Was the cult of Great Mother exchanged with Jesus?

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

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).

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.

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

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

In front of You i have our languages as proves Ron!It looks that Alchemist exists!

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

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

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

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