|
Author
|
Topic: Since it IS Christmas time......
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
|
Message 26 of 126 (540424)
12-25-2009 12:04 AM
|
Reply to: Message 12 by Blue Jay
12-24-2009 5:11 PM
|
|
Happy Festiva everyone !!! Re: Christianity and Rocket Science
We celebrate the birth of Christ, not the Roman goddess Saturn. Saturn (Chronos, Father Time) is actually a god. Nor is this his birthday, or day at all. The Roman feast of Saturnalia ran from the 17th to the 23d, though much of the customs involved have been co-opted by the Church. Yes, there are many different gods and customs that revolve around the winter solstice, which tends to take place on the 20th or 21st. But the guy whose birthday is actually 25 December is Mithras. This is a god who has come a long way, hasn't he? Beginning as Mitra, a minor god of light in Hindu polytheism with prehistoric roots, under the Persian religion of Zoroaster he changes sides in the war between the Devas and Ahuras and becomes a major player as Mithra, angel of the sun. From there he infects the Roman Empire as a Mystery religion with various degrees and orders, and finally achieves world supremacy in 321 when Constantine merged the imperial cult of Sol Invictus with the socio-political organization of Christianity and the military secret society of Mithras.
We wish you a hairy Mithras
We Wish You A Hairy Mithras
WE WISH YOU A HAIRY MITHRAS
and a happy Jew near ....
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 12 by Blue Jay, posted 12-24-2009 5:11 PM | | Blue Jay has replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
shennanigans?
How many stories have you heard about secular groups trying to put up holiday decorations, only to have christians fight them tooth and nail? Please, could you tell me some of those stories? I don't think I'm understanding your argument correctly. I have heard plenty of reports about Christians wanting to put up things like creches and pietas on public property and being prevented. And I think I have heard of Jews and Muslims getting similar troubles in Hanukkah and Ramadan. But somehow I've missed the persecution of secularity. What would that constitute, anyway? No gifts or something? I've seen plenty of evergreen trees and old men in sleds with reindeer, both pagan symbols, in the public square. And also an assortment of yule logs, stars, and snow men. Which interesting public beatdowns am I missing?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 35 by hooah212002, posted 12-25-2009 2:39 PM | | hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
YAY
Thank you very much! Yeah, Christian bashing other Christians never suprises me. At one church I attended I developed the opinion that the only reason a lot of Baptists weren't out killing Methodists was that the different-colored fellow Baptists weren't all dead yet. But I wasn't aware of the shift to inclusive displays. We've come a long way baby!
Haupt said in addition to the sign, the Nativity Scene and the Christmas tree, there is also a Soldiers' Angels wreath, and a tabletop display from the American Civil Liberties Union that says the group "defends freedom of religion." A Hanukkah menorah had also been on display until the Jewish Festival of Lights ended on Saturday. For the second year in a row, the Capitol also has an aluminum Festivus pole commemorating the fictional holiday created in "Seinfeld." I think it's interesting which new legal paradigm is already being subverted in this argument, we can expect a lot more of this stuff.
But Kelly called the sign "hate speech," and said he does not believe it is appropriate for a sign that "mocks" religion to be placed next to a Christmas tree and also near a nativity scene. "I don't think the State of Illinois has any business denigrating or mocking any religion," Kelly said, "and I think that's what the verbiage on the sign was doing." The sign reads: "At the time of the winter solstice, let reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is just myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 48 by Granny Magda, posted 12-27-2009 10:14 AM | | Granny Magda has not replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
|
|
Message 56 of 126 (540707)
12-27-2009 10:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 54 by Peg
12-27-2009 8:51 PM
|
|
Herods death is debatable. Not really.
Antiquities 17:8.1 writes: AND now Herod altered his testament upon the alteration of his mind; for he appointed Antipas, to whom he had before left the kingdom, to be tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and granted the kingdom to Archclaus. He also gave Gaulonitis, and Trachonitis, and Paneas to Philip, who was his son, but own brother to Archclaus by the name of a tetrarchy; and bequeathed Jarnnia, and Ashdod, and Phasaelis to Salome his sister, with five hundred thousand [drachmae] of silver that was coined. He also made provision for all the rest of his kindred, by giving them sums of money and annual revenues, and so left them all in a wealthy condition. He bequeathed also to Caesar ten millions [of drachmae] of coined money, besides both vessels of gold and silver, and garments exceeding costly, to Julia, Caesar's wife; and to certain others, five millions. When he had done these things, he died, the fifth day after he had caused Antipater to be slain; having reigned, since he had procured Antigonus to be slain, thirty-four years; but since he had been declared king by the Romans, thirty-seven. A man he was of great barbarity towards all men equally, and a slave to his passion; but above the consideration of what was right; yet was he favored by fortune as much as any man ever was, for from a private man he became a king; and though he were encompassed with ten thousand dangers, he got clear of them all, and continued his life till a very old age. To date the year, we look at the beginning of his reign
Antiquities 14:13.1-2 writes: WHEN after this Antony came into Syria, Cleopatra met him in Cilicia, and brought him to fall in love with her. And there came now also a hundred of the most potent of the Jews to accuse Herod and those about him, and set the men of the greatest eloquence among them to speak. But Messala contradicted them, on behalf of the young men, and all this in the presence of Hyrcanus, who was Herod's father-in-law already. When Antony had heard both sides at Daphne, he asked Hyrcanus who they were that governed the nation best. He replied, Herod and his friends. Hereupon Antony, by reason of the old hospitable friendship he had made with his father [Antipater], at that time when he was with Gabinius, he made both Herod and Phasaelus tetrarchs, and committed the public affairs of the Jews to them, and wrote letters to that purpose. He also bound fifteen of their adversaries, and was going to kill them, but that Herod obtained their pardon. Yet did not these men continue quiet when they were come back, but a thousand of the Jews came to Tyre to meet him there, whither the report was that he would come. But Antony was corrupted by the money which Herod and his brother had given him; and so he gave order to the governor of the place to punish the Jewish ambassadors, who were for making innovations, and to settle the government upon Herod; but Herod went out hastily to them, and Hyrcanus was with him, (for they stood upon the shore before the city,) and he charged them to go their ways, because great mischief would befall them if they went on with their accusation. But they did not acquiesce; whereupon the Romans ran upon them with their daggers, and slew some, and wounded more of them, and the rest fled away and went home, and lay still in great consternation. And when the people made a clamor against Herod, Antony was so provoked at it, that he slew the prisoners. Antony went to Asia in early 42 BC, and left the following year. We can check the date though, using the event about 3 years later.
Antiquities 14.13.3 writes: Now, in the second year, Pacorus, the king of Parthia's son, and Barzapharnes, a commander of the Parthians, possessed themselves of Syria. Ptolemy, the son of Menneus, also was now dead, and Lysanias his son took his government, and made a league of friendship with Antigonus, the son of Aristobulus; and in order to obtain it, made use of that commander, who had great interest in him. Now Antigonus had promised to give the Parthians a thousand talents, and five hundred women, upon condition they would take the government away from Hyrcanus, and bestow it upon him, and withal kill Herod. And although he did not give them what he had promised, yet did the Parthians make an expedition into Judea on that account, and carried Antigonus with them. This is the beginning of the Antigonus revolt. Herod goes to Rome, to get approval from the Senate to kill the usurper and have his kingdom restored to him.
14:14.5-6 writes: But when the senate was dissolved, Antony and Caesar went out of the senate house with Herod between them, and with the consuls and other magistrates before them, in order to offer sacrifices, and to lay up their decrees in the capitol. Antony also feasted Herod the first day of his reign. And thus did this man receive the kingdom, having obtained it on the hundred and eighty-fourth olympiad, when Caius Domitius Calvinus was consul the second time, and Caius Asinius Pollio [the first time]. All this while Antigonus besieged those that were in Masada, who had plenty of all other necessaries, but were only in want of water insomuch that on this occasion Joseph, Herod's brother, was contriving to run away from it, with two hundred of his dependents, to the Arabians The date specified by consulate and olympiad there is 40-39 BC. Herod heads back home and kills Antigonus soon after he gets there.
Antiquities 14:16.4 writes: This destruction befell the city of Jerusalem when Marcus Agrippa and Caninius Gallus were consuls of Rome on the hundred eighty and fifth olympiad, on the third month, on the solemnity of the fast, as if a periodical revolution of calamities had returned since that which befell the Jews under Pompey; for the Jews were taken by him on the same day, and this was after twenty-seven years' time. So when Sosius had dedicated a crown of gold to God, he marched away from Jerusalem, and carried Antigonus with him in bonds to Antony; but Herod was afraid lest Antigonus should be kept in prison [only] by Antony, and that when he was carried to Rome by him, he might get his cause to be heard by the senate, and might demonstrate, as he was himself of the royal blood, and Herod but a private man, that therefore it belonged to his sons however to have the kingdom, on account of the family they were of, in case he had himself offended the Romans by what he had done. Out of Herod's fear of this it was that he, by giving Antony a great deal of money, endeavored to persuade him to have Antigonus slain, which if it were once done, he should be free from that fear. The date specified, by consulate and olympiad and month, is 38 BC. Do the math, 41-37= 4, 38-34= 4. The point where we start to care about the eclipse story is to verify the month and date.
Antiquities 17:6.4-5 writes: But Herod deprived this Matthias of the high priesthood, and burnt the other Matthias, who had raised the sedition, with his companions, alive. And that very night there was an eclipse of the moon. But now Herod's distemper greatly increased upon him after a severe manner, and this by God's judgment upon him for his sins; for a fire glowed in him slowly, which did not so much appear to the touch outwardly, as it augmented his pains inwardly; for it brought upon him a vehement appetite to eating, which he could not avoid to supply with one sort of food or other. The lunar eclipse in 4 BC is about a month before Passover.
Antiquities 17:9.3 writes: Now, upon the approach of that feast of unleavened bread, which the law of their fathers had appointed for the Jews at this time, which feast is called the Passover and is a memorial of their deliverance out of Egypt, when they offer sacrifices with great alacrity; and when they are required to slay more sacrifices in number than at any other festival; and when an innumerable multitude came thither out of the country, nay, from beyond its limits also, in order to worship God, the seditious lamented Judas and Matthias, those teachers of the laws, and kept together in the temple, and had plenty of food, because these seditious persons were not ashamed to beg it. And as Archelaus was afraid lest some terrible thing should spring up by means of these men's madness, he sent a regiment of armed men, and with them a captain of a thousand, to suppress the violent efforts of the seditious before the whole multitude should be infected with the like madness; and gave them this charge, that if they found any much more openly seditious than others, and more busy in tumultuous practices, they should bring them to him. QED Edited by Iblis, : go ahead, ask me about that "traditional date" -- you will have to admit the source though, I won't be the one to bring that into the argument 
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 54 by Peg, posted 12-27-2009 8:51 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 58 by Peg, posted 12-28-2009 5:03 AM | | Iblis has not replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
|
|
Message 62 of 126 (540776)
12-29-2009 12:43 AM
|
Reply to: Message 61 by bluescat48
12-28-2009 11:20 PM
|
|
we don't know when the crucifixion occurred. It happened the year that there was a 3-hour eclipse of the sun during Passover. That same year, Pontius Pilate caved in to popular pressure, and a Jewish leader protested the currency exchange. In other parts of the world, an Irishman who was given written instructions from his doctor to stay in bed tried to get up and do his job instead, a Greek god died of natural causes, and a Danish king brought world peace. (No, I did not make any of that up.) As for the Christmas story, that gets even funnier when you read about when Luke says he was conceived. This was during the time that Lucius Quirinius was governor of Syria, and administrating a head tax on the whole area. That's 6 AD! My theory is that Baby Jesus, as we know, is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. This is similar to the original Superboy, who had super-strength, super-speed, and super-senses. Superboy used his powers to travel through time to the future, where he joined the Legion of Super Heroes, and to the past, where he fought dinosaurs. His childhood was spread out over about 40 years, during which his parents were shown at different ages and with a wide variety of haircuts. His first case as an adult Superman was to investigate the Kennedy assassination, after which he fought in World War II. In much the same way, Baby Jesus must have been able to use his omnipresence to break the Time Barrier. Once he was conceived, while still in utero, he was quite the playful little fetus. This is why a pregnant Virgin Mary tends to appear briefly to people throughout spacetime. Towards the end of her pregnancy, when they happened to be at home, Joseph piled them on a donkey and rushed off to try to make his tax deadline. The mischievous Little Lord dropped them back 13 years though, to the time of Herod the Great. Boy was that donkey freaked out! But Joseph was able to invest his tax shekels, and with compound interest over the next decade or so he could afford a nice shop and some new saws and lathes from the residuals. After that, they went to Egypt during the time of Moses, so the prophecy could be fulfilled about calling his son out of Egypt. No double fulfillment nonsense for Baby Jesus! He explored Biblical history a bit more, and animated some clay pigeons at a skeet shoot on the Carnival cruise line, among other things. Finally, when he was 12 years old, in the early 50's, he taught in the temple under the name of Josephus, or "little Joseph". He spent the next 18 years of proper time wandering about through the future, appearing to numerous people, mostly in their hearts. Finally, having carefully investigated all the accounts of his mission and theories about him, he journeyed to the 15th year of Tiberius to be baptized by his cousin John. John was surprised to see him, of course, as it was he who had baptized John when the Baptist was just a wee tyke. But Jesus just winked and said "play along buddy, it's all part of the Big Plan." He spent the next three years doing and saying much the same thing in various different places, often at the same time. He also did some special preparatory work we will come back to in a moment. Finally he convinced poor Judas to go sell him out, and was nailed to the cross just as predicted. As he died, the spasm opened up a time warp in the sky, witnessed by numerous Roman soldiers who dropped their dice in amazement, back to events of the late fall in 29 AD. And then he was gone (PBUH). The following day, while everyone was out Jewing, a previous version of him came forward from the past, got his body, carried it back in time many years, recovered the brain, and buried various other pieces raw in a small farm he kept under the name of Immanuel. Then he planted vines and wheat on the fertilized areas and the following harvest he stomped the grapes into new wine, which he left to age for several years. Jumping forward with the bread made from the wheat, he got the wine when it was a good vintage, and set that up for use at the Last Supper. No transubstantiation for Anomaly Jesus, he really meant it! Then he went forward to that famous Sunday, where he encouraged everyone to carry the word to all nations and did a few more tricks for old time's sake. His brain he wired up with technology from the 31st century, and took it back in time to, you know, 1x10 -44 of a second, where it used its mighty omni-powers to whatever, do stuff, its been traveling around interfering with things ever since. It makes its home base in a special Ethiopian replica of the Lost Ark kept in one of the catacombs under the Vatican, which it refers to as "the Tardis". It grows fake bodies for itself, but it tends to vary the appearance of them.
With different reconings there is no way to determine when any event actually occurred. That's only for dates she doesn't like. They do this same stuff whenever anyone bothers to do the Genesis math and realizes exactly how Methuselah died.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by bluescat48, posted 12-28-2009 11:20 PM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
The part you may not be flashing on is the correlation between days of the week and days of the month. The weekend only frames Passover once every few years. So, for Good Friday to actually be a Friday, and smudge the named and implied dates the least, the only option there is is 33 AD. Sir Isaac Newton actually did the work, but got 34 AD.
Isaac Newton was one of the first scientists to estimate the date of the crucifixion by calculating the relative visibility of the crescent of the new moon between the Hebrew and Julian calendars. Newton suggested the date as Friday, April 23, 34 AD. He based his arguments on several presuppositions, including: "I take it for granted that the passion was on friday the 14th day of the month Nisan".[59] Writing in the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1991, John Pratt argued that Newton's reasoning was effectively sound, but included a minor error at the end. Pratt suggested the year 33 AD as the accurate answer.[60] Using similar computations, in 1990 astronomer Bradley Schaefer arrived at the same date, Friday, April 3, 33 AD.[61] Thus it can be concluded that Newton's argument favors the April 3, 33 AD date. This date was further supported in 2003. Using a computer program, astronomers Liviu Mircea and Tiberiu Oproiu again estimated that Jesus died at 3 pm on Friday, April 3, 33 AD, and rose on Sunday, April 5, dates that agree with Schaefer.[62][63] Another computer calculation suggests somewhat different dates.[64] Using the completely different approach of a lunar eclipse model, Humphreys and Waddington of Oxford University also arrived at the conclusion that Friday, April 3, 33 AD was the date of the Crucifixion. This is all just a cluster though, it relies on a misunderstanding of the word "Sabbath" which refers not only to Saturdays, but also to feast days like Passover. Plenty of scholars stick the crucifixion on Thursday or even Wednesday, to reconcile some statements in John and get the "three days and three nights" straight. None of them can explain the solar eclipse though. That part had to be a miracle. (Eclipses fall at new moon, Passover at full.) Crucifixion of Jesus - Wikipedia A death certificate found imprinted on the Shroud of Turin last month by Vatican scholar Barbara Frale says it was 16 Tiberius, ie 30 AD. I thought someone had proven already that that thing was just Da Vinci taking the piss? Anyway, Victorius of Aquitaine, who produced the first Easter Cycle in 457 AD (a kind of chronicle) went with 28 AD based on Matthew and Josephus, they don't seem to have had the version of Luke we use now handy in the 5th century. PS: It was in 69 AD that Titus held Jerusalem under siege during Passover time, sending Josephus bar Matthias (Joseph of Arimathea) off to Tekoa to survey it for a potential army camp. On returning, he discovered 3 of his friends on the other side had been crucified as part of a Roman exemplum; he received an unprecedented permission from Titus to take them down, but only one of them was able to be revived.
Titus reportedly refused to accept a wreath of victory, as he claimed there is "no merit in vanquishing people forsaken by their own God". Titus - Wikipedia Edited by Iblis, : facts and links
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 65 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-29-2009 12:17 PM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
|
|
Message 111 of 126 (541225)
01-01-2010 4:10 PM
|
|
|
General answer in due regard to tulkus of Maitreya
roger pearse: Your allegations that I could conceivably be acting "in good faith" are utterly baseless and constitute a vile misrepresentation of my character.
You have my glove, sir. Catholic Scientist: For whatever tiny aspect of your didactic lesson might be construed as "defending me", I thank you. In case there is any confusion on the part of our readers as to the actual content of this disagreement, I will summarize. After a complaint from Indo-Iranian scholars in 1971 to the effect that western understanding of eastern religious thought was crippled by classical emphasis on western mystery religions, a group of academics at the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies agreed to be the goat and take advantage of sloppy research by 19th-century compiler Franz Cumont to systematically challenge every single conclusion about Mithras that had been propagated by icons like J G Frazer and Jessie Weston. This revival in a stagnant field was a great success, producing wonderful cooperation with living religions and opening up a dialogue that has improved our understanding of Mazdaism in particular. But some of the underlying challenges were doomed to fail on simple grounds of philological continuity. The current champion of this approach, Roger Beck, has happily conceded that pre-CE interactions between Parthia/Anatolia and the western empires do support the minimal position that the name and superficial attributes of Roman Mithraism are reflective of the Achaemenid sun deity, not simply made up on the spot in the Capitol. Arguing that Mitra and Mithras are different people because the one has a thousand ears and the other heads a secret society is similar to arguing that Yeshu and Jesus are distinct entities because one celebrates the Passover while the other transubstantiates his body and blood in the miracle of the Real Presence. That is, while useful as a pederastic technique, to emphasize profound contrasts between the views of different religions, it requires a suspension of disbelief to deny the equal validity of the numerous similarities subject to comparison. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, there's currently a strong movement to insist that Yeshu has nothing to do with Jesus, and that the name is actually an acronym for yimmach shemo vezikhro "May his name be obliterated". But no one who is really in the know takes these approaches as absolutes. The numerous pseudo-Christian scholars who quote-mine the work of Beck, Merkelbach, Hinnels and Gordon are no better than the people dragging Woese and Ruse in out of context to claim that they support "Intelligent Design". The relationship between Mitra, Mithra, and Mithras is very similar to the evolution of Hastur in the work of Ambrose Bierce, Robert W Chambers, and August Derleth. In Bierce he is a pithy shepherd-god, in Chambers an eponymous allusion from which the name of a culture is derived, and in Derleth a monstrous sky-being who has a material influence on earth whenever his celestial latitude lines up properly with his victim. In much the same way, in Hindu texts Mitra is one among many gods, in post-Zarathustra Mazdaism he becomes a powerful subordinate to the dualistic representation of fire and light, and in the Empire he is reworked in light of the emphasis on precession to take on the position of the "new" deity responsible for spinning the sky. He's currently the Laughing Buddha honored by numerous people with incense, regardless of their avowed religion. He has, in short, come a long way from his original conceptualization. (No, I will not entertain the argument as to who the current "future Buddha" is, under any circumstances.)
RCS: Sorry man, no offense to the Vedanta. You may not be aware of the context of my post. I'm replying to someone on "the same side" as me, with the specious argument that Nuh uh, Saturnalia isn't Christmas, Christmas is actually Mithras. This is a parody of recent funny moments when people on "the other side" have been ambushed by nit-picks from their allies on similar lines, as for example No the kingdom isn't the apocalypse, the church is actually the kingdom. Clues as to what I'm up to include indirect allusions to Robert E Howard's character Conan, who swears by Crom and Mitra, reference to a Zoroastrian "angel", and an improper pluralization of the Seinfeld fictional holiday Festivus. And a song, the song is really the whole point of my particular selection. Immediately above me, also just moments after midnight Eastern Standard Time, you will see Buzsaw, a rather devout person and the main victim of these "friendly fire" attacks, pushing a pagan synthesis as an explanation for the holiday with a much better overview than myself and equally good wishes for everyone in the fray. This sort of "Feast of Fools" role-reversal is part of the traditional celebration of the winter holidays in our culture, and counter-intuitively helps promote "peace on earth, good will to men" and other good things I'm sure Jesus and Mitra and whoever else may or may not be paying attention would be inclined to approve of. You can see this renewed good fellowship in action a bit later in the thread, when I request the whys and wherefores of the persecution of seculars and support my ignorance by exalting the humble Christmas pine, and Buz immediately steps in to back up my reference with a splendid verse from Jeremiah and a side-swipe at the shepherds watching over their sheep in the field. Chestnuts roasting over an open fire, for everyone! . . .
A monk asked Ummon, "What is Ummon's melody?" Ummon replied: "The twenty-fifth of December!" Edited by Iblis, : the master of souls, before whom emperors have bowed
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
bite yourself in the ass much?
I wonder if there is any statement by anyone on any subject in the world that cannot be "objected to" with demands like that? Aren't you the same fellow who was attacking some poor brother's literary laud to the Lord of Light on his own feast day with still-unsubstantiated self-stroking?
It's an old way to run someone around. Don't do it, hey? If you believe they're wrong, say why. You're just a mass of contradictions lately, aren't you?
Many thanks for your note, most of it consisting of an irrelevant and rather insulting lecture on how you believe I should post. Don't do this; play the game, not the player. Where's my glove, felon? You are using it to do "the stranger" right now, aren't you?
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
|
|
Message 116 of 126 (541309)
01-02-2010 1:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 87 by Peg
12-30-2009 8:14 PM
|
|
Re: Secular Jewish thought on Messiahs coming
this is certainly a reference to Daniel's prophecy and the Messiah was to appear at the end of it. No ma'am, the 7-year periods referred to in tractate Sanhedrin and throughout the Mishna and Gemara are the ones specified in the Torah.
Leviticus 25:2-10 writes: Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the LORD. Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof; But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard. That which groweth of its own accord of thy harvest thou shalt not reap, neither gather the grapes of thy vine undressed: [for] it is a year of rest unto the land. And the sabbath of the land shall be meat for you; for thee, and for thy servant, and for thy maid, and for thy hired servant, and for thy stranger that sojourneth with thee, And for thy cattle, and for the beast that [are] in thy land, shall all the increase thereof be meat. And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubile to sound on the tenth [day] of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land. And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout [all] the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family. These differ from the superficially similar periods in Daniel not only in that there is an extra super-sabbatical year thrown after each group of seven sevens; but also, more importantly, in that there isn't any limited number of them specified in the text. That's why they are debating which particular septenate, and their specifications differ profoundly from what Daniel says about his "weeks".
Sanhedrin 97a writes: Our Rabbis taught: in the seven year cycle at the end of which the son of David will come-in the first year, this verse will be fulfilled: And I will cause it to rain upon one city and cause it not to rain upon another city;2 in the second, the arrows of hunger will be sent forth;3 in the third, a great famine, in the course of which men, women, and children, pious men and saints4 will die, and the Torah will be forgotten by its students; in the fourth, partial plenty;5 in the fifth, great plenty, when men will eat, drink and rejoice, and the Torah will return to its disciples; in the sixth, [Heavenly] sounds;6 in the seventh, wars; and at the conclusion of the septennate the son of David will come. R. Joseph demurred: But so many septennates have passed, yet has he not come! Abaye retorted: Were there then [Heavenly] sounds in the sixth and wars in the seventh! Moreover, have they [sc. the troubles] been in this order7 ! This shouldn't come as a surprise. The Talmud is a commentary on the Law, with some interpretive reference to the Prophets. To get any serious discussion of the content of the disputed texts like Daniel you have to go to the Midrash.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 87 by Peg, posted 12-30-2009 8:14 PM | | Peg has not replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
|
|
|
Message 121 of 126 (541616)
01-04-2010 6:31 PM
|
Reply to: Message 120 by Jazzns
01-04-2010 6:07 PM
|
|
Re: Minor Correction
1) Daniel, the prophecy under discussion, is not in the Torah, but rather is in Former Prophets, the second of the three sections of the Tanakh (AKA "The Hebrew Bible"), those sections being Torah, Former Prophets, and Writings. I am catching up on EvC threads so sorry for the mid-thread reply. Daniel is not in the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible it is in the Writings. Some Christian reorderings put Daniel next to other books that are originally from the Prophets. Excellent catch! Also note that the second section of the Hebrew Scriptures is simply the Prophets ( Nephibim). The books of the Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, also known as the Prose Prophets to reflect the rearrangement in post-Targum translations. The Latter (or Poetic) Prophets are Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and then in one scroll all of the Minor Prophets. This last scroll is sometimes also known as "the Prophets", confusing in English but distinguished in Hebrew with a different article form; but is now commonly referred to as the Twelve. There is still some debate about this classification, however, as Jonah is also considered one of the Megilloth ("Booklets"), traditional holiday readings, and had that status well before things like Esther. So we do not have good confidence one way or another as to whether Jonah was among those books canonized c. 200 BC or continued to be part of the debatables after the Psalms were accepted and the countdown toward Daniel (the last) took place. The Twelve in their current listing are Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. Edited by Iblis, : memory glitch
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 120 by Jazzns, posted 01-04-2010 6:07 PM | | Jazzns has not replied |
|
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3926 days) Posts: 663 Joined: 11-17-2005
(1)
| |
| |
| |
On the 10th day of Mithras
You claimed that there's no conection between Mithras and Dec. 25. You could have easily, after making the claim provided something like:
quote:
It is often stated that Mithras was thought to have been born on December 25. But Beck tells us that this is not so. In fact he calls this assertion 'that hoariest of "facts"'. He continues: "In truth, the only evidence for it is the celebration of the birthday of "Invictus" on that date in Calendar of Philocalus. 'Invictus' is of course Sol Invictus, Aurelian's sun god. It does not follow that a different, earlier, and unofficial sun god, Sol Invictus Mithras, was necessarily or even probably, born on that day too."
source I found that pretty quickly. Anyone reading through the thread already has a link to go through for that ascertaining they might be inclined to. You do understand that that's Pearse's own post at Wikipedia right? That's correct, he's one of the primary editors at the page, and responsible for most of the deletions that slant the topic, even though two of the footnotes are to his own essays. He gets away with it because no one else cares enough to do the tremendous amount of shitwork needed to keep the page from being taken over by Magic drones, and he at least has a scholarly veneer derived from hosting a ton of good sources. This talk entry summarizes the result of this neglect, however
Accounts survive of their rituals and core beliefs. They had a strong following in the military. This article has been decimated by christians who jump at anything that underminds their concept of their religion being 'original'. From what i remember reading latin texts, it is described as 'coming from the east' with no specific mention of where. I suggest this article has the improperly deleted sections restored and the article be locked. After all, they are just sock puppets, and as we all know, wiki is at war with sock puppets.
Talk:Mithraism - Wikipedia Note how tightly Beck has been quote-mined in your example, also, to produce the necessary effect. This even though Beck is the main champion of the "Mithras is different" dogma! Nor are his conclusions in this case anything but ludicrous. The military cult of Mithras, which used the public name of Sol Invictus ("The Unconquerable Sun") is hardly likely to be different in this public aspect from the imperial cult mandated by the career soldier Aurelian in the generation before Constantine. The re-identification of the god of the secret society (which had expanded among the merchant class) with that of the Empire was exactly the sort of thing we could expect from the soldier Constantine when he co-opted the Christian ecclestiacal network. Neither is the claim that the name and initial founding of the Mithraic rites in the West is somehow unconnected to the Zoroastrian inhabitants of Persia, Parthia and Anatolia the least bit believable. The most reliable witness to the living Mysteries is Lucius Mestius Plutarchus
Life of Pompey writes: The power of the pirates first commenced in Cilicia, having in truth but a precarious and obscure beginning, but gained life and boldness afterwards in the wars of Mithridates, where they hired themselves out, and took employment in the king's service. Afterwards, whilst the Romans were embroiled in their civil wars, being engaged against one another even before the very gates of Rome, the seas lay waste and unguarded, and by degrees enticed and drew them on not only to seize upon and spoil the merchants and ships upon the seas, but also to lay waste the islands and seaport towns. So that now there embarked with these pirates men of wealth and noble birth and superior abilities, as if it had been a natural occupation to gain distinction in. They had divers arsenals, or piratic harbors, as likewise watch towers and beacons, all along the sea-coast; and fleets were here received that were well manned with the finest mariners, and well served with the expertest pilots, and composed of swift sailing and light-built vessels adapted for their special purpose. Nor was it merely their being thus formidable that excited indignation; they were even more odious for their ostentation than they were feared for their force. Their ships had gilded masts at their stems; the sails woven of purple, and the oars plated with silver, as if their delight were to glory in their iniquity. There was nothing but music and dancing, banqueting and revels, all along the shore. Officers in command were taken prisoners, and cities put under contribution, to the reproach and dishonor of the Roman supremacy. There were of these corsairs above one thousand sail, and they had taken no less than four hundred cities, committing sacrilege upon the temples of the gods, and enriching themselves with the spoils of many never violated before, such as were those of Claros, Didyma, and Samothrace; and the temple of the Earth in Hermione, and that of Aesculapius in Epidaurus, those of Neptune at the Isthmus, at Taenarus, and at Calauria; those of Apollo at Actium and Leucas, and those of Juno, in Samos, at Argos, and at Lacinium. They themselves offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time, having received their previous institution from them. In the 19th century, when public magickal studies were in their infancy again, a lot of pedants made a career out of throwing aspersions on Plutarch. But when the hieroglyphics were finally decrypted, his apparently-imaginative account of Isis and Osiris was shown to be remarkably accurate on point after point. Even items he only referred to obliquely like the beheading of Isis were revealed to be real elements of doctrine. Since that time, with the further translation of cuneiform and the results of extensive archaeological studies in the ancient Near East, he has never been demonstrated to be misleading us about living customs and beliefs.
Life of Alexander writes: At the hearing of these words, such was the grief and emotion of Darius's mind, that they carried him into extravagant suspicions; and taking Tireus aside into a more private part of his tent, "Unless thou likewise," said he to him, "hast deserted me, together with the good fortune of Persia, and art become a Macedonian in thy heart; if thou yet ownest me for thy master Darius, tell me, I charge thee, by the veneration thou payest the light of Mithras, and this right hand of thy king, do I not lament the least of Statira's misfortunes in her captivity and death? Have I not suffered something more injurious and deplorable in her lifetime? And had I not been miserable with less dishonor, if I had met with a more severe and inhuman enemy? For how is it possible a young man as he is, should treat the wife of his opponent with so much distinction, were it not from some motive that does me disgrace?" Whilst he was yet speaking, Tireus threw himself at his feet, and besought him neither to wrong Alexander so much, nor his dead wife and sister, as to give utterance to any such thoughts, which deprived him of the greatest consolation left him in his adversity, the belief that he was overcome by a man whose virtues raised him above human nature; that he ought to look upon Alexander with love and admiration, who had given no less proofs of his continence towards the Persian women, than of his valor among the men.
http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/674/pg674.html So there's no doubt that the Romans were aware of the eastern deity, and considered him to be the same fellow as the guy at their underground bull-fights.
|
™ Version 4.2