[split] Resurrection of Jesus - Argument with Ralph Ellis
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-06-2013, 06:58 AM
RE: Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, another look
(27-06-2013 06:43 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Ha, ha, what you mean is that you did not realise that the New Testament was based upon Precessional Astrology.

You're putting the cart before the horse, Ralph.

(27-06-2013 06:43 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Why do you think Jesus was born as a Lamb of God (Aries) but became a Fisher of Men (Pisces)??

Uh, no, he said he would make the disciples he took from the sea of Galilee the fishers of men. He was not a "Fisher of Men." Go read the text instead of just making up what it says. Also the notion of the "lamb of God" does not come from Aries.

(27-06-2013 06:43 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  And why the line of Arthurian kings were called the Fisher Kings (Pisces), and why the symbol of Christianity is the fish (Pisces), and why the pope wears the fisher ring and fisher hat (Pisces).

You have got to be kidding me. You cannot possibly be serious with this crap.

(27-06-2013 06:43 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  For those who do not follow precession, the Earth wobbles on its axis, making the constellations change every 2,140 years or so. It happens that in AD 10, when Jesus-Izas was born, Aries (the Lamb of God) turned into Pisces (the Fisher of Men). Jesus was the first Piscean King, the first of the Arthurian Fisher Kings...

Again, you cannot possibly be serious.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:03 AM
RE: [split] Resurrection of Jesus - Argument with Ralph Ellis
(27-06-2013 06:50 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  But you have still not answered my pesher quiz. I gave you two pesher extracts to decypher, and you failed to do so - and until you do so you have completely lost the argument.

You don't know what pesher is, do you? Loser.

No, your "pesher quiz" was just a test of your eisegetical nonsense. Yes, I know what pesher is. You do not. For the education of others here who would like to know, there's a decent discussion here, and then you can dig deeper in the following publications (Ralph's notion of pesher is complete and utter nonsense):

http://academia.edu/532314/Pesher_A_Cogn..._the_Genre

http://www.jstor.org/stable/545741

http://books.google.com/books?id=rUMiixk...&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=zRBHIzz...&q&f=false

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25442514

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27...2475767897

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:04 AM
RE: [split] Resurrection of Jesus - Argument with Ralph Ellis
(27-06-2013 06:43 AM)maklelan Wrote:  Fine, add this to the list of things to translate, with the nouns declined:

Nisi quis iucundus bonusque erit, vitam vere felicem mihi non vivet


Only if you give me the take-off V1, Vr and V2 of a B 747 at MTOW. It is about as relevant.

You know I have never seen someone quite so childish in all my life. You have no answer to any of my questions nor any evidence to refute my claims, and so you hide behind a thin veil of excuses that are so infantile they would be beneath the dignity most educated people. How can you be so obtuse without being utterly embarrassed about your demonstrable lack of knowledge and understanding?

Give us evidence and an explanation for Rome invading Parthia without sustaining any losses. No quiz required. Not even a 747's V2.

Go on, do us all a favour for a change, and actually answer a question. You can't can you, because you know nothing about the subject.


.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:12 AM
RE: [split] Resurrection of Jesus - Argument with Ralph Ellis
(27-06-2013 07:03 AM)maklelan Wrote:  (Ralph's notion of pesher is complete and utter nonsense):


Actually, my pesher was taken from the Talmud, from venerable theologians of the 19th century, like Adam Clarke, and from Professor Robert Eisenman.

But Maklelan knows more than all these authorities, and can refute them all without writing a single word of argument (just a few URLs). Such a simplistic world you inhabit, Maklelan.

All you have in your armoury, is 'nonsense', 'rubbish', 'you don't know what you are saying', or 'answer my quiz first'. You are vacuous, Maklelan, a deep-space 'atmosphere' of Mormon evangelism - but highly skilled in deceiving the unbeliever.


.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:20 AM
RE: [split] Resurrection of Jesus - Argument with Ralph Ellis
(27-06-2013 07:04 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Only if you give me the take-off V1, Vr and V2 of a B 747 at MTOW. It is about as relevant.

You know that's not true at all. It's very relevant. First, you base much of your argument on etymological connections. Second, you've here claimed that you do not read the ancient sources in translation. Third, you don't get to claim language isn't relevant in a series of books on what ancient texts mean.

(27-06-2013 07:04 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  You know I have never seen someone quite so childish in all my life. You have no answer to any of my questions nor any evidence to refute my claims, and so you hide behind a thin veil of excuses that are so infantile they would be beneath the dignity most educated people. How can you be so obtuse without being utterly embarrassed about your demonstrable lack of knowledge and understanding?

Give us evidence and an explanation for Rome invading Parthia without sustaining any losses. No quiz required. Not even a 747's V2.

Go on, do us all a favour for a change, and actually answer a question. You can't can you, because you know nothing about the subject.

I'll be happy to answer the question after you respond to my concerns. I asked for responses to several concerns in the very first interaction you and I ever had, and you have refused since then to respond at all to the majority of them. You don't get to keep refusing to answer concerns while at the same time barking about how childish I am being for not answering your subsequent concerns.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:22 AM
RE: [split] Resurrection of Jesus - Argument with Ralph Ellis
(27-06-2013 07:12 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Actually, my pesher was taken from the Talmud, from venerable theologians of the 19th century, like Adam Clarke, and from Professor Robert Eisenman.

Congratulations. It's still complete and utter nonsense.

(27-06-2013 07:12 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  But Maklelan knows more than all these authorities, and can refute them all without writing a single word of argument (just a few URLs). Such a simplistic world you inhabit, Maklelan.

Where does the talmud define pesher as sardonic humor?

(27-06-2013 07:12 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  All you have in your armoury, is 'nonsense', 'rubbish', 'you don't know what you are saying', or 'answer my quiz first'. You are vacuous, Maklelan, a deep-space 'atmosphere' of Mormon evangelism - but highly skilled in deceiving the unbeliever.

I've already seen that putting together lengthy and supported cases against your arguments is a huge waste of time, since you don't respond. I'd rather just ask you to actually support your claims, which you quite clearly are unwilling and unable to do.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:23 AM (This post was last modified: 27-06-2013 08:45 AM by ralphellis.)
RE: Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, another look
(27-06-2013 06:58 AM)maklelan Wrote:  
(27-06-2013 06:43 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  For those who do not follow precession, the Earth wobbles on its axis, making the constellations change every 2,140 years or so. It happens that in AD 10, when Jesus-Izas was born, Aries (the Lamb of God) turned into Pisces (the Fisher of Men). Jesus was the first Piscean King, the first of the Arthurian Fisher Kings...

Again, you cannot possibly be serious.


Ha, ha. And Maklelan knows nothing about Precession.

Precession is a real astronomical event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_prece...astronomy)

And the Age of Pisces (Great Month of Pisces) started in Ad 10.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrologica...ean_Age.29

The entire Old Testament and New Testament was created around an understanding of Precession.

Why do you think that the Patriarchs were shepherds (Age of Aries).
Why do you think that Joseph told pharaoh they were not cattle breeders (Age of Taurus) but were shepherds (Age of Aries).
Why do you think that Alexander the Great wore the horns of a ram? (Age of Aries)
Why do you think that Ptolemy III wore the horns of a ram? (Age of Aries)
Why do you think that Christinity was identified with fish? (Age of Pisces)
Why do you think the Arthurian royal line were called Fisher Kings? (Age of Pisces)
Why do you think this is the 'Dawn of the Age of Aquarius'? Geez, even the hippies know this much.......


Why do you think that the (1st century) zodiac at Tiberias was a precessional zodiac?? (It points at the conjunction of Aries and Pisces, or AD 10)
http://www.sandrabornstein.com/hamat-tev...he-galilee


If you don't know any of this, Maklelan, then you know nothing about Judaism and nothing about Christianity, and thus you know nothing about the events that underpin your worldview. (And you nothing about Edessa. ) Come into the rational world, Maklelan, the water is lovely.


The Hamat Teverya precessional zodiac.

[Image: 2zf6783.jpg]



.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:28 AM
RE: [split] Resurrection of Jesus - Argument with Ralph Ellis
(27-06-2013 07:04 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  You know I have never seen someone quite so childish in all my life. You have no answer to any of my questions nor any evidence to refute my claims, and so you hide behind a thin veil of excuses that are so infantile they would be beneath the dignity most educated people. How can you be so obtuse without being utterly embarrassed about your demonstrable lack of knowledge and understanding?
...
Go on, do us all a favour for a change, and actually answer a question. You can't can you, because you know nothing about the subject.

You are the very platonic ideal of a lack of self-awareness.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:39 AM
RE: Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, another look
(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Ha, ha. And Maklelan knows nothing about Precession.

No, I just said your conflation of it with the New Testament is laughable.

(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Precession is a real astronomical event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_prece...astronomy)

And the Age of Pisces (Great Month of Pisces) started in Ad 10.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrologica...ean_Age.29

The entire Old Testament and New Testament was created around an understanding of Precession.

That's completely and totally untrue.

(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Why do you think that the Patriarchs were shepherds (Age of Aries).

There were no patriarchs, but the text represents some of them as such because the traditions came down from nomadic pastoralists.

(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Why do you think that Joseph told pharaoh they were not cattle breeders (Age of Taurus) but were shepherds (Age of Aries).

Because it serves the rhetorical needs of the tradition.

(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Why do you think that Alexander the Great wore the horns of a ram? (Age of Aries)

Because he was asserting descendance from Ammon.

(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Why do you think that Ptolemy III wore the horns of a ram? (Age of Aries)

Because the horns became a symbol of divinity.

(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Why do you think that Christinity was identified with fish? (Age of Pisces)

Because its followers were closely associated with the fishing industry, and the fish provided helpful symbolism for their traditions and ideologies. Also, the acronym for the title "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior" spells out the Greek word for "fish."

(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Why do you think that the zodiac at Tiberias was a precessional zodiac (it points at the conjunction of Aries and Pisces,mor AD 10).

By that late time period astrology had become closely linked with Jewish/Christian groups.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2013, 07:41 AM
RE: Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, another look
(27-06-2013 07:23 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Ha, ha. And Maklelan knows nothing about Precession.

The precession is not something that can be dated to an exact year. The full cycle takes 25000 years. Therefore the motion in one year is 360/25000 degrees. Even if the zodiac signs were exactly defined (they're not, and certainly weren't back then), and it was somehow possible to tell exactly where one's region ended and another's started (possible with computers, though it certainly wasn't back then), the change in the sun's position in each year is still only ~1 arcsecond.

Human vision can distinguish one arc-minute. Therefore - being VERY generous, since Aries/Pisces is one of the hardest to judge 'boundaries' - unaided human observation of the transition would be no more precise than plus or minus thirty or forty years. At best the ancients could date the shift to within a century or two. The very wiki article you linked to gives dates from 1 to 500 AD.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: