Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Sidney
Colonel
Joined: 31-Jan-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 690
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Was the cult of Great Mother exchanged with Jesus? Posted: 03-Mar-2014 at 16:57 |
For Catholics and others the healing properties of holy objects is due to the workings of the Holy Spirit - not due to the objects being God/gods themselves.
I don't think the Black Stone at Kaaba is mentioned in the Quran. Islamic tradition believes the stone fell from Heaven to mark the place where Adam should build an alter to God. The Black Stone still rests at or near the same spot. It was not originally broken into pieces. This is said to have happened in the late 7th Century, with further damage occurring in the 10th and 11th.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 03-Mar-2014 at 21:10 |
So Sidney, just what sources of your above response fall into the believable? LOL
Some where, some time, I believe that these stones were once found in Jerusalem? But I am old and my memory sometimes fails me.
But, before all else, there seems to be little or no information concerning these "stones" that can be deemed reliable!
Do you agree?
Ron
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 03-Mar-2014 at 21:17 |
Originally posted by Sidney
For Catholics and others the healing properties of holy objects is due to the workings of the Holy Spirit - not due to the objects being God/gods themselves.
I don't think the Black Stone at Kaaba is mentioned in the Quran. Islamic tradition believes the stone fell from Heaven to mark the place where Adam should build an alter to God. The Black Stone still rests at or near the same spot. It was not originally broken into pieces. This is said to have happened in the late 7th Century, with further damage occurring in the 10th and 11th.
Yes! What a bunch of malarkey! The "stones of Moses" disappear into history, without a mention, and the "Stone" or "Stones" of Islam just appear and then become fragmented!!!!!!!!!!!
Quoting a famous book; "Something wicked this way comes!"
And you also said, "For Catholics and others the healing properties of holy objects is due to the workings of the Holy Spirit - not due to the objects being God/gods themselves."
And another way to explain things that you, and your church do not want to be conceded!!! If it is not so, then just why do those who want the powers try to become as close to them as possible?
Ron
Ron
|
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Sidney
Colonel
Joined: 31-Jan-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 690
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Mar-2014 at 15:09 |
As I mentioned in my post, the Black Stone was first damaged in the 7th Century (AD). The history of its damage in the 7th, 10th and 11th Centuries appear in Islamic writing. This is reliable history. It cannot be the broken Tablets of Law, which were broken many centuries before and many miles away (if they existed at all).
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Mar-2014 at 17:49 |
Originally posted by Sidney
As I mentioned in my post, the Black Stone was first damaged in the 7th Century (AD). The history of its damage in the 7th, 10th and 11th Centuries appear in Islamic writing. This is reliable history. It cannot be the broken Tablets of Law, which were broken many centuries before and many miles away (if they existed at all).
|
But Sidney, you know that I delve in "Black Magic!", or "Fomenko World!" Laugh! Thus those dates you believe in are subject to change with a Fomenko smile!
You just don't really know too much about the Fomenko Group do you?
This bunch considers the Old Testament to be younger than the so called New Testament! Thus all of that predicting nonsense is explained!
Got to run!
Cheers!
Ron
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Sidney
Colonel
Joined: 31-Jan-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 690
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Mar-2014 at 18:17 |
I'm aware of Fomenko's desire to fold history in on itself. I'm aware Fomenko has posited the theory that the Kaaba is the Tabernacle. It doesn't alter my answers.
The Ark of the Covenant is not described as containing the broken tablets of Law.
The Quran teaches that there were no broken tablets of Law.
The history of the origin and breaking of the Black Stone does not resemble the story of the origin or breaking of the tablets of Law, even in passing.
I suggest you do some research outside of Fomenko's book to discover what the accounts actually say. Fomenko is largely ignorant about Jewish and Muslim literature and tradition, regardless of whether he believes their dates are authentic or not.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Mar-2014 at 21:02 |
Many thanks for your suggestions Sidney! But, I have greater "fish to fry!"
And just how much credit do you give to Muslim sources. Jewish sources or Christian ones?
I give little credence to any of them!
But, that is just me! Please continue to keep me straight!!!
Regards, and thanks!
Ron
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Mar-2014 at 21:10 |
Originally posted by Sidney
I'm aware of Fomenko's desire to fold history in on itself. I'm aware Fomenko has posited the theory that the Kaaba is the Tabernacle. It doesn't alter my answers.
The Ark of the Covenant is not described as containing the broken tablets of Law.
So! Lots of things are not mentioned! The truth is "no one knows" and "no one can prove anything concerning this!"
The Quran teaches that there were no broken tablets of Law.
The history of the origin and breaking of the Black Stone does not resemble the story of the origin or breaking of the tablets of Law, even in passing.
Ditto, my answer above! Know one knows or cannot prove or disprove any of my statements.
I suggest you do some research outside of Fomenko's book to discover what the accounts actually say. Fomenko is largely ignorant about Jewish and Muslim literature and tradition, regardless of whether he believes their dates are authentic or not. |
Research "outside of Fomenko" does not present myself or you with any real "evidence" from any "original sources!", Period! If you can provide any real "original sources" for most anything before the rise of the "printing press" and its acceptance in the Western world, then please show me? Yes, if they are "original" then you can or should also, "Show me the Money!" LOL
Priceless is hardly a word any more!
Ron
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
medenaywe
AE Moderator
Master of Meanings
Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Mar-2014 at 08:57 |
Now i see why languages as they are today were invented:You can speak all day telling nothing at all! ![Smile Smile](http://www.allempires.com/forum/smileys/smiley1.gif) !Regards.
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Sidney
Colonel
Joined: 31-Jan-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 690
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Mar-2014 at 17:14 |
Originally posted by medenaywe
Now i see why languages as they are today were invented:You can speak all day telling nothing at all! !Regards. |
Agreed. You can teach, but you can't make people learn.
Edited by Sidney - 05-Mar-2014 at 17:15
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Mar-2014 at 23:20 |
It seems that when the question is asked, that there mostly exists silence as a result! I'd bet most of you never were asked to prove the existence of any documents that are the "originals!" Smile!
They are quite rare, are they not?
Regards, Ron
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
medenaywe
AE Moderator
Master of Meanings
Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Mar-2014 at 13:42 |
In front of You i have our languages as proves Ron!It looks that Alchemist exists!
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Sidney
Colonel
Joined: 31-Jan-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 690
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Mar-2014 at 18:23 |
Originally posted by opuslola
It seems that when the question is asked, that there mostly exists silence as a result! I'd bet most of you never were asked to prove the existence of any documents that are the "originals!" Smile!
They are quite rare, are they not?
Regards, Ron |
You are right. Originals really are rare. The further back in time you go the rarer it is that originals have survived, produced as they are upon perishable materials. Reliance on copies of copies of the original is often the best that can be done, and research into the veracity of those copies is a big academic discipline.
Understanding this, why is printed material any more reliable? Where does the printed version come from? - from originals that are rarely if ever seen. Editors and publishers have more control over the final results than the authors do.
Have you ever seen an original Fomenko? I don't mean the edited and redrafted printed works, but the actual original text? Who knows what errors, fallacies and forgeries have been inserted by deceitful publishers and editors intent on masking the real facts of Fomenko's research?
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2014 at 19:41 |
Yes Sidney, even today, with the best possible concerns, it seems that the USA has had problems keeping intact those earliest documents of the revolution of 1776 CE!
But, since these problems seem to exist within certain types of documents dating from a little more than 225 years or so, to the type of material that seems to have lasted for a thousand years or more in environments not as well considered as "good" in abandoned monasteries in the North of Europe, which are considered to have been found, in readable condition, by certain persons of the 16th century CE, and later, that were reportedly copied and thus trans versed from the middle or late Roman period to the Renaissance!
Dark, dank rooms located upon the North Sea, and other out of the way places just don't seem to be the perfect places to find the works of Ancient Pagan Romans! It seems that the Pontiff of the Roman Church at one time or more even ordered the destruction of these very documents! And strangely, it seems these very Monks actually kept these "pagan" documents safe! Somehow????
But it seems that in the early 15th to the late 16th century, these documents were readily turning into dust. Thus, we have certain documents that are reportedly "actual copies of the originals!" LOL
That, my friends is the truth! None of these documents have actually made it to today, and it is only via the printing press that most of these so called "copies" of the originals have made it to today!
But, please don't take my word for it!
Just except that all we have is innuendo, hearsay, accusation, and less!
Regards,
Ron
Edited by opuslola - 08-Mar-2014 at 20:01
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2014 at 20:05 |
Originally posted by Sidney
As I mentioned in my post, the Black Stone was first damaged in the 7th Century (AD). The history of its damage in the 7th, 10th and 11th Centuries appear in Islamic writing. This is reliable history. It cannot be the broken Tablets of Law, which were broken many centuries before and many miles away (if they existed at all).
|
So, you believe in the Islamic version and not believe in the Jewish version?
Upon which side of the "field of play" do you reside?
The "East Bank" or the "West?"
Regards, Ron
PS, I don't believe in either side! Both are pure lies at best!
Edited by opuslola - 08-Mar-2014 at 20:07
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Sidney
Colonel
Joined: 31-Jan-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 690
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2014 at 20:30 |
Originally posted by opuslola
Originally posted by Sidney
As I mentioned in my post, the Black Stone was first damaged in the 7th Century (AD). The history of its damage in the 7th, 10th and 11th Centuries appear in Islamic writing. This is reliable history. It cannot be the broken Tablets of Law, which were broken many centuries before and many miles away (if they existed at all).
|
So, you believe in the Islamic version and not believe in the Jewish version?
Upon which side of the "field of play" do you reside?
The "East Bank" or the "West?"
Regards, Ron
PS, I don't believe in either side! Both are pure lies at best! |
I can believe in both, because as I have said before - the Black Stone of Islam and the Broken Tablets of Judaism are not the same thing. Muslim belief does not identify the two as the same thing. Judaic tradition does not either.
But if both traditions are pure lies, as you believe, then you have no evidence for the existence of the broken Tablets of Law. Therefore identifying the Black Stone with non existent Tablets is untenable.
Whether we take my view, or your view, the conclusion is the same!! We agree - the Black Stone is not the broken Tablets of Moses.
Edited by Sidney - 08-Mar-2014 at 20:35
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2014 at 21:52 |
So, sir, can you give us all a play by play understanding how "one" stone came to be 12 or so? over 600 or so years?
I look forward to this little trip into fairy land! LOL Sorry, but the Jewish version with the golden calf and fiery bush is just as funny.
So, go ahead and let us have it!!! 600 years of rock breaking, parts one thru ?
And you wrote in the post above these words;
"Whether we take my view, or your view, the conclusion is the same!! We agree - the Black Stone is not the broken Tablets of Moses."
That is a big NO, NO! Amigo! There exists no agreement at all. I still insist upon some relationship! Because I do not accept the dating of either religion based upon todays chronology.
Thus Islam is an invention of the 16th/ 17th century CE, at the latest!
Regards, Ron
Edited by opuslola - 08-Mar-2014 at 22:09
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2014 at 22:20 |
So, Sidney, can you provide us a step by step history of this great meteorite? , which allegedly struck the floor of the dry desert and was retrieved as a sacred object by some fellows on camel back, about 6000-50 years after the birth or death of Jesus and his uncles Moses, and Joshua?, etc. ?
Come on, give it too us! We can take if you can! Smile! PBTH
Ron
Edited by opuslola - 08-Mar-2014 at 22:21
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
medenaywe
AE Moderator
Master of Meanings
Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2014 at 00:46 |
So you are commenting about non reliable version of documents.By the way we miss the subject of
this topic Ron!Great Mother&religions succssesors of it!
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |
Sidney
Colonel
Joined: 31-Jan-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 690
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2014 at 17:54 |
Opuslola. On the one hand you tell me that you believe the Islamic and Judaic traditions are fairy tales and a pack of lies. Yet on the other hand you insist that both traditions are true, and are talking about the same object.
You can't seem to follow your own argument, and certainly cannot present it in a coherent manner. I see no point in making the effort to elaborate on the accepted history of the Kaaba, which you have already prejudged. You believe the theory presented in Fomenko's books, and can't think beyond what his publishers present you with.
Jewish tradition tells what happened to the Broken Tablets of the Law. The Broken Tablets were never preserved - they were never placed in the Ark of the Covenant. It was the unbroken Tablets that were preserved and placed in the Ark. Such a tradition clearly cannot be reconciled with the Fomenko's fiction that the Broken Tablets were preserved. There is no tradition, that says the Broken Tablets were kept. Fomenko seems disinclined to comment on this lack of tradition, nor does he acknowledge the sources that describe what did happen to the Broken Tablets. This avoidance, and his creation of a tradition that doesn't exist (ie that the Broken Tablets were preserved), makes me question how much faith I can place in his presented research.
Don't you find it suspicious that a published and edited book should emphasis so much that only published and edited books are to be trusted? Its as if the book trade, fearful of declining sales, is seeking to promote its own importance by throwing suspicion on sources that are not published and edited. It cannot attack the internet, because what book sales that do remain are upheld through well known on-line retail sites. Indeed, the largest of these online retail sites does not deal in manuscripts and unedited paperwork, which raises the question of whether the promotion of published books as the only means of gaining reliable information is not actually being generated by these internet retail sites themselves.
Just ask yourself - Did Fomenko's book exist before the internet existed? Why are mathematicians, the very discipline that formulated the internet, the creators also of the 'New Chronology'? Just who exactly is publishing Fomenko's books? - the publishing company does not exist at the address provided (check for yourself!). BIG questions are being missed here!!!
Edited by Sidney - 09-Mar-2014 at 18:03
|
![Back to Top Back to Top](forum_images/back_to_top.png) |