History is repeating

[thalbergmad]

if you are seriously trying to convince people of the existence of god, jesus, a unicorn, leprechauns, the easter bunny, etc. at least answer us "poor lost souls'" questions, or we just might take you religious nuts for psychopaths.

If she does not know by now that a lot of people think she is a deluded crackpot, she never will.

The fact that this poor woman continues to post (despite several pleas to shut up), would indicate that she is not trying to convince us, but that she is actually trying to convince herself.

Thal

[pianistimo]

I did answer your questions, Aslanov.  You said 'where in the bible is the proof that G-d gave you any human rights.'  I quoted the part of the bible where G-d created Adam and Eve in His image.  That gives us inalienable rights because we are created in the image of G-d and not a chimp.

Secondly, to those who think that the ressurrection is bunk.  I simply ask - disprove it.  You can't!  So...we're at an impasse.  You may use roedinger's cat.  I will use the power of the Holy Spirit. 

Jesus Christ is thought to have uttered at his last breath 'G-d, My G-d, why  have you forsaken me?'  But, why would he say that if he just told the thief on the cross 'today, you will be with me in paradise!'  That just doesn't jive.

I think people thought Jesus was quoting the Psalm - 22 'My G-d, My G-d, why have you forsaken me?'  But, actually, he had WON THE RACE and was speaking to His Father as He always did.  He was saying 'G-d, My G-d, Lord of Sabaoth.'  He was entering His rest and was not actually dead because G-d had His Spirit.  Remember - they also thought He was calling for Elijah when he said Eli, Eli.  You can't really tell what a person is fully saying and thinking at the moment of death - but you can take a good guess.

Psalms 22 is actually the prayer that Jesus was praying in Gethsemane before he had to endure the 'race' ahead of himself.  But, at the moment of death - HE WON.  He was praising G-d and must have been somewhat elated for the physical sensation of death was no longer plaguing Him.  Why would He say 'why have you forsaken Me? When G-d would never forsake Him EVER'  Jesus Christ had that confidence all through His ministry.  If He showed unbelief at the end - that would be ridiculous.

What person, when they have won a race, turns and gives a sour face?  Jesus taught many on the Sabbath day (Mark 6:2 is one example) and Jesus knew that the Sabbath was the day he would be ressurrected on.  He was prophecied to be 'cut off' in the middle of the week.  This certainly happened.  And, if He is LORD of the Sabaoth - how can He be Lord of it and also be Lord of Sunday? 

Matthew 27:50 - is a victory whoop.  "And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.  And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom, and the earth shook; and the rocks were split, and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs AFTER his ressurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.  Now the centurion, and those who were with him keeping guard over Jesus, when they saw the earthquake and the things that were happening, became very frightened and said, 'Truly, This WAS the Son of G-d."

[pianistimo]

Btw, the reason I think what I do is that in Psalm 22:2 it says 'I cry by day, but Thou dost not answer; and by night, but I have no rest.'  I think Jesus did ask in the garden of Gethsemane - if it is possible, let this burden be taken from me... or something like that.

At the end of Psalm 22 - at the point where Jesus should be complaining (the prophetic description of the crucifixion) he says 'You who fear the Lord, praise Him; All you descendants of Jacob, glorify Him, and stand in awe of Him, all you descendants of Israel.  For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted (Jesus knew G-d knew of his crucifixion and was right there); NEITHER HAS HE HIDDEN HIS FACE FROM HIM; but when he cried to Him for help, He heard.'

King David was inspired to write the ending words that most likely Jesus Christ felt during his death.  He knew and believed.  He had no lack of faith. He trusted G-d and there was no doubt that He was now King of Kings.  He had fulfilled his mission.  I mean, if he messed up somehow, he'd be all 'G-d, where are you?'  But, that would be a ridiculous thing to say for a winner.

[m]

Dear Piantistimonial,

When you started this post with "Dear Aslanov" i, for a second believe u would actually answer my questions, and not give any evasive answers or ignore my question altogether. BOYYY was i wrong.

Dear Aslanov,

In 5 years on the board I don't actually remember one single time she would answer a simplest question in more or less concise and coherent form. To talk to her is the same as to start hitting a brick wall with your head.

Just out of curiosity, why people would reduce themselves to dealing with some brainwashed fundamentalist?

Best, M

[pianistimo]

Dear Marik,

Have you studied archeology? There is much to prove the bible true.  I've already mentioned the findings in 2008 of Herod's tomb.  Then, there's Herod's temple.  also In Luke 2:1 - there is mention of a worldwide census declared by Caesar Augustus and carried out by many including Quirinius in his governorship of Syria.  This is at the time Joseph takes Mary from Galilee to Judea to the city of David (Bethlehem) because he was of the house and family of David.

OK.  Here's some recent findings on Quirinius:
But recently, confirmation that Quirinius was in Syria during the first Roman census taken between 8 B.C. and 5 B.C. has been found.
      First of all, lets look at a few early census accounts taken from history and see how they match up with the Bible.
       The following is a record of a census taken in the year 104 A.D. which contains similar wording to that found in the Gospel:
      "From the Prefect of Egypt, Gaius Vibius Maximus. Being that the time has come for the house to house census, it is mandatory that all men who are living outside of their districts return to their own homelands, that the census may be carried out  . . . "
       Another census was uncovered from 48 A.D. which also records a return of the people to their native land for the census. It reads as follows:
      "I Thermoutharion along with Apollonius, my guardian, pledge an oath to Tiberius Claudius Caesar that the preceding document gives an accurate account of those returning, who live in my household, and that there is no one else living with me, neither a foreigner, nor an Alexandrian, nor a freedman, nor a Roman citizen, nor an Egyptian. If I am telling the truth, may it be well with me, but if falsely, the reverse. In the ninth year of the reign of Tiberius Claudius Augustus Germanicus Emperor."
      It is interesting to note that these two census accounts required a person to return to their homeland to be registered. The same is true of the gospel account.
      Two well-respected leaders from the early church, Justin and Tertullian, also believed that a record of the census, along with the registration of Joseph and Mary could be found in official documents from the reign of Augustus Caesar. In their writings they  mention that if anyone were to question the Lord’s virgin birth they should go and checkout the Roman state records for themselves.
      
       And as for Quirinius being the governor of Syria during this census, it is worth noting that the Bible never calls him the governor, at least the New King James Version doesn't. It says he was governing in Syria. And we know that Quirinius was indeed governing in some capacity in this region at this time.
       Records also indicate that Quirinius was no minor figure in Roman politics. His name is mentioned in Res Gestae - The Deeds of Augustus by Augustus placing him as consul as early as 12 B.C.
      The Roman historian Tacitus also mentions that Quirinius was appointed by Augustus to be an advisor to his young son Caius Caesar in Armenia well before the census of 6 A.D. - Caius was sent to administer Syria in 1 A.D. and was wounded in nearby Armenia in 3 A.D.  Evidently, Augustus wanted someone who was experienced in previously administering the region to advise his son. Who better then Quirinius?
      The first century historian Josephus also mentions that Quirinius became governor later on in 6 A.D.:  He wrote:               
       "Quirinius, a Roman senator who had gone through other magistracies, and had passed through them all until he had become consul, was appointed governor of Syria by Caesar and was given the task of assessing property there and in Judea." 
      So who was in charge as the assessor of property in Judea during the first census?  Just as the bible had said all along, Quirinius.
                   
THE  WORDS  OF  THE  PROPHET  ISAIAH
CAME  TRUE  DURING  THE  FIRST  CENSUS
                   
      "And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins."
       So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying:
       "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel," which is translated, "GOD with us."                 Matthew 1:21-23

Then, there is also the dating of the beginning of Jesus ministry in Luke 3:1 'in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea....'  this is a huge clue to the time frame we are talking about:
Excerpt from: Kenneth F. Doig, New Testament Chronology, (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990).

Chapter 12
THE FIFTEENTH YEAR OF TIBERIUS

The beginning of John the Baptist's ministry occurred "in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar." (Luke 3:1) John baptized Jesus soon thereafter, and this marks the beginning of the Lord's ministry (Luke 3:13, 16-17). With that year established it is possible to reconcile that Jesus was about thirty years old (Luke 3:23).

Tiberius Caesar succeeded to ruler of the empire after the death of Caesar Augustus on August 19, 14 CE. John the Baptist began to preach during the fifteenth year of Tiberius' reign. These two exact numbers have led commentators to a broad range of possible times for the beginning of John's ministry. The deviation has been caused by a lack of exact knowledge of the calendar system Luke was using. Luke's calendar and his reckoning of the reigns of kings is the controlling factor, not how Tiberius or the Romans reckoned his reign.

I. Luke's Reckoning of the Fifteenth Year

As with his other timed references, Luke, a Greek, was using the Syro-Macedonian calendar familiar to Theophilus, the Greek recipient of his letters in Antioch. This calendar system led to the dating of the Annunciation in the "sixth month" on March 25, coinciding with the appearance of the first nova, or Star of the Magi. Luke's use of this method of dating is here continued. This calendar was in use through much of the Middle East, including Judea, and would here be an expected reference. The usual reckoning was by the years of the Syrian Seleucid Era, which dated by the Syro-Macedonian calendar. The rulers of that area reckoned their reigns by this calendar, as discussed in the chapter on "Herodian Chronology." They used inclusive reckoning, with the new year beginning with the fall lunar month of Dios.1 The dating of the reign of Tiberius can be according to Luke's Syro-Macedonian calendar.

Tiberius became Caesar on August 19, 14, and in that year Dios 1 fell on October 15. Thus, his first regnal year according to the Syro-Macedonian calendar would be from Dios 1, or October 25, 13 until October 14, 14. Luke would have measured the fifteen years from that year one by non-accession, or inclusive, reckoning. Thus, the "fifteenth year" fell from October 20, 27 to October 9, 28. According to Luke's Syro-Macedonian reckoning John the Baptist began his ministry between these two dates. This falls in line with the arrival of Pontius Pilate by the autumn of 27. The earliest first Passover of Jesus' ministry would have been in 28.

II. Other Interpretations

The interpretation of the "fifteenth year" according to the Syro-Macedonian calendar has not been a usual choice of New Testament historians. The selection of the dating method is usually based on backdating three and a half years from a predetermined crucifixion in 30, 31 or 33. These interpretations are here presented in order from the earliest to the latest possible date.

1. Inclusive Reckoning from a Co-regency of Tiberius with Augustus. Some interpretations recognize a decree establishing a "co-regency" in 12 CE, with Tiberius ruling as a colleague of Augustus in the provinces. This is described by the Roman historian, Suetonius: "After two years he (Tiberius) returned to the city from Germany and celebrated the triumph. . . . Since the consuls caused a law to be passed soon after this that he should govern the provinces jointly with Augustus and hold the census with him, he set out for Illyricum on the conclusion of the lustral ceremonies; but he was at once recalled, and finding Augustus in his last illness but still alive, he spent an entire day with him in private." (Augustus 97:1; Tiberius 20-21) The triumphal celebration was on October 23, 12,2 and he became colleague shortly thereafter. Thus, his "co-regency" is usually dated from late October of 12. The fifteenth inclusive year by dynastic reckoning might be dated from the end of October of 26 until October of 27, with a first Passover of Jesus' ministry in 27 or 28. The fifteenth year has also been claimed to be from January 1 to December 31, 26, with a first Passover in 27. Also, if Jesus was baptized early in the year, as on the traditional January 6, then His first Passover could theoretically be as early as 26. This reckoning from a "co-regency" allows a three-and-a-half-year ministry ending in 30 CE.

If Luke reckoned from the fifteenth year that Tiberius was colleague then this might fall before the earliest possible year when Pilate became governor in the autumn of 27. If John baptized Jesus near the end of the fifteenth year from the "co-regency," October of 27, then this interpretation also will satisfy the first Passover of Jesus' ministry falling in 28. The baptism of Jesus still could not fall in 26 CE, with a first Passover in 26 or 27.

There have been a number of objections to this interpretation from a "co-regency." There is a total lack of hard evidence from either historical documents or coins of the period which date the reign of Tiberius from a co-regency.3 There is abundant evidence that historians of the period reckoned Tiberius' reign from August 19, 14 or shortly thereafter, the time at which he became sole ruler.4 Also, Tiberius' time in the provinces was limited to a short stay in Illyricum, western Greece. His presence there would have had little or no effect in faraway Syria or Judea. A Syrian Greek, such as Luke, is unlikely to have used such dating. Tiberius was awarded a special honor, but there is no evidence that anyone during the first century reckoned from such a date.

Augustus favored Tiberius and selected him to follow as emperor. Tiberius "was adopted as a son, as a colleague in empire and a partner in the tribunation power." (Tacitus, Annals 1:3) However, the consuls caused the law to be passed making Tiberius a colleague. This title did not automatically confer on him control of the Roman Empire, which was not confirmed until after the funeral of Augustus (Annals 1:12). A "colleague" was not a co-regent in the usual sense, as there might even be more than one colleague (Suetonius, Tiberius 25). No one, excepting some modern Biblical scholars, dates Tiberius' reign from 12 CE. And, such reckoning scripturally and historically conflicts with Pontius Pilate's term as governor of Judea.

2. Inclusive Reckoning from Tishri. Many have assumed that Luke used the Jewish calendar of the Diaspora, which began the year in the fall month of Tishri. The "fifteenth year" would have fallen between September 21, 27 and September 8, 28. Again, the earliest first Passover of Jesus' ministry would have been in 28, on in the following year in 29. There is no reason to presume that Luke used this calendar, which was similar to the Syro-Macedonian calendar. The use of this calendar is usually presumed because of its similarity to the present fixed Jewish calendar.

3. Inclusive reckoning from Dios. This was likely the method by which Luke reckoned the reign of Tiberius. As discussed above, this was from October 20, 27 to October 9, 28.

4. Inclusive Reckoning from January. The fifteenth year would be from January 1 to December 31, 28. Since Luke's reference was to the reign of the Roman emperor, might not his dating be according to the Julian calendar of the Romans? To support such a possibility, it is contended that Theophilus, the recipient of Luke's letter, was a Roman, not a Greek. As discussed in the chapter, "The Sixth Month," this is based solely on the term of address, "most excellent." (Luke 1:3; Acts 23:26, 24:3, 26:25) It is contended that this term of address was only applicable when speaking to a Roman, that Theophilus must be a Roman and that Luke must be using Roman dating. However, just because Paul and Lysias used this term when addressing a Roman does not mean that Theophilus was a Roman. Luke was using a term of respect, not an ethnic address reserved for Romans. The use of Roman dating by Luke is not found in any other part of his writings and is inconsistent with the conclusions about the birth of Jesus. It is unlikely that he here uses Roman dating. However, since the traditional date for the baptism of Jesus is January 6, again the earliest first Passover would be in 28.

5. Inclusive Reckoning from Nisan. The fifteenth year of Tiberius' reign by non-accession, or inclusive, reckoning from Nisan was from March 16, 28 to April 3, 29. Jesus' first Passover must then be in 29. The Nisan interpretation is in an expected usage by a Jewish writer such as Josephus, and it is in accord with the later Mishna. However, neither Luke nor Theophilus were Jews, and they are unlikely to have used the Jewish Second Temple calendar.

6. Dynastic Reckoning From The Beginning of Tiberius' Sole Reign. This was the usual Roman method for reckoning Tiberius' reign. It is the only reckoning, besides use of the Syro-Macedonian calendar, that makes sense in the historical context of the Scripture. The calendar year is not considered, and inclusive reckoning is used. The fifteenth year was from August 19, 28 to August 18, 29.5 Jesus' first Passover might then be in 29 or 30.

The Roman coins of Tiberius, including the coins of the prefects of Judea, are dated by dynastic reckoning. From Madden's study,6 "It is almost certain that the regnal years of Tiberius were computed from the nineteenth August, A.D. 14, after the death of Augustus, and his tribunation year from June twenty-seventh, A.D. 4, the year of his adoption. His second year would therefore commence on the nineteenth of August, A.D. 15." No coins exist that can be dated from a co-regency beginning in 12 CE.

Roman historians also used the above dynastic reckoning for Tiberius. Tacitus (Annals 4:1) wrote, "The year when Caius Asinius and Caius Antistius were consuls was the ninth of Tiberius' reign." The year of the consuls was 23 CE, beginning January 1.7 The ninth year was from August 19, 22 to August 18, 23, which included the beginning of the year twenty-three. Further, Tacitus (Annals 6:51) wrote that Tiberius ruled "the Roman world, with absolute sway, for about twenty-three." It was twenty-three inclusive dynastic years from August 19, 14 until Tiberius' death on March 16, 37. Also, Suetonius (Tiberius 73:1) described Tiberius' death as, "In the seventy-eighth year of his age and the twenty-third of his reign on the seventeenth day before the Kalends of April, in the consulship of Gnaeus Acerronius Proculus and Gaius Pontius Nigrinus." If Tacitus or Suetonius had reckoned the regnal year from January 1, then they would have written twenty-four years. However, there was only a twenty-three year reign by dynastic reckoning from Tiberius' accession. For a Roman the fifteenth year of Tiberius caused no confusion and was the year beginning August 19, 28. For a Greek from Antioch, such as Luke, such dating is not so certain.

7. Accession Reckoning from January. The fifteenth year of Tiberius' reign reckoned by accession reckoning was from January 1 to December 31, 29. This would again place Jesus' first Passover in 29 or 30.

The point of attempting to establish Roman dating from January by Luke often finds its fulfillment in this interpretation. If Jesus was baptized during the fifteenth year of Tiberius according to dynastic reckoning, then the latest time would be early August of 29. Then it would be a little more than three and a half years to a crucifixion in 33 CE. With accession reckoning from January, Jesus might have been baptized as late as December of 29, thus giving some flexibility in dating. This method is based on the claim that Roman historians such as Tacitus and Suetonius used accession reckoning according to the Roman calendar year. This was shown to be incorrect in section 6 above. In those examples the twenty-three-year reign of Tiberius would be correct if the portion of the year from August 19 to December 31 of 14 CE was not counted, with year 1 beginning January 1, 15 CE. There is no historical support for this supposition. Even if there was support, Luke was not a Roman historian, and it cannot be demonstrated that he used such a method. There is little to commend accession reckoning in the interpretation of Luke's "fifteenth year."

III. About Thirty Years of Age

John the Baptist began his ministry in the "fifteenth year" of Tiberius according to the Syro-Macedonian calendar, between October 20, 27 and October 9, 28. Pontius Pilate arrived in Caesarea at about that time, by the fall of 27. John was thirty years of age from about July of 26 to July of 27, and he would likely have begun his ministry by the autumn of 27.

[m]

Dear Marik,

Have you studied archeology?

"Dear" Pianistimo,

Let's make a deal. First, you apologize for insulting my wife about two years ago. Then you apologize for making numerous antisemitic remarks and insulting Jewish nation and its believes. After that you apologize for insulting other nations believes. Next, you apologize for your deeply disrespectful attitude towards members of this community, with your constant trolling and spamming (which is against Internet ethics and ethiquette). After that you apologize to those members of this community whose fine threads you mercilessly ruined with your tactless and tastless rants.
After that you tell me if you YOURSELF had any formal studies in archeology, and then I will answer your question. Deal?

Have a good day.

EDIT: P.S. BTW, have you ever learnt that plagiarizing (which is basically, stealing) is not very honorable thing to do?
Next time (to save Nils bandwidth) just post a link to the places you steal your "thoughts". It will be more honest, and (maybe) Christian way to do things:

https://www.biblehistory.net/newsletter/quirinius.htm
https://doig.net/NTC12.htm

[pianistimo]

No deal.  I do not recall ever insulting your wife because I know neither you or her and feel that it would not be very smart to insult anyone in the first place.  Tell me what I said.  I just don't recall because i think you are mistaken about my impression of you and i don't even recall what you said about your own wife if you said something.  I think you are easily offended.

Buck up.

You know that I love the nation of Israel because i believe the bible.  Who reads and takes the bible literally and is anti-semitic?  Nobody I know. 

Secondly, if you think that the holocaust happened and want to prevent it from happening again - what should you do in the face of dictators.  Tell them you know about history and you don't want it to happen again.  You know how forcefully I spoke against Ahmadinejad when he spoke to Columbia university -because he denies the holocaust happened and also wants the destruction of Israel.

Marik, it is you that is actually afraid of someone different than yourself.  You are unaccepting of Christians.  This is really something you have to work out for yourself.  I neither ask you for an apology nor wish any evil upon you.  In fact, if you wish - consider yourself prayed for for blessings. 

In this day and age you should take the friends you are given.  After all, you may need them later!  Israel is a country worth defending and I would give my life for Israel just as I would for America.  Sorry that you think this is racist or something.  Wierd.  Susan

PS Plagarizing means not  quoting sources.  I quoted sources in all the above.  I am very careful that way.  Marik, you need to calm down and consider that not everyone is on your 'high standard' of scholarly expression.  Look, I am a housewife, I have three children, and your considering me 'elite' enough to insult - is rather demeaning to a woman.  Have you ever treated a woman like a woman?  I mean, what do you actually think and feel about women?  You say that you are married - can your wife come on here and actually tell me her feelings about something - or must I speak through a microphone to her and say 'i'm sorry for something that i said - but i don't really know you and i wish that i knew what it was.'  She might actually acknowledge the place that i am coming from.  I don't know her from Eve.

[communist]

No deal.  I do not recall ever insulting your wife because I know neither you or her and feel that it would not be very smart to insult anyone in the first place.  Tell me what I said.  I just don't recall because i think you are mistaken about my impression of you and i don't even recall what you said about your own wife if you said something.  I think you are easily offended.

Buck up.

You know that I love the nation of Israel because i believe the bible.  Who reads and takes the bible literally and is anti-semitic?  Nobody I know. 

Secondly, if you think that the holocaust happened and want to prevent it from happening again - what should you do in the face of dictators.  Tell them you know about history and you don't want it to happen again.  You know how forcefully I spoke against Ahmadinejad when he spoke to Columbia university -because he denies the holocaust happened and also wants the destruction of Israel.

Marik, it is you that is actually afraid of someone different than yourself.  You are unaccepting of Christians.  This is really something you have to work out for yourself.  I neither ask you for an apology nor wish any evil upon you.  In fact, if you wish - consider yourself prayed for for blessings. 

In this day and age you should take the friends you are given.  After all, you may need them later!  Israel is a country worth defending and I would give my life for Israel just as I would for America.  Sorry that you think this is racist or something.  Wierd.  Susan

PS Plagarizing means not  quoting sources.  I quoted sources in all the above.  I am very careful that way.  Marik, you need to calm down and consider that not everyone is on your 'high standard' of scholarly expression.  Look, I am a housewife, I have three children, and your considering me 'elite' enough to insult - is rather demeaning to a woman.  Have you ever treated a woman like a woman?  I mean, what do you actually think and feel about women?  You say that you are married - can your wife come on here and actually tell me her feelings about something - or must I speak through a microphone to her and say 'i'm sorry for something that i said - but i don't really know you and i wish that i knew what it was.'  She might actually acknowledge the place that i am coming from.  I don't know her from Eve.

please except the deal

[ahinton]

You know that I love the nation of Israel because i believe the bible.  Who reads and takes the bible literally and is anti-semitic?  Nobody I know.

More or less than you love what you perceive America to be - or what you think it should be? You "love" what you perceive to be the Israel of Biblical times; modern day Israel is something quite different and, for all that I deprecate the rhetoric that has been widely reported from Ahmadinejad on the need to "wipe" that country from the map, Israel itself is not short of blood on its hands and, rather than concentrate on one man's reportedly avowed desire to wipe that country off the map we should be striving to put that of Palestine ON the map - the contemporary map, not some Biblical one...

Secondly, if you think that the holocaust happened

Don't you, then?

Marik, it is you that is actually afraid of someone different than yourself.  You are unaccepting of Christians.  This is really something you have to work out for yourself.  I neither ask you for an apology nor wish any evil upon you.  In fact, if you wish - consider yourself prayed for for blessings.

I do not know whether or not Marik is "accepting" of Christians in general terms, but just examine your own record for once in terms not only of certain others but also of certin Roman Catholic Christians.

In this day and age you should take the friends you are given.  After all, you may need them later!

How patronising! And with friends like you (the way you are behaving on this forum from time to time, one might ask who needs enemies.

I don't know her from Eve.

So by your own admission you cannot distinguish a living woman from a dead one or a real one from a possibly mythical one. I rest my case.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Have you studied archeology? There is much to prove the bible true.   

When studying Biblical archeology, you have to enter into it with a completely clear mind. Religious conviction of any kind will cloud your judgement and you will simply only look for evidence that confirms already pre conceived ideas.

Your mind is already made up, so you are completely unfit to look at this subject.

I have not read all of your post, as i have not got the 8 hours required and i doubt if anyone else has, as most of us are aware of the deluded shite you come up with.

Already, you are beginning to piss people off and you do not appear to have learned anything from your previous enforced vacations. In fact, each time you appear to come back worse from the experience.

I have no problem with publicly stating that i would like you to be banned on a permanent basis, as you are no longer of any value whatsoever.

Thal

[ahinton]

When studying Biblical archeology, you have to enter into it with a completely clear mind. Religious conviction of any kind will cloud your judgement and you will simply only look for evidence that confirms already pre conceived ideas.

Neither religious conviction nor lack thereof need cloud the judgement of anyone studying biblical archaeology, but there is no doubt that it can do so and that the former is indeed the case here; in addition, such study will obviously be of more value to those with archaeological qualifications and experience than to the layperson and it is likely that, in the present case, no such qualifications or experience pertain. The conclusions from these facts should be obvious and easy for anyone without prior prejudices to reach.

I have no problem with publicly stating that i would like you to be banned on a permanent basis, as you are no longer of any value whatsoever.

I am not personally seeking that, but I nevertheless think that if this kind of behaviour continues at every return to the forum, such a step may indeed be taken eventually in any case, although that, as I know you (Thal) appreciate), is for Nils alone to decide if and when he might so choose.

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

It is not, and never was my desire to offend anyone.  However, in the 'modern' day world that we live in - much offense has already occurred to Christians and nobody says anything.  How is it that one religion, the Roman Catholic religion, is the chosen favored religion of the EU.  What makes it the most 'powerful' religion in the world today, and others have no voice at the EU?  Look, the pope gets to ADDRESS the EU.  Hmm.  Doesn't that tell you something?  He has some clout.  I would like to hear from the pope himself why he thinks he deserves and is better than any other religious leader.  Do you think that is too much to ask - since Americans are for freedom of choice when it comes to religion, health care, and who is working out the 'deals.'

Secondly, of COURSE, I believe the holocaust happened.  I believe that Native Americans were pushed off their land, also.  I believe much evil has been done.  However much I like archeology and the bible - I don't really look back at people's messages here from two years ago and pick something out.  I really think that Marik is over-sensitive and doesn't really know to whom he is speaking.  Insults are a just a 'power point' way of pointing out someone elses flaws instead of addressing the REAL issues.  I don't think Marik likes or understands women who think for themselves, Christians, and/or people who don't want a One World Order.
You see, the process started now is all about things that cannot be adequately controlled by fair and due process.  For instance, you can accuse someone of practically anything on the internet.  There are newer and newer 'cyber laws' - definitions of 'cyber attack' - and 'cyber bullying' - but nobody actually says 'We're taking away your right to free speech because we don't think you should have it.  You have the 'wrong opinion.'

Btw, did you know there is an actual 'case' - in PC gear - that is called 'case closed.'  It's a suitcase.  You zip it up.  So...duly and effectively - I zip up when I realize the purpose and intent that Marik has is to 'transfer.'  He is probably unaware of his own tactics - but if he and i don't know each other - and he comes at me out of the blue using defamation as his weapon - what am I to do.  He has effectively used the internet as a sort of 'free speech' squasher. 

I would like to say in my own defense (since this isn't a court of law) that only G-d knows the intent and heart of someone.  If I say that history is repeating - do I have to be a historian?  Marik doesn't have to BE an archeologist to admit that archeology is helpful.  I don't have to write everything that archeology has proven - it's been done FOR ME by archeologists.  And, if I quote something (with sources) what's the difference between reading it online here and/or there to prove a point.

My original point was not to bash people, things, ideas - but to say that others seem to want to.  For instance, in Roman times, people were forced into complying with laws that forced them to abandon their own beliefs or be killed.  This was a world dominion.  Greek, Roman, Ottoman, Turk, whatever the system is attempted to become - it's forcing a group of people to comply with the terms of a world system according to their own 'ideals.'  What is wrong with saying 'the Third Reich' was off?  It was a system that was occultic and used tactics sometimes that people weren't even aware of to control masses.  I think that religions can do this too, but that doesn't mean that only one should have a voice.  That is even more ridiculous.

The bible warns of history repeating.  In the book of Daniel, the great Neb has a dream where he witnesses a statue and G-d gives him an interpretation of the dream.  He is told that He himself is the head of gold.  So this head of a statue is the  Babylonian empire. Interestingly, Saddam Hussein had rebuilt Neb's palace, the hanging gardens, and was very interested in the Babylonian empire.  Then, G-d says 'afteryou, there will arise another kingdom inferior to you, then another third kingdom of bronze.  This could be the Medo-Persian and the Greek dominions of the world.  Then, there will be a fourth kingdom as strong as iron.  The Roman Empire - fromt he time of Christ's and before (30BC to 476 AD) was pretty strong. Daniel goes on to say that it will crush and break all these in pieces.  The force used in the Roman Empire was not unlike all the 'reincarnations' of it - as the 'Holy Roman Empire.'  A combination of church and state.  Charlemagne is given both title of emperor and 'god' or protector and defender of the 'church.'  Here is the first reminder again of the emperor/gods of the first Roman Empire. 

Anyways, lastly there were the toes of the statue and Daniel said 'in the days of  THOSE kings (the last ones - that repeat this cycle of Roman Empire like world dominion) the G-d of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself rule forever.'  I think we are in those times.  Right before those times, the ten toes made of iron/clay (mixture of nations) will be set up.  Hitler called it 'the Third Reich' - but in his time it wasn't to be.  The system of governance will be a little different though.  We will have a 'beast' which controls things by technology - and tries to input what is in our minds (forehead) and what we do (right hand) and will not allow those who disagree to buy or sell.

This is a lack of freedom.  I am saying this is happening RIGHT NOW.  And, has been happening.  We have media bias towards all kinds of things because of ONE incident where one thing happens and there is a huge response to one person or idea.  But, where disagreement happens on the whole (ie doctors forced to perform abortion, etc) - secretly rules are made and then enforced on the basis of one thing that is blown out of proportion.  For instance, not everyone is going around having eight babies with invitro.  But, to suddenly have the government trying to control the population by means of laws and doctors deciding if a person is 'fit' - is really going beyond the legal bounds of the law of G-d.  G-d is the one who should decide many things that the government is now sticking their head into.

What person would not be affected by more and more personal intrusion of the government?  And, yet - nobody is complaining.  Like a frog in hot water - you'll all be boiled before you see what I'm talking about.  Although, there are many like me that want to express the opinion that we are not willing participants in the EU.  We are Americans that prefer to leave 'well enough alone.'  We don't want international law. It's not based on the Torah.  I hope that is specific enough. 

[ahinton]

It is not, and never was my desire to offend anyone.

That's as maybe, but you do so nevertheless.

However, in the 'modern' day world that we live in - much offense has already occurred to Christians

ONLY to Christians?

and nobody says anything.

Plenty of people say plenty of things about the ways in which all manner of groups are offended wilfully and otherwise - and many of them make out a far more plausible case then you do with your prejudiced rants.

How is it that one religion, the Roman Catholic religion, is the chosen favored religion of the EU.

I have no idea - because it isn't; indeed, there is no "chosen favoured religion" in EU where, I might remind you, I have lived for many years and you have never lived.

What makes it the most 'powerful' religion in the world today, and others have no voice at the EU?

Nothing does, beacuse it isn't; apart from the subscription to other sectors of Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, etc., there are vast swathes of atheism, agnosticism and other manifestations of secularism across EU.

I would like to hear from the pope himself why he thinks he deserves and is better than any other religious leader.

Then why not write and ask him rather than pestering us all here? If you do so and if he bothers to respond, he will no doubt tell you that your accusation is in any case wholly unfounded.

Americans are for freedom of choice when it comes to religion, health care, and who is working out the 'deals.'

You appear to imply that the EU does not offer such freedoms of choice to the citizens of its 27 nations and rising; this is arrant nonsense supported, as usual, by a notable absence of any corroborative evidence.

Secondly, of COURSE, I believe the holocaust happened.

Well, we must be grateful for small mercies, then, I suppose...

I believe that Native Americans were pushed off their land, also.

There is indeed truth in this also.

However much I like archeology and the bible - I don't really look back at people's messages here from two years ago and pick something out.  I really think that Marik is over-sensitive and doesn't really know to whom he is speaking.  Insults are a just a 'power point' way of pointing out someone elses flaws instead of addressing the REAL issues.  I don't think Marik likes or understands women who think for themselves, Christians, and/or people who don't want a One World Order.

It is not for me to act as Marik's mouthpiece but I will nevertheless comment on your remarks here. You make, once again, all manner of assumptions here which, as usual, are based only upon your belief systems (insofar as they are in any sense systematic, which I take leave to doubt) rather than factual evidence; it is up to Mark to challenge these assumptions which, I might remind you, add up to a pretty serious set of allegations. It is also up to him to identify (if so he chooses) specific details of what insults you have made in his or other directions at which he has taken offence.

You see, the process started now is all about things that cannot be adequately controlled by fair and due process.  For instance, you can accuse someone of practically anything on the internet.  There are newer and newer 'cyber laws' - definitions of 'cyber attack' - and 'cyber bullying' - but nobody actually says 'We're taking away your right to free speech because we don't think you should have it.  You have the 'wrong opinion.'

That is utter rubbish in the present context; if Marik believes that you have committed a number of insults in your posts and can draw attention to the fact that you have written them, then the evidence is there for all to read and it will be up to you to submit a defence or no defence.

Btw, did you know there is an actual 'case' - in PC gear - that is called 'case closed.'  It's a suitcase.  You zip it up.  So...duly and effectively - I zip up when I realize the purpose and intent that Marik has is to 'transfer.'  He is probably unaware of his own tactics - but if he and i don't know each other - and he comes at me out of the blue using defamation as his weapon - what am I to do.  He has effectively used the internet as a sort of 'free speech' squasher. 

Again, you are talking nonsense. What do you mean by "transfer"? For the sake of clarity and understanding, I hope that Marik will indeed identify exactly what it is you said and in which posts; we will all then know precisely what it is that he feels aggrieved about and it will then be over to you to seek to justify yourself. Until and unless that occurs, the case will not be "closed".

I would like to say in my own defense (since this isn't a court of law) that only G-d knows the intent and heart of someone.

No, Susan; you believe that only God knows this (and, God knows, I'm not going to use that ridiculous hyphen).

If I say that history is repeating - do I have to be a historian?

No, Susan; you appear to have gotten so caught up in your often disjointed and prejudiced rantings that you have omitted to notice that it is now others here who are claiming that history is repeating itself in the form of your utterly unreformed - rather than in any sense prodigal - return to the forum.

My original point was not to bash people, things, ideas - but to say that others seem to want to.

How arrogant and patronising of you! Whatever your point may have been (and that is almost never clear from what you write), the effect has been to remind those who have witnessed your past forum behaviour that nothing has changed and that your constant and voluminous screeds do indeed "bash people, things, ideas" by virtue of allowing no dissent or debate.

For instance, in Roman times, people were forced into complying with laws that forced them to abandon their own beliefs or be killed.  This was a world dominion.  Greek, Roman, Ottoman, Turk, whatever the system is attempted to become - it's forcing a group of people to comply with the terms of a world system according to their own 'ideals.'  What is wrong with saying 'the Third Reich' was off?  It was a system that was occultic and used tactics sometimes that people weren't even aware of to control masses.  I think that religions can do this too, but that doesn't mean that only one should have a voice.  That is even more ridiculous.

Then please stop writing as though only those subscribing to your very particular brand of creationist literal-interpretation of-every-Biblical-word Christian fundamentalism does and should have such a voice!

The bible warns of history repeating.  In the book of Daniel, the great Neb has a dream where he witnesses a statue and G-d gives him an interpretation of the dream.  He is told that He himself is the head of gold.  So this head of a statue is the  Babylonian empire. Interestingly, Saddam Hussein had rebuilt Neb's palace, the hanging gardens, and was very interested in the Babylonian empire.  Then, G-d says 'afteryou, there will arise another kingdom inferior to you, then another third kingdom of bronze.  This could be the Medo-Persian and the Greek dominions of the world.  Then, there will be a fourth kingdom as strong as iron.  The Roman Empire - fromt he time of Christ's and before (30BC to 476 AD) was pretty strong. Daniel goes on to say that it will crush and break all these in pieces.  The force used in the Roman Empire was not unlike all the 'reincarnations' of it - as the 'Holy Roman Empire.'  A combination of church and state.  Charlemagne is given both title of emperor and 'god' or protector and defender of the 'church.'  Here is the first reminder again of the emperor/gods of the first Roman Empire. 

Anyways, lastly there were the toes of the statue and Daniel said 'in the days of  THOSE kings (the last ones - that repeat this cycle of Roman Empire like world dominion) the G-d of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself rule forever.'  I think we are in those times.  Hitler called it 'the Third Reich' - but in his time it wasn't to be.  The system of governance will be a little different though.  We will have a 'beast' which controls things by technology - and tries to input what is in our minds (forehead) and what we do (right hand) and will not allow those who disagree to buy or sell.

There's a typical example of your own hand - using your own personal literal interpretations of carefully chosen Biblical texts and no other text sources in a vain and wearisome attempt to prove things about the immediate past, present and future.

This is a lack of freedom.  I am saying this is happening RIGHT NOW.  And, has been happening.

Yes, we've all noticed that it is indeed just that! So please desist from more of it!

We have media bias towards all kinds of things because of ONE incident where one thing happens and there is a huge response to one person or idea.  But, where disagreement happens on the whole (ie doctors forced to perform abortion, etc) - secretly rules are made and then enforced on the basis of one thing that is blown out of proportion.

Again, you display your prejudices by omitting mention of doctors who conduct abortions and who are not forced tto do anything other than follow the dictates of their medical training, experience and expertise.

For instance, not everyone is going around having eight babies with invitro.

Thank God for that!

But, to suddenly have the government trying to control the population by means of laws and doctors deciding if a person is 'fit' - is really going beyond the legal bounds of the law of G-d.  G-d is the one who should decide many things that the government is now sticking their head into.

Nonsense! And He isn't doing it, so presumably He agrees that it's nonsense.

What person would not be affected by more and more personal intrusion of the government?  And, yet - nobody is complaining.

I am with you on the spread of undue governmental interference - but people ARE complaining!

Like a frog in hot water - you'll all be boiled before you see what I'm talking about.

Not even then, Susan - not even then!

Although, there are many like me that want to express the opinion that we are not willing participants in the EU.

How can you be any kind of "participant" in EU? You are an American citizen, not an EU one!

We are Americans that prefer to leave 'well enough alone.'

Well, I for one do wish that one particular American would leave us alone for once...

I have not at all enjoyed writing this but I believe that it is necessary in the probably forlorn hope of helping you to see at least a little sense.

Best,

Alistair

[db05]

I have no problem with publicly stating that i would like you to be banned on a permanent basis, as you are no longer of any value whatsoever.

Thal

I have no problem with publicly agreeing with Thal.

db05

[thalbergmad]

Let us conduct a small experiment.

I hereby most humbly beg that nobody make any further posts in this thread and lets see if she shuts up.

Thal

[ahinton]

Let us conduct a small experiment.

I hereby most humbly beg that nobody make any further posts in this thread and lets see if she shuts up.

Sorry to spoil your entreaty, even if only momentarily, but it's not only this thread that contains evidence of the problem that currently concerns us - and I would not like to have to seek to encourage members to avoid posting in any of the affected threads with that purpose in mind, as the consequence of that would be tantamount to offering a single member the power to prevent - er - what's it called - ah, yes, I remember - FREE SPEECH!

Best,

Alistair

[m]

No deal. 

I had no illusion on that one.

I do not recall ever insulting your wife because I know neither you or her... Tell me what I said.  I just don't recall because i think you are mistaken about my impression of you and i don't even recall what you said about your own wife if you said something. 

You obviously have whether very short or very selective type of memory. One or the other, I don't have much time and desire to get back into that crap, so considering once I have already wrote you all of that in great details, you could just make a search, if you are interested to refresh.
 

feel that it would not be very smart to insult anyone in the first place.

Then how about the part of my message you conviniently dropped out, i.e. the part about your highly offensive behavior on this board. Of course, I cannot talk for every member of this community, but it seems that many would agree, i. e. the part:
Next, you apologize for your deeply disrespectful attitude towards members of this community, with your constant trolling and spamming (which is against Internet ethics and ethiquette). After that you apologize to those members of this community whose fine threads you mercilessly ruined with your tactless and tastless rants.

Marik, it is you that is actually afraid of someone different than yourself.  You are unaccepting of Christians.  This is really something you have to work out for yourself.  I neither ask you for an apology nor wish any evil upon you.  In fact, if you wish - consider yourself prayed for for blessings. 

First of all, what makes you think you know who I am, what I am afraid of, and what is my relationship with Christians? I never speak about my believes publically, as I consider them my private matters, which are none of anybody's business, other than mine. All I can tell you, if it makes you happy, I deeply respect peoples believes, whatever they are, I am however, afraid of religious fanatics, i.e. people, who lives and blindly follows what the books tell them (regardless whether it is Bible, Coran, or Torah), people who think only their believes are right and their way of living life is the only right way, people who feel they are entitled to tell others what to do, what to believe, and how to live ones life, people who lives by principle "who is not with us, is against of us".
Second, on which grounds you feel yourself entitled to tell me what I REALLY HAVE (!!!) TO DO or work out. Sorry to tell you, but this is none of your business, so I'd greatly appreciate you keeping your nose out of that.
And third, if and when I wish or feel a need for a prayer I will ask people whom I trust and respect. Sorry to tell you, you did very little to gain either (and so far managed to accomplish quite an opposite), so it is very unlikely you would be the one I will approach.

Look, I am a housewife, I have three children, and your considering me 'elite' enough to insult - is rather demeaning to a woman. 

I met many housewives and some of them were quite intelligent and fun people. I don't consider you anything, let alone "elite", so since you mentioned that, maybe that would be better if you do whatever you do the best, i.e. multiply, take care of house and children, etc., rather than stick your nose into others people lives and "teach" them how to live their lives and what to believe.

Have you ever treated a woman like a woman?  I mean, what do you actually think and feel about women? 

Excuse me, but again, quite frankly, this is none of your business.

You say that you are married - can your wife come on here and actually tell me her feelings about something - or must I speak through a microphone to her and say 'i'm sorry for something that i said - but i don't really know you and i wish that i knew what it was.'  She might actually acknowledge the place that i am coming from. 

Again, what makes you feel that my wife would enjoy talking to you, let alone, would be even remotely interested to know the place you are coming from?

Marik, you need to calm down and consider that not everyone is on your 'high standard' of scholarly expression.

Yet, again, what makes you feel you are entitled to tell me what I NEED, and what to CONSIDER?

Have a good day

[goldentone]

I daresay that it true, but will she do so?

History isn't repeating. History is bunk. I know that must be true beause it was said by a very famous American.

Best,

Alistair

That was Truman, was it not?

[db05]

Sorry, pianistimo, but the mere fact that history repeats itself shows that G-d either does not exist, or delights in having humanity suffer again and again. Just like you delight in coming back here to make this community suffer again and again with your posting.

[morningstar]

Sorry, pianistimo, but the mere fact that history repeats itself shows that G-d either does not exist, or delights in having humanity suffer again and again. Just like you delight in coming back here to make this community suffer again and again with your posting.

Ooooh I have an analogy to disprove this! Well, part of it anyway...For most parents with children they let them have fun and sometimes make their own mistakes but they always keep an eye out right? Well maybe God does the same thing, letting us make our own mistakes to learn from them. Sadly that doesn't happen, which brings us back to the title...

[term]

Sorry, pianistimo, but the mere fact that history repeats itself shows that G-d either does not exist, or delights in having humanity suffer again and again.

I don't think it shows any of that. Have you considered the possibility that history repeats itself because humans don't learn?