quote:
Originally posted by WT
The voluminous evidence that these persons were indeed who the Bible frames them to be via the effects of their presence/Hebrew evidence in the British Isles.
Whether there is evidence, (voluminous or otherwise), is the question under investigation. Not, as you would have it, an axiomatic starting point; regardless of the number of self-serving descriptive adjectives you choose to employ.
As such, your statement above simply assumes facts not in evidence.
quote:
WT
Search | United Church of God
Concerning the names Tea, Tephi and Tamar, while they may refer to the same person at the time of Jeremiah, it is also possible that they do not. In favor is the fact that these names are sometimes linked together in old Irish poems.
http://asis.com/~stag/jerrytea.html
(M.R. Munro Faure) give quotations from old Irish verse
How many times do you intend to beat this dead horse? Yet again, this verse from the "Forward" - Watchman What of the Dawn" states that Tea is the daughter of Lughaidh.
But, since you don't want to hear that, you (and your websites) must surmise that it really says something else. Thus the parenthetical, "(equivalent in Erse of Bethel)".
Yet the authors of the annals themselves say that Lughaidh means "Lug, who was less than his father" (83).
These authors of the source material also say that Lughaidh was a son of Ith, and that Ith was a "hard valorous warrior with the strength of an hundred" (72).
These same authors also say that a plot was laid to kill Ith - Ith fell - and his body was carried to back to Spain (71).
(Lebor Gabla renn: Book of the Taking of Ireland Part 1-5. ed. and tr. by R. A. S. Macalister. Dublin: Irish Texts Society, 1941.)
quote:
WT:
Thus, "Tea, daughter of Lughaidh (Bethel), son of Itha, son of Breoghan" could conceivably be read as "Tea, daughter of the House of God (or oath), child of the crown, child of Brigantium (or child of royalty).
Search | United Church of God
So, your argument here is that you want to use the annals as a source provided that it's understood that everything in the annals is wrong except for those parts that you either add or rewrite?
Did your "Bethel" have a father named Ith who was a mighty warrior in Spain/Ireland? And whose body was carried back to Spain after he was killed by his enemies in Ireland? And whose genealogy the annals trace back to Japeth?
How can you claim something as a source when the
only words that agree with you are the words that your website has added to the text? Answer: you can't (not honestly). IOW, you cannot honestly use the annals as a source; the annals disagree with you. The only "source" you have presented here is your website's interpolated "(equivalent in Erse of Bethel)".
The same applies to "Tephi". Your poem (as per M. Faure) states only that Tephi was a daughter of Pharaoh. But, since you don't want Tephi to be Egyptian, Pharaoh magically becomes king Zedekiah.
quote:
WT
Surely by the above inclusion you are not claiming the "daughter of Pharoah" to be a dark skinned North African/Hamite ?
I am telling you only what the annals say. But it surprises me that you would make this objection. After all, your original assertion was that it was Ephraim & Manasseh that received the promise of Abraham and thus became the Caucasian race of Britain and the U.S.; and their Egyptian mother didn't seem to be a problem for you then.
quote:
WT
The above is also better evidenced by the link below: I urge you to compare the cut and pasted poem with the latter link and its more thorough explanation of the stanzas and their sources.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/idr/idr30.htm
There is little to nothing of relevance in that link. Although there is a reference to Temhuir:
quote:
TARA, Temor, Temhuir, or Temoria, is intimately connected with the early religion of Ireland, and has been associated with singular theories. As Tea-mur, it was the mount or home of Queen Tea, wife of the Milesian King Heremon. The centre of Druidical song and power . . . while bards record a great assembly being held there 921 B.C., Dr. Petrie, the eminent antiquary, is disposed to regard the place as existing only between 200 and 300 years after Christ.
Here your link states that the annals record an assembly at Tea-mur in 921 B.C., which would be long before Tea's time if she were a daughter of Zedekiah. IOW, your own link says that the annals disagree with you.
quote:
The Rev. F. R. A. Glover, M.A.: "In Ireland, in the royal precincts of Tara, cir. B.C. 582-3, there was a Hebrew system and transplanted Jerusalem . . .
The Rev. F. R. A. Glover, M.A. states that there was a transplanted Jerusalem in Tara c. 582-3 B.C., but it doesn't mention how the good Rev. came by that opinion.
Thus, here again, you can say that Rev. Glover's opinion supports you, but you can't (honestly) say that the annals support you.
quote:
WT
Pat Gerber, the University of Glasgow lecturer . . . remains unconvinced of any links at all between Ireland and the line of David. But notice what she says: "No serious historian would dare to suggest that Zedekiah’s daughter Tea could have married the Irish King Eochaid the Heremon. And yetit is not impossible.
She goes on to say: "Dare we link Simon Brech with Jeremiah’s scribe Baruch, connect Tara with the Princess Tea who had passed through Egypt as the guest of Pharaoh on her flight from Nebuchadnezzar, the sole survivor of David’s line? Could she have been given the eponymous name ‘Scota’ by later writers because she wed Eochaid the Heremon, became Queen of the ‘Scots’ as the Irish were then known, and mother to a royal Irish-Scottish dynasty? Probably notbut because none of this is either provable or disprovable as yet, we are free to dream.
Search | United Church of God
Sounds to me like Pat Gerber has it about right. As I stated in a previous post, "What you say could be true". But the ultimate question is not "
could it be true" but, rather, "
is it true". And based on the evidence I have seen thus far, my current answer to this question must echo Pat Gerber; "Is it true?" - probably not, but you are free to dream.
quote:
WT
We may repeat the words of F.R.A. Glover, who wrote at length about this subject in the 19th century: "I have . . . no desire to encumber my hypothesis, with any argument, as to whether the Ollam Fodhla of Irish Tradition is, or is not a mistake for Jeremiah the Prophet. I feel that the case of the presence of the illustrious Seer in Ireland is made out on other grounds;
Search | United Church of God
And perhaps you would do well to follow Mr. Glover's lead and pursue your case on other grounds.
quote:
WT
You (there is no "tone") seem to seek an outright annal quote saying "Tea daughter of Zedekiah" or the claim fails.
At this point I would find it refreshing if you could just come up with an annals quote that didn't explicitly describe her as someone
other than Zedekiah's daughter.
quote:
WT
The point is that the annals confirm the existence of the person in question. Who that person is the other sources identify to be a king's daughter.
The annals confirm that the personage of Tea was said to exist, but this person is not described as a daughter of Zedekiah. And I know of no other sources that mention any Tea.
quote:
WT
Surely you will not insinuate that the multiplicity of sources are in some type of conspiracy except of course for the truth/continuing substantiation of Tephi to be a royal tender twig perpetuating the bloodline of David as God promised.
Mulitplicity of sources? I've yet to see a single source that has supported you. You have other people on websites, talking the story, that support you, but they don't seem able to cite any supporting source material either.
quote:
WT
Brutus descended from Darda son of Zarah.
Then at the end of your post you ask for the Prince Brutus source cite:
Where Did the Roman Senate Meet?
Here is a reproduction of a portion of the text from your provided link:
quote:
The first man that dwelt in Europe was Alanus, with his three sons, Hisicion, Armenon, and Neugio. Hisicion had four sons, Francus, Romanus, Alamanus, and Brutus. Armenon had five sons, Gothus, Valagothus, Cibidus, Burgundus, and Longobardus. Neugio had three sons, Vandalus, Saxo, and Boganus. From Hisicion arose four nations--the Franks, the Latins, the Germans, and Britons: from Armenon, the Gothi, Balagothi, Cibidi, Burgundi, and Longobardi: from Neugio, the Bogari, Vandali, Saxones, and Tarinegi. The whole of Europe was subdivided into these tribes.
Alanus is said to have been the son of Fethuir; Fethuir, the son of Ogomuin, who was the son of Thoi; Thoi was the son of Boibus, Boibus of Semion, Semion of Mair, Mair of Ecthactus, Ecthactus of Aurthack, Aurthack of Ethec, Ethec of Ooth, Ooth of Aber, Aber of Ra, Ra of Esraa, Esraa of Hisrau, Hisrau of Bath, Bath of Jobath, Jobath of Joham, Joham of Japheth, Japheth of Noah.
The Britons were thus called from Brutus: Brutus was the son of Hisicion, Hisicion was the son of Alanus, Alanus was the son of Rhea Silvia, Fhea Silvia was the daughter of Numa Pompilius, Numa was the son of Ascanius, Ascanius of Eneas, Eneas of Anchises, Anchises of Troius, Troius of Dardanus, Dardanus of Flisa, Flisa of Juuin, Juuin of Japheth.
So the first man in Europe was Alanus. Alanus fathered Hisicion. Hisicion fathered Brutus.
I see no Zerah here. In fact, your own link states that Brutus is a descendant of Japeth. Do you even read these?
quote:
WT
The link below: "History of the British Kings" by Geoffrey of Monmouth
http://camelot.celtic-twilight.com/hrb/index.htm
Geoffrey claims to follow a reliable and ancient source given to him by a friend. I won't "argue the man", but given the nature of some of the claims in this book, I would have to see that esoteric source.
quote:
WT
"Who exactly were these people?" asks Pat Gerber, a lecturer at Glasgow University. "Is it merely the desire to make connections that suggests links where there is nothing more than coincidence?" (Stone of Destiny, 1997, p. 47).
Notice that Gerber admits "coincidence" which is a recognition and a dismissal. IOW, the evidence cannot mean what it implies/screams therefore it must be a coincidence.
Do you like coincidences?
The Mother Goddess Dana/Danu/Danann is one of the oldest recorded Celtic deities and is associated with Druidry. She is mentioned in the Lebor Gabla renn in a poem describing the adventures of the Tuatha de Danann:
quote:
64 Danann, mother of the gods.
(Lebor Gabla renn: Book of the Taking of Ireland Part 1-5. ed. and tr. by R. A. S. Macalister. Dublin: Irish Texts Society, 1941.)
Tuatha de Danann means tribe or children of Danann. The Lebor Gabla renn describes the druidic nature of the Tuatha de Danann:
quote:
58. Now Nuadu Airgetlam was king over the Tuatha de Danann for seven years before their coming into Ireland
64. Nuadu Airgetlam s. Echtach s. Etarlam s. Ordam s. Aldui s. Tat s. Tavarn s. Enda s. Baath s. Ebath s. Bethach s. Iarbonel s. Nemed s. Agnomain s. Pamp s. Tat s. Sera s. Sru s. Esru s. Braimend s. Rathacht s. Magoth s. Iafeth s. Noe.
54. Thereafter the progeny of Bethach s. Iarbonel the Soothsayer s. Nemed were in the northern islands of the world, learning druidry and knowledge and prophecy and magic, till they were expert in the arts of pagan cunning.
(ibid. Lebor Gabla renn)
For clarity: Noah begat Japeth > Magoth > . . . > Nemed > Iarbonel > Bethach > . . . > Nuadu Airgetlam.
Thus, the ancestors of the first king of the Tuatha De Danann in Ireland (Nuada Airgetlam) were studied disciples of druidry, knowledge, prophecy, magic and were experts in "pagan cunning". Just exactly what one would expect of the children of the Goddess Danann, i.e. the Tuatha de Danann.
How's that for coincidence? Does it "scream" anything at you? Or have you suddenly decided that you don't like coincidences anymore.
The annals do not support your conjecture.
Cyrus Gordon does not support your conjecure.
From MangyTiger's/Jar's posts, it appears that heraldry does not support your conjecture.
What source would you like to examine next?
Amlodhi
), I'll repeat:
™ Version 4.2