here who have a very dismissive attitude about some "dusty footed Jew" wandering around Judea. The whole area "the Near East" is something most people don't even think about or know anything about. The reason is that our history has been handed down to us via the Romans who, as it turns out, moved the center of their Empire to what is now Istambul in Turkey, back in about 300 AD, where it remained until they were kicked out in 1452 by the Ottomans. Why did the Ottomans want to do that? Because the "near east" was the center of a world civilization.

Most of Europe was covered by a glacier up to 9,000 years ago (don't quote me) When you look at things like the Standard of Ur, you see a civilization which looks much like later medieval civilizations with a king, soldier with chariots, musical instruments, stone architecture and the myths we still have in our religious documents. http://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/hi...2400-b-c-e

This area was a green, fertile area and it was occupied by the ancestors of modern Europeans who were predominantly sheep farmers, so places like Syria, which we write of today as a pointless dustbowl was heavily occupied by "Europeans".

Has anyone ever heard of Cappadocia? Underground cities: http://www.cappadociaonline.com/under.html

Modern Europeans are not descended from people of the AME, nor were people of the AME in any way descended from Europeans. The DNA confirms this. Was there some small amount of mixing? Sure.

Europe was populated by anatomically-modern humans from 40,000 years ago. The last ice age covered a bit more that half of Europe, so there were still Europeans in Europe and non-Europeans in the Middle East. One has to go back long before civilization to make the genetic connection.

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
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 09:47 PM (This post was last modified: 06-06-2014 09:52 PM by Deltabravo.)
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(03-06-2014 09:46 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(03-06-2014 02:00 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I thought I might as well post this here.

This is a set of images of the Near East. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/14/E778.full

The reason I am posting this is that I have come across a number of posters here who have a very dismissive attitude about some "dusty footed Jew" wandering around Judea. The whole area "the Near East" is something most people don't even think about or know anything about. The reason is that our history has been handed down to us via the Romans who, as it turns out, moved the center of their Empire to what is now Istambul in Turkey, back in about 300 AD, where it remained until they were kicked out in 1452 by the Ottomans. Why did the Ottomans want to do that? Because the "near east" was the center of a world civilization.

Most of Europe was covered by a glacier up to 9,000 years ago (don't quote me) When you look at things like the Standard of Ur, you see a civilization which looks much like later medieval civilizations with a king, soldier with chariots, musical instruments, stone architecture and the myths we still have in our religious documents. http://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/hi...2400-b-c-e

This area was a green, fertile area and it was occupied by the ancestors of modern Europeans who were predominantly sheep farmers, so places like Syria, which we write of today as a pointless dustbowl was heavily occupied by "Europeans".

Has anyone ever heard of Cappadocia? Underground cities: http://www.cappadociaonline.com/under.html

Modern Europeans are not descended from people of the AME, nor were people of the AME in any way descended from Europeans. The DNA confirms this. Was there some small amount of mixing? Sure.

Europe was populated by anatomically-modern humans from 40,000 years ago. The last ice age covered a bit more that half of Europe, so there were still Europeans in Europe and non-Europeans in the Middle East. One has to go back long before civilization to make the genetic connection.


Oh dear! Chas, you are a dumbo.

Here we go again:

"Over the past 10,000 years a small coterie of farming populations expanded rapidly and replaced hunter-gatherer groups which were once dominant across the landscape. So, the vast majority of the ancestry of modern Europeans can be traced back to farming cultures of the eastern Mediterranean which swept over the west of Eurasia between 10 and 5 thousand years before..."

Source: a new paper in PNAS which uses a coalescent model of 400+ mitochondrial DNA lineages to infer the pattern of expansions of populations over the past ~40,000 years. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/15/6044.short

FacepalmGaspLaugh out loadDrinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 09:50 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
Anyway, moving on, I thought everyone would be interested in this new development. I know I had a teary moment thinking I can now go to Syria and see this statue:

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/519265/in-m...tue-arises

Bowing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 10:05 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.c...n-journey/

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
06-06-2014, 10:05 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
I found someone who says Jesus travelled to England and that he went to the south coast of Cornwall and then up to Glastonbury:

Among the places Jesus is said to have visited are Penzance, Falmouth, St-Just-in-Roseland and Looe, which are all in Cornwall, as well as Glastonbury in Somerset - which has particular legends about Jesus.

"St Augustine wrote to the Pope to say he'd discovered a church in Glastonbury built by followers of Jesus. But St Gildas (a 6th-Century British cleric) said it was built by Jesus himself. It's a very very ancient church which went back perhaps to AD37."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8380511.stm

Hey, maybe Ralph is right! Ohmy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 10:15 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
And here is someone who says that Jesus and St. Paul travelled to South Wales. http://www.eternalidol.com/?p=9541

King Arthur is also associated with Glastonbury which some say is "Avalon" and others say his castle was on the north coast of Cornwall at Tintagel.

So, what would explain someone going to the south coast of Cornwall, then the middle of Somerset and then the south of Wales.

If you know the area, what this shows is a route of travel north because it it avoids water travel up the west coast of Cornwall which is very dangerous. If one were travelling towards modern Chester, this is a direct route, crossing the Severn River where it isn't impassible.

So, we have myths which put Jesus and Joseph, St. Paul and Arthur all in the same areas and showing a direction of travel.

Yes, I think Ralph is on to something.YesBowingDrinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 10:37 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
I voted for option #4, but I think it was kind of a cross between #2 and #4.

At any rate, it was several different things happening at the same time. But definitely no real walking on water and whatnot. Wink I'm going to have to come back and read this thread when I have more time. It seems like there are some interesting entries here, but I can't currently sift through them all.

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 11:52 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(06-06-2014 10:15 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  And here is someone who says that Jesus and St. Paul travelled to South Wales. http://www.eternalidol.com/?p=9541

King Arthur is also associated with Glastonbury which some say is "Avalon" and others say his castle was on the north coast of Cornwall at Tintagel.

So, what would explain someone going to the south coast of Cornwall, then the middle of Somerset and then the south of Wales.

If you know the area, what this shows is a route of travel north because it it avoids water travel up the west coast of Cornwall which is very dangerous. If one were travelling towards modern Chester, this is a direct route, crossing the Severn River where it isn't impassible.

So, we have myths which put Jesus and Joseph, St. Paul and Arthur all in the same areas and showing a direction of travel.

Yes, I think Ralph is on to something.YesBowingDrinking Beverage

No, I think Ralph has been smoking something Thumbsup
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: