On 13 Jun, 14:58, "pearl" <t...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
[snip]
> > # All this is well known. What might your point be?
>
> > So why tell us to refer to the NT for facts if you know it's been
altere=
d?
If you remember where this started, someone claimed that Jesus had
told people not to eat meat. I asked where that was in the NT - which
would be the obvious source for any sayings of Jesus.
> How much do you know about the early MSS of the NT? That some
> epigrapha never made it to the Bible is well known - that is what I
> was referring to. That the existing books in the NT were substantially
> altered I never did say. Please do not read more into my posts that
> what I actually say.
A fair bit, though I must admit the NT is not my speciality, the OT
is. This from an old post of mine, where I had to explain a bit about
it:
"The original texts of the NT were almost certainly written on scrolls
of
papyrus. This was the cheapest and the most available writing material
in the
1st century Palestine. Scrolls, however, are very ***bersome to use
after a
certain lenght, and a scroll of the Pauline Letters would have been
very
difficult to use, especially if the reader was trying to locate a
passage in
one of the letters. The entire NT on a scroll would have been a near
impossibility. The solution was the form of book known as the codex.
Indeed,
all of our modern books are in the form of codices. A codex can be of
any
lenght and all of its pages are equally accessible. Another im****tant
feature
of the codex is that its pages can be written on both sides, thus
conserving
expensive writing material. The early Christian church took to codices
with
great eagerness, 99% of the known NT manuscripts are in codex form.
By 1989 there were 5488 manuscripts of the Greek NT catalogued by the
Munster
Institute for New Testament Textual Research. This amount of
manuscripts,
however, does not indicate that all of them are neat copies of the
entire NT,
indeed most of them are fragmentary, or contain only parts of the
text. Only
59 of the manuscripts contain the entire NT text.
In addition to the actual NT manuscripts, other material such as the
NT
quotes by the Church Fathers are used in evaluation. This, however,
has some
inherent problems. First, we cannot tell whether the Church Father had
a
manuscript in front of him or was quoting from memory. Second, he
rarely
tells us which book he was quoting from. Third, none of the original
manuscripts of Church Fathers have survived. Almost all of the copies
of the
early Church Fathers' writings date from the Middle Ages. One
interesting
fact about the Church Fathers' writings is that a good critical
edition of a
Father's text or the discovery of an early manuscript always moves
the
Father's quote of the NT _away_ from the Textus Receptus and closer to
the
text of our modern critical editions of the Greek NT.
The cl***** of manuscripts are from oldest to youngest: papyri,
uncials,
minuscules and lectionares. I will give a brief description of each of
the
categories below.
The earliest of the NT manuscriptal finds, the papyri, are found only
in
Egypt and by 1989 there were 96 of them catalogued. The climate in
Egypt is
dry enough to preserve even the fragile papyri, given that they were
discarded above the inundation line. Despite that, most of the papyri
are
fragmentary; some consist of only one or two leaves. Only a few of
the
papyri, for example P72 and P46 contain complete texts. Most of the
others
are incomplete. The oldest papyrus contains 5 verses from John 18 and
is
dated 100-150 CE. Most papyri date from the 3rd and 4th centuries.
The uncials, of which there are 299 samples catalogued, derive their
name
from the writing style used in them. In fact, papyri are also written
in
uncials, and the difference between papyri and uncials lie in the
writing
material: they are written on parchment instead of papyrus. Uncials
become
common in the 4th century, and the bulk of surviving uncials are from
6th to
9th centuries. Being in the codical form, several of them contain the
full NT
texts. The best known uncial manuscripts are the Codex Sinaiticus
(Aleph) 4th
century, Codex Alexandrinus (A) 5th century, and Codex Vaticanus (B)
4th
century.
Minuscules, which also derive their name from the writing used in
them, become
the major form of manuscripts from 9th century onwards and some of
them were
even written after the invention of printing. 2182 of them are
catalogued. The
most im****tant innovation in minuscules is the appearance of accents,
breathings, word spacing, paragraphs and punctuation."
There are indeed reams of pseudepigrapha, but I tend to become very
suspicious when a 'translation' appears out of thin air, with no-one
else ever seen the MSS it is claimed to have been translated from - in
other words, no provenance. This is certainly true with Szekely's
Essene Gospel of Peace and now that I have had some time to look it
up, Ousley's Gospel of the Twelve. It appears there was some kind of
fa****on earlier to claim to find texts nobody has ever seen before -
or since in Tibetan monasteries. Churchward's Mu books make exactly
the same claim.
Both texts also include attitudes not attested anywhere in real
ancient texts. I have already posted Szekely's health fads, and Ousley
(who we know was a vegetarian) has quite a number of them as well.
> What do you think "editing or writing" means?
This is actually truer of the OT than the NT. The OT has been edited,
rewritten and generally mangled through the generations before it
finally got its canonic form - though interesting snippets that
represent earlier theological thinking still remain here and there.
That the NT has not been through such a thorough process can be
clearly seen if we start comparing the theological ideas of the NT
books with each other. We can clearly distinguish quite a few of them,
such as Pauline, Hebraizing and Johannine, which do not agree with
each other as much as they should, had the texts been edited to
conform to the final, canonical doctrine - which would be the Pauline
one.
[snip]
> > #Trouble for this hypothesis is, we do have papyri fragments that
=A0do
> > #not differ from the current books of the NT we have, the earliest
> > #being the Rylands Library Papyrus P52 which dates roughly to 150-170
> > #CE.
>
> > Any mention of eating fish therein?
>
> I simply gave you an example of an early papyrus. That particular
> fragment does not mention fish eating, but the earliest MSS of Mark,
> the Sinaitic c.a. 370 CE - which is the earliest of gospels and
> certainly mentions fish eating.
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Who wrote it?
Do you mean the MSS or the Gospel of Mark?
> > #[snip some irrelevancies about the Albigensians]
>
> > They didn't eat flesh. =A0Where/how do you think that came about?
>
> Who knows where people develop their ideas from. But what is certain
> is that they did not get that from the Bible. Do you really want me to
> quote even more extensively from the Bible as regards meat eating as
> allowed? Can and will do.
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Don't bother. =A0You've been told from where they got "the idea".
Do you mean this bit? "They invoke with their own interpretation
and according to their abilities the authority of the Gospels and the
Epistles..."
That would be the NT then. This is also from Gui, who is quoting an
Inquisition re****t on the Albigenses:
"Moreover they read from the Gospels and the Epistles in the vulgar
tongue, applying and expounding them in their favor and against the
condition of the Roman Church in a manner which it would take too long
to describe in detail."
I don't see any mention of any pseudephigrapha here, the inquisitor
would have mentioned those, if they had been in use. This refers to
the canonical NT, which they clearly interpreted rather radically.
And I have been _told_ quite a few things, but you'll surely excuse me
if I decline to believe everything I'm told.
[ snip]
> > #Someone's confusing ????, 'naziyr', with ?a???ai??, 'nazooraios'. The
> > #Hebrew word comes from the root ???, 'nzr' which means ' to dedicate,
> > #consecrate, separate.' =A0The form 'naziyr' is in hiphil and is used
in=
> > #two senses: 'to keep sacredly separate' or 'to be a Nazarite, live as
> > #a Nazarite.' The vows of the Nazirite required them to abstain from
> > #wine, wine vinegar, grapes, raisins, and according to some alcohol
and
> > #vinegar from alcohol, refrain from cutting the hair on their head and
> > #to avoid human corpses and graves, even those of family members, and
> > #any structure which contains such. There is no mention of refraining
> > #from meat whatsoever. And before you try to tell me again that the
> > #early RCC edited the texts, they did not have access to the Dead Sea
> > #Scrolls, which contain the same laws.
>
> > "The Nasaraeans - they were jews by nationality - originally from
> > Gileaditis (where the early followers of Yeshu-Maria fled after the
> > martyrdom of James the Lord's brother), Bashanitis and the
> > Transjordon . . . =A0They acknowledged Moses and believed that he
> > had received laws - not this law, however, but some other. And so,
> > they were jews who kept all the Jewish observances, but they
> > would not offer sacrifice or eat meat. =A0They considered it unlawful
> > to eat meat or make sacrifices with it. They claim that these Books
> > are fictions, and that none of these customs were instituted by the
> > fathers.This was the difference between the Nasaraeans and the
> > others. . . (Epiphanius, Panarion 1:18) - ibid.
>
> Epiphanius lived in the 5th century CE - which means he did not have
> any first-hand evidence whatsoever. You'll have to do better than
> that.
> --------------------------------
>
> Epiphanius - early christian scholar, ca 310-20 - 403 AD. =A0Do you
> really think he wasn't basing it on knowledge, just making it all up?
Hello, excuse me? Does 70 CE mean anything to you? The destruction of
the Temple? The Dias****a? How many nazirites would have been around
the 5th century?
The last person mentioned we can suspect having been a Nazirite is
John the Baptist - and he is explicitly said to have been living on
locusts and honey.
You see, without the Temple the nazirite vow becomes a tad difficult.
At the end of the nazirite period the nazirite was to bring three
sacrifices in the Temple in Jerusalem. The first iwas a ewe for a sin
offering, the second was alamb for an elevation offering, and finally
a ram as a peace offering along with a basket of matzah and their
grain and drink offerings. After bringing the sacrifices the nazirite
shaved his or her head in the outer courtyard of the Temple.
Which sacrifices also make it quite interesting, as regards nazirite
diet - meat eating is not forbidden for them in the Bible.
I suspect Eusebius had been talking to people who no longer had any
clear memory of what being a nazirite entailed.
[snip]
> The
> Hebrew word comes from the root ???, 'nzr' which means ' to dedicate,
> consecrate, separate.' =A0The form 'naziyr' is in hiphil and is used in
> two senses: 'to keep sacredly separate' or 'to be a Nazarite, live as
> a Nazarite.' The vows of the Nazirite required them to abstain from
> wine, wine vinegar, grapes, raisins, and according to some alcohol
> and
> vinegar from alcohol, refrain from cutting the hair on their head and
> to avoid human corpses and graves, even those of family members, and
> any structure which contains such. There is no mention of refraining
> from meat whatsoever. And before you try to tell me again that the
> early RCC edited the texts, they did not have access to the Dead Sea
> Scrolls, which contain the same laws."
>
> =A0Now deal with that.
> ---------------------------
>
> Your confusion? =A0Not my problem.
The only one who is confused - or in denial - here is you. How on
earth do you manage to dismiss what is actually being said?
Do you also deny there was such a town as Nazara? In Greek the ending -
aios means 'of, from [a location].
Really, pearl, if you want to debate the issue, TRY learning at least
something of the original languages. That will actually help you to
understand at least a little of what is really going on. Relying on
translations is not a good idea, and also, given your tendency to pick
modern fakes as your sources, try also to develop some critical
faculty when it comes to selecting your sources.
> > > >On the contrary, let's see what the Bible really says as regards
Jesu=
s
> > > >and animal-based food:
>
> > > >Mark 6:38-41: "He said to them, "How many loaves do you have? Go
and
> > > >see." When they found out, they said, "Five - and two fish." Then
he
> > > >directed them all to sit down in groups on the green grass. So they
> > > >reclined in groups of hundreds and fifties. He took the five loaves
> > > >and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and
broke
> > > >the loaves. He gave them to his disciples to serve the people, and
he=
> > > >divided the two fish among them all."
>
> > > '4. And the day was far spent, and his disciples came unto him and
sai=
d,
> > > This is a desert place, and now the time is far passed. Send them
away=
,
> > > that they may go into the country round about into the villages, and
b=
uy
> > > themselves bread, for they have nothing to eat.
> > > 5. He answered and said unto them, Give ye them to eat. And they say
> > > unto him, Shall we go and buy two hundred pennyworth of bread, and
> > > give them to eat ?
> > > 6. He saith unto them, How many loaves have ye? go and see. And when
> > > they knew, they said, Six loaves and seven clusters of grapes. And
he
> > > commanded them to make all sit down by companies of fifty upon the
> > > grass. And they sat down in ranks by hundreds and by fifties.
> > > 7. And when he had taken the six loaves and the seven clusters of
grap=
es,
> > > he looked up to heaven, and blessed and brake the loaves, and the
grap=
es
> > > also and gave them to his disciples to set before them and they
divide=
d
> > > them among them all.
> > > 8. And they did all eat and were filled. And they took up twelve
baske=
ts
> > > full of the fragments that were left. And they that did eat of the
loa=
ves
> > > and of the fruit were about five thousand men, women and children,
and=
> > > he taught them many things.
> > > ..'http://reluctant-messenger.com/essene/gospel_3.htm#Lection290
>
> > #You're not quoting your source,
>
> > What do you mean?
>
> Try not to be dishonest, will you?
>
> ----------------------------
>
> I'm NOT being dishonest at all.
Yeah, riiight... I did not see book, chapter and verse indicated the
way I indicated it.
> -----------------------------------------
>
> What you actually quote is from the fake Szekely "gospel", but there
> is a real fishless one in Mark as well. Please TRY to actually read
> the material you're arguing about!
>
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> That's for you to do. =A0Just follow the link provided.
I've read it, quoted it AND gave the reference - so what are you on
about?
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Mark 8:1-8 =A0"In those days when there was again a great crowd without
> anything to eat, he called his disciples and said to them, =91I have
> compassion for the crowd, because they have been with me now for three
> days and have nothing to eat. 3f I send them away hungry to their
> homes, they will faint on the way=97and some of them have come from a
> great distance.=92 His disciples replied, =91How can one feed these
people=
> with bread here in the desert?=92 He asked them, =91How many loaves do
you=
> have?=92 They said, =91Seven.=92 Then he ordered the crowd to sit down
on
> the ground; and he took the seven loaves, and after giving thanks he
> broke them and gave them to his disciples to distribute; and they
> distributed them to the crowd. They had also a few small fish; and
> after blessing them, he ordered that these too should be distributed.
> They ate and were filled; and they took up the broken pieces left
> over, seven baskets full."
>
> Just a typical parallel narrative from a different source in the same
> text, common enough - if you have the slightest clue what exegetics is
> all about.
>
> -----------------------------
>
> You stated there is a fishless account.
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> In other words, you do not give your source in book, chaper and verse.
> Simple enough?
I did - what the hell do you think Mark 6:38-41 would be? Okay, let's
explain the basics to the clueless, then. 'Mark' is the Gospel of
Mark, '6' is chapter 6 and '38-41' are the verses quoted. This is the
standard way of citing book, chapter and verse - but I guess you've
never seen it before.
> > #but yep, that is also in the Gospels.
>
> > No. =A0The fishy version you posted is in the NT.
>
> BOTH are in the NT, my dear, they both are, as I have just shown.
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> You've just shown that both accounts mention fish.
Oops, my mistake. Note to self: do not post around 2 am when dead
tired and likely to miss a couple of fishes. :-)
> =A0What you quoted was from the Szekely
>
> --------------
> translation. =A0No. it isn't.
> --------------
Bit hard to keep all the fakes straight, there are so many around -
and the Szekely one is quite often used.
> forgery. Substituting 'fruit'
> for 'fish' is dishonest to the extreme. How on EARTH do you manage to
> translate ?????, 'ichthys,' 'fish' as 'fruit' - which in Koinee Greek
> would be '?p??a', 'opo:ra', 'fruit'?
>
> Remember "editing or writing"? =A0Who did that?
In this case, we certainly know that. It was Ousley, as he wrote the
whole mess.
> > #So they have 2 variants of the same story, one complete with fish and
> > #one without. This is typical with garbled accounts - as none of the
> > #Gospels are by eyewitnesses - but does NOT remove the fact that fish
> > #is mentioned in the parallel narrative.
>
> > Look again. =A0Fish are mentioned in both accounts in Mark.
>
> Oaky, admitted, my mistake - but the texts undermine your stance even
> further.
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> Well done. =A0Those texts are fraudulent.
And Ouslely's completely writing a brand new gospel is NOT
fraudulent???? Oh DEAR....
Btw, I would be curious to know to exactly WHAT do you base your claim
that Mark is fraudulent? At least it is some 1800 years older than
Ousley's little pamphlet. And if O'Callaghan is correct and the 7Q5
really contains Mark 6:52-53, that would make it 1900 years older than
Ousley's fake.
> > > >Mark 7:18-19: "He said to them, "Are you so foolish? Don't you
> > > >understand that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot
defil=
e
> > > >him? For it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and then goes
> > > >out into the sewer." (This means all foods are clean.)"
>
> > > '2. And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, they who
partake
> > > of benefits which are gotten by wronging one of God's creatures,
> > > cannot be righteous: nor can they touch holy things, or teach the
> > > mysteries of the kingdom, whose hands are stained With blood, or
> > > whose mouths are defiled with flesh.
> > > 3. God giveth the grains and the fruits of the earth for food: and
for=
> > > righteous man truly there is no other lawful sustenance for the
body.
> > > 4. The robber who breaketh into the house made by man is guilty, but
> > > they who break into the house made by God, even of the least of
these
> > > are the greater sinners. Wherefore I say unto all who desire to be
my
> > > disciples, keep your hands from bloodshed and let no flesh meat
enter
> > > your mouths, for God is just and bountiful, who ordaineth that man
> > > shall live by the fruits and seeds of the earth alone.
> > > ..'
> > >http://reluctant-messenger.com/essene/gospel_4.htm#Lection380
> > #The Essene Gospel of Peace by Edmond Bordeaux Szekely has no bearing
>
> > The text I've posted is not from the Essene Gospel of Peace.
>
> Oh great, another late forgery with no credentials - and I looked into
> it. How come we do not find this alleged 'emerald tablet' anywhere? As
> for the backgound story, you would be well advised to take a little
> look here:
>
> http://www.tektonics.org/lp/ouseley01.html
> --------------------------
>
> At this point you should have reviewed what you'd already
> written above and changed it. =A0I've looked at that page and
> find perceived inspiration and guidance during translation.
It's all the same, anyway - fake, tendentiously written fake material.
> > #on anything, being a LATE literary forgery, first published in 1928.
> > #
> > #My evidence for this claim is as follows:
> > #
> > #1. Nobody has EVER seen a single manuscript resembling anything like
> > #this - and the Vatican archive is online nowadays, go check it
> > #yourself. This is a very good reason to suspect Szekely wrote the
> > #whole thing himself.
>
> > '....... =A0Szekely discussed with Mercati whether he should 'overlook
> > the =A0evidence of history' and 'bury the shame of this discovery' or
> > depart from the church to reveal the information to others. Mercati
> > claimed that he personally withheld the knowledge because of his
> > parent's devotedness to the church, but he felt that in doing so, he
> > had 'betrayed his own soul'. Mercati revealed that cardinals and
> > bishops of the Vatican had read his summaries of the hidden scrolls
> > and knew of their contents and existence in the secret vaults.(Saggi
> > di storia e letteratura; Rome, 1951)
> > .........'
> >http://davincibooks.com/tony-bushby-the-crucifixion-of-truth/
>
> Oh DEAR. Do you have ANY ability to evaluate your sources for
> credibility at all? That is so bleedingly obviously a crackpot site if
> I ever saw one.
> ---------------------------
>
> It's a review of the book.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To quote from the website: "=91The recent publication of
> ancient scriptures realed incontrovertible eveidence of an intrinsic
> system of priestly fraudulence operating within Christianity. These
> writings exposed a church in which false pretences are the basis of
> its existence and forged texts form the essence of its history and
> preaching."
>
> Somebody call the X-files, quick!
> ----------------------------------
>
> Here are the five reviews at Amazon - all 5-star ratings - by people
> who have read the book:
[snip meaningless quotes]
The quality of scholar****p is not determined by popularity. I just
wonder how many of those people has the faintest grounding in any of
the required disciplines.
Look here, pearl, you can get people who are so inclined to rant and
rave about everything, from the Celestine Prophecies to Dianetics - or
Flat Earth and Geocentricity. Once you start accepting that as a valid
indication of its factuality, you'll end up accepting ALL the crackpot
claims that saunter your way. Of course, you are free to do so, but
I'm not about to.
[snip]
Not having read it myself, I really can't comment on it.
>
> > A reference. =A0Whether you can get hold of it is 'another' matter.
>
> Sorry, no. I'm open-minded, but not so open-minded that I would let my
> brains fall out.
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Not open-minded at all seeing you can't even consider it possible.
For very good reasons I have tried to present - I am a skeptic when it
comes to claims like this, and I do have the necessary grounding and
experience to start suspecting a fraud when I run into cases like
this. No provenance, nobody has ever seen the alleged original MSS,
not even a shred of the alleged original language quoted anywhere,
quite often repeating the mistakes of earlier translators of the Bible
(I haven't checked that out, and am not going to bother as I have
better things to do) as they usually use the KJV which is rife with
translation errors and presenting modern ideas as ancient.
> > #Since there is no manuscript available, I'm unable to check the
> > #alleged original text (what language was it supposed to be?), but the
> > #English of the text is very curious in style, and does not resemble
> > #anything I've seen in translations of 1 century CE texts.
>
> > 'The Essene Gospels of Peace
> > The Original Hebrew and Aramaic Texts Translated and edited by
> > EDMOND BORDEAUX SZEKELY
>
> > It was in 1928 that Edmond Bordeaux Szekely (pronounced Say-Kay)
> > first published his translation of The Essene Gospel of Peace, an
> > ancient manuscript discovered in the Secret Archives of the Vatican
> > as the result of limitless patience, faultless scholar****p, and
unerring=
> > intuition.
>
> > The English version first appeared in 1937 representing yet another
> > fragment of the complete manuscript which exists in Aramaic in the
> > Secret Archives of the Vatican and in old Slavonic in the Royal
> > Library of the Habsburgs (now the property of the Austrian
> > government). The poetic style of the translator brings to vivid
reality
> > the exquisitely beautiful words of Jesus and the Elders of the Essene
> > Brotherhood. Liberated from the secret archives of the Vatican,
> > these sacred scrolls are testaments to the eternal and living truth of
> > the Way.
>
> And in which library is the original supposed to be? References,
> please - and I can read Hebrew and can struggle with Aramaic, so I
> actually could check it myself.
>
> -------------------------
>
> Replaced post translation. =A0Good luck.
You mean 'never existed in the first place, so tough.'
What library did you say it was again?
At least this one http://193.43.102.72/gui/console?service=3Dscan
did
not seem to have it...
> > *The Essene Gospels of Peace Book 1 "The Essene Gospel of Peace"
> > *The Essene Gospels of Peace Book 2 "The Unknown Books of the
> > =A0 Essenes"
> > *The Essene Gospels of Peace Book 3 "Lost Scrolls of the Essene
> > =A0 Brotherhood"
> > *The Essene Gospels of Peace Book 4 "The Teachings of the Elect."
> > ..'http://www.thenazareneway.com/index_essene_gospels_of_peace.htm
>
> Missed this bit? "Since there is no manuscript available, I'm unable
> to check the alleged original text (what language was it supposed to
> be?), but the English of the text is very curious in style, and does
> not resemble anything I've seen in translations of 1 century CE
> texts."
>
> Where the heck is the original Szekely claimed to translate - managing
> to include late 19th-early 20th century food and health fads in?
>
> -------------
>
> All answered. =A0Where it was borrowed from.
Nothing answered. All you have done is quote mine - and none of that
answers ANY of my questions.
> > #2. Some of the doctrines within bear a curious resemblance to health
> > #fads of late 19th - early 20th century health fads. Let me quote from
> > #it:
>
> [snip}
>
> > #Colonic irrigation and **** sunbathing were in fa****on silghtly later
> > #than 1 cen. CE....
>
> > Fa****onable maybe.. but just how ancient exactly is the practice.. ?
>
> The earliest reference is the Eber Papyrus from Egypt, ca. 14th cen.
> BCE - but the practice has been in and out of fa****on throughout the
> centuries, which is something modern practitioners acknowledge. I can
> find NO references from the 1st cen. CE whatsoever - maybe you can...
>
> -------------------
>
> You've cited one.
I've cited a 20th century fake.
> > #""Let the angels of God prepare your bread. Moisten your wheat, that
> > #the angel of water may enter it. Then set it in the air, that the
> > #angel of air also may embrace it. And leave it from morning to
evening
> > #beneath the sun, that the angel of sun****ne may descend upon it. And
> > #the blessing of the three angels will soon make the germ of life to
> > #sprout in your wheat. Then crush your grain, and make thin wafers, as
> > #did your forefathers when they departed out of Egypt, the house of
> > #bondage. Put them back again beneath the sun from its appearing, and
> > #when it is risen to its highest in the heavens, turn them over on the
> > #other side that they be embraced there also by the angel of sun****ne,
> > #and leave them there until the sun be set. For the angels of water,
of
> > #air, and of sun****ne fed and ripened the wheat in the field, and
they,
> > #likewise, must prepare also your bread. And the same sun which, with
> > #the fire of life, made the wheat to grow and ripen, must cook your
> > #bread with the same fire. For the fire of the sun gives life to the
> > #wheat, to the bread, and to the body. But the fire of death kills the
> > #wheat, the bread, and the body. And the living angels of the living
> > #God serve only living men. For God is the God of the living, and not
> > #the God of the dead."
> > #
> > #Which completely misses the point of _unleavened_ bread talked about
> > #in Exodus. It does not mean uncooked. This is based on a late raw
food
> > #fad, and completely missing from any text we have from around 1
> > #century CE.
>
> > The unleavened bread of Exodus was likewise baked by the sun.
>
> Says who? Another example of I-think-so? I can't find anywhere in the
> Bible the claim that it was not baked (even as camp bread, over an
> open fire), the only thing I can find is that they did not put the
> leaven in.
> -------------------------
>
> That's what we were taught by our rabbi in cheder...
Fuuny, we were not in the Exegetics cl***** I took in the university.
> 'So they packed the raw dough to take with them on their journey.
> As they fled through the desert they would quickly bake the
> dough in the hot sun into hard crackers called
matzohs.http://www.msgr.ca/=
msgr-8/Seder_Resources.html
>
> '..the fleeing Jews were given such short notice when they were
> allowed to leave Egypt that they didn't have time to wait for their
> bread to rise, baking quick flat bread on the desert rocks
instead.http://=
everything2.com/title/matzoh
>
> PEP Web - Prohibitions Against the Simultaneous Consumption of ...
> It is of further interest to learn that the symbolic im****tance of the
> baking of unleavened bread, as the Bible describes it, on a stone
> heated by the sun,
...www.pep-web.org/do***ent.php?id=3Dijp.026.0169a=A0(r=
estricted)
>
> How do you think they baked this unleavened bread in the desert?
How about the same way the cooked their other foods - and the way
campers still do. First you collect some sticks for the fire - and
that activity is mentioned in the Bible, Numbers 15:32-36: "When the
Israelites were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks
on the sabbath day. Those who found him gathering sticks brought him
to Moses, Aaron, and to the whole congregation. They put him in
custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. Then the
Lord said to Moses, =91The man shall be put to death; all the
congregation shall stone him outside the camp.=92 The whole congregation
brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death, just as the Lord
had commanded Moses." - then you build your fire and bake your bread,
either on flat stones heated on the fire, baked in the ashes (the way
Sinai nomads did even recently) or wound around sticks which are held
over the fire.
> > #"From the coming of the month of Ijar, eat barley; from the month of
> > #Sivan, eat wheat, the most perfect among all seed-bearing herbs. And
> > #let your daily bread be made of wheat, that the Lord may take care of
> > #your bodies. From Tammuz, eat the sour grape, that your body may
> > #diminish and Satan may depart from it. in the month of Elul, gather
> > #the grape that the juice may serve you as drink. In the month of
> > #Marchesvan, gather the sweet grape, dried and sweetened by the angel
> > #of sun, that your bodies may increase, for the angels of the Lord
> > #dwell in them. You should eat figs rich in juice in the months of Ab
> > #and Shebat, and what remain, let the angel of sun keep them for you;
> > #eat them with the meat of almonds in all the months when the trees
> > #bear no fruits. And the herbs which come after rain, these eat in the
> > #month of Thebet, that your blood may be cleansed of all your sins.
And
> > #in the same month begin to eat also the milk of your beasts, because
> > #for this did the Lord give the herbs of the fields to all the beasts
> > #which render milk, that they might with their milk feed man. For I
> > #tell you truly, happy are they that eat only at the table of God, and
> > #eschew all the abominations of Satan. Eat not unclean foods brought
> > #from far countries, but eat always that which your trees bear. For
> > #your God knows well what is needful for you, and where and when. And
> > #he gives to all peoples of all kingdoms for food that which is best
> > #for each. Eat not as the heathen do, who stuff themselves in haste,
> > #defiling their bodies with all manner of abominations."
> > #
> > #Now we KNOW when macrobiotics was invented....
>
> > And?
>
> Did you by any chance miss this bit? "Eat not unclean foods brought
> from far countries, but eat always that which your trees bear." That
> is the main macrobiotic principle, in case you're unaware of it. I
> have never seen any reference to anything like that in any genuine 1st
> cen. CE texts.
>
> ---------------
>
> You have now.
I said in _genuine_ 1st cen texts, not in 20th cen fakes.
> > #""And take no delight in any drink, nor in any smoke from Satan,
> > #waking you by night and making you to sleep by day. For I tell you
> > #truly, all the drinks and smokes of Satan are abominations in the
eyes
> > #of your God."
> > #
> > #And now we have Jesus taking an anti-smoking stance. Very curious, as
> > #tobacco is an American plant and was quite unknown in Europe until
the
> > #very late 15th century.
>
> > Maybe he's referring to opium and derivatives..
>
> No evidence for that either - in any ancient texts.
>
> --------
>
> 'The Sumerian, Assyrian, Egyptian, Minoan, Greek, Roman,
> Persian and Arab Empires each made widespread use of opium,
> which was the most potent form of pain relief then available,
> allowing ancient surgeons to perform prolonged surgical
> procedures. Opium is mentioned in the most im****tant medical
> texts of the ancient world, including the Ebers Papyrus and the
> writings of Dioscorides, Galen, and Avicenna.
> ..'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium
Yes it is - but never in a smoked form. The texts - if you actually
bother reading them - do not refer to smoking it.
Let's take a closer look, shall we (really, you should learn how to do
some research, instead of just copy-pasting and ending up misleading
either intentionally or unintentionally).
The Ebers Papyrus: "Remedy to stop a crying child: Pods of poppy
plant, fly dirt which is on the wall, make it into one, strain and
take for four days, it acts at once."
How do you smoke such a liquid is bit beyond me.
Pedanius Dioscorides: "...sleeping potions such as opium or mandragora
are applied to such people as shall be cut, or cauterised .... For
they do not apprehend the pain because they are overborn [overcome]
with dead sleep .... But used too much they make men speechless."
Potions tend to be liquid.
Galen: "Opium is the strongest of the drugs which numb the senses and
induce a deadening sleep; its effects are produced when it is soaked
in boiling water, taken up on a flock of wool and used as a
suppository; at the same time some can be spread over the forehead and
in the nostrils. If it is mixed with a drug that mitigates its power,
its effects are greatly reduced."
I don't know anyone who would smoke anything anally.
Avicenna: "If the child does not sleep properly, mix some poppy with
his food."
Smoking food now, are we?
> > #For some sources of the obvious food fads embedded in the text, see
> > #
> >
#http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3DkWoJ8mEEJ0wC&pg=3DPA224&lpg=3DPA22=
4&dq...
> > 6zwltsmyfpqzio&hl=3Den#PPA221,M1
>
> > tinyurl.com . =A0Please use it.
>
> tinurl.com WHAT?
> ------------
>
> tinYurl.com.
>
> 'Making long URLs usable! More than 74 million of them.
> Over 2 billion hits/month. =A0------- =A0http://tinyurl.com.
http://tinyurl.com/3f9edu
- The book that directs to might be useful
to you in other cases as well...
[snip]
> Shown to the satisfaction to all except faith-heads, who will accept
> anything that appears to sup****t their agenda - no matter how dubious
> the source.
> ---------------------------------
>
> Not shown to anyone's satisfaction.
Like I said, to all except faith-heads.
> > > >Eating Passover - as if weren't clear enough from the text - means
> > > >eating the sacrificed lamb.
>
> > > EJP | News | Western Europe | Pope suggests link between Jesus
> > > and mysterious Essene sect...
> > > In addition, the pope said Thursday, Jesus celebrated Passover
> > > "without a lamb, as did the Essene community," which did not
> > > sacrifice animals. ...www.ejpress.org/article/15698
>
> > #That's the Pope's opinion - which is not shared by the majority of
> > #Biblical scholars.
>
> > His opinion is based upon what at least some experts are saying.
>
> References, please - and they better be to peer-reviewed journals.
>
> -----
> That's what the articles cited say. =A0Who else??
"they better be to peer-reviewed journals." Missed that one? EJPress
is NOT a peer-reviewed journal.
[snip]
> Well, since you are uneducated as regards the Jewish Passover, let me
> quote: "The ordinances of the Passover, specified in Exodus chapter
> 12, state that the lamb was to be examined for four days, to ensure it
> was without blemish. Then at evening (Jewish days begin at sunset) the
> lamb was to be slain, its blood applied to the lintels and doorposts
> and then roasted for sustenance for the Exodus
journey."http://www.domini.=
org/tabern/passover.htm
I do know of the Passover customs, what on earth did you think I have
been referring to? Really, pearl, is your reading comprehension always
this deficient?
> No mention of Jesus ("the Good Shepherd") eating the lamb.
I quoted you this:
"Mark 14:12-14 Now on the first day of the feast of Unleavened Bread,
when the Passover lamb is sacrificed, Jesus' disciples said to him,
"Where do you want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?" He sent
two of his disciples and told them, "Go into the city, and a man
carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him. Wherever he enters,
tell the owner of the house, 'The Teacher says, "Where is my guest
room where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?"' "
Oh great expert in 1st cen Judaism, please enlighten me [sarcasm off]
what might "I may eat the Passover" mean?
> > #Moreover,
> > #at Luke 2: 21-24 the parents of Jesus sacrifice two doves: " After
> > #eight days had passed, it was time to cir***cise the child; and he
was
> > #called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in
> > #the womb. =A0When the time came for their purification according to
the=
> > #law of Moses, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the
> > #Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, 'Every firstborn male
> > #shall be designated as holy to the Lord'), and they offered a
> > #sacrifice according to what is stated in the law of the Lord, 'a pair
> > #of turtle-doves or two young pigeons.'"
>
> > Fiction.
>
> And you base your claim precisely on what? I-feel-like-so, perhaps?
> ----------------------------
>
> Jesus' parents belonged to the Nazarene community of Galilee.
>
> "The Nasaraeans - they were jews by nationality - originally from
> Gileaditis (where the early followers of Yeshu-Maria fled after the
> martyrdom of James the Lord's brother), Bashanitis and the
> Transjordon . . . =A0They acknowledged Moses and believed that he
> had received laws - not this law, however, but some other. And so,
> they were jews who kept all the Jewish observances, but they
> would not offer sacrifice or eat meat. =A0They considered it unlawful
> to eat meat or make sacrifices with it. They claim that these Books
> are fictions, and that none of these customs were instituted by the
> fathers.This was the difference between the Nasaraeans and the
> others. . . (Epiphanius, Panarion 1:18)
> ..'http://essenes.net/sz17.htm
This sounds like a little like the Essenes, but could be a long ago
vanished sect. We know there were quite a few around then. However,
what should this have to do with the parents of Jesus? (Don't tell me
you're confusing nazirites and Nasarenes again!)
> '1. NOW, Joseph and Mary, his parents, went up to Jerusalem every
> year at the Feast of the Passover and they observed the feast after
> the manner of their brethren, who abstained from bloodshed and the
> eating of flesh and from strong drink. And when he was twelve years
> old, he went to Jerusalem with them after the custom of the
feast.http://r=
eluctant-messenger.com/essene/gospel_1.htm#Lection10
KINDLY stop quoting fakes to me, that does nothing to sup****t your
case. It only convinces me of your desperation when you resort to
dubious sources.
> > > >Luke 24:36-42: " While they were saying these things, Jesus himself
> > > >stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." But they
were=
> > > >startled and terrified, thinking they saw a ghost. Then he said to
> > > >them, "Why are you frightened, and why do doubts arise in your
hearts=
?
> > > >Look at my hands and my feet; it's me! Touch me and see; a ghost
does=
> > > >not have flesh and bones like you see I have." When he had said
this,=
> > > >he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still could
not=
> > > >believe it (because of their joy) and were amazed, he said to them,
> > > >"Do you have anything here to eat?" So they gave him a piece of
> > > >broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in front of them."
>
> > > '1. THEN the same day at evening, being the first day of the week,
whe=
n
>
> > #[even more Szekely forgery snipped]
>
> > Heresy, is it. =A0LOL.
>
> Blast heresy, I'm an agnostic anyway, heresy would not matter to me
> less. BUT I do mind tendentious forgeries made to back a private
> agenda, and later used by faith-heads to back whatever crackpot ideas
> they subscrive to.
> --------------------------------
>
> What you're actually describing is orthodox christianity.
More like some crackpot food faddists who attempt to base their food
fad on Christianity, and when that fails, simply write their own
gospels, just like Szekely and Ousley did.
You want to show otherwise, dig up some _valid_ evidence for the
existence of the alleged MSS - and 'the author said they existed' is
NOT valid evidence.
> > #Next time you try to base veganism on Jesus, read the frigging Bible
> > #first - and by that I DO NOT mean extremely dubious very late
sources!
>
> > That would be the NT (and the OT too).
>
> See my earlier post quoting Genesis. 8th-7th cen. BCE early enough for
> you? You won't get many Biblical texts earlier than that, apart from a
> few minor prophets and psalms - none of which take any stance on the
> issue of meat-eating or abstaining from it.
> ----------------------
>
> I'd like to see your evidence that those texts were written 8th-7th cen.
B=
..C.
> But mostly your evidence showing that earlier texts weren't altered
later.=
I am not, repeat NOT going to type a complicated matter of OT
Exegetics to you, I do not have the time of energy. Do what you
usually do and bloody google for it.
> > #Dragonblaze
> > #
> > #- Who did EVER hear of vegan dragons? -
>
> > So got a pic' of yourself we can see?
>
> Yeah. Go check yahoo.chat for my profile under Dragonblaze.
>
> Dragonblaze
> ------------------------
>
> Link?
http://uk.worldsbiggestchat.com/
Try profiles under my nym
Dragonblaze
|
