 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / British English / May 2007Easter 2007 - Jesus, Myth of History or Son of God?
My name is Lorenzo Crescini. I am a Captain of the merchant Navy now on retirement. When I was a secular missionary in an African leprosary, I wrote some Flashes on the Holy Gospels which helped a lot of people by giving them new trust and hope. You will find them in web site www.lorenzocrescini.it/holygospels E mail: ricercapap@lorenzocrescini.it Here are the first three Flashes as an example 1. There is the historical proof the myth could not invent the Cross . If the Cross roused a "social orror" by the heathens ,it caused a shocking religious dismay by the Jews. It is not a case that the first christians in order to avoid that the preaching might be jeopardised.,represented the Cross by an anchor ,a plough, a mast, a man praying with open arms.How can we think that this way of dying was put in the myth by the christians themselves ? 2. Should somebody tell us of having seen a dead person on the cross resuscitated, nobody would believe him. But if the same person stating that could also make miracles, then we would believe him. That happened to the Apostles who got the power of making miracles in order to be believed. Without that power, Christianity couldn't have been born. 3. Jesus says on the Cross: "My God ,My God ,why did You abandon me ? Such words might even shock the reader. Why should they have been written if they weren't true,then ? > 1. There is the historical proof the myth could not invent the > Cross. The cross was the means of execution employed by the ancient Romans (among others). In that sense, it is equivalent to the gas chamber, electric chair, gallows, or firing squad. It does not need mythical invention. It was not the shape described in the myth however ... more like a T, so the extra part with 'inri' written on it could not have been affixed as described. It is fortunate, is it not, that christians are not obliged to wander about wearing a small replica, tastefully fashioned in silver or gold, of old sparky. > If the Cross roused a "social orror" by the heathens ,it > caused a shocking religious dismay by the Jews. There were no heathens. There were Jews and there were followers of the religions of the Romans (the natural religions of Europe). > 2. the power of making miracles in order to be believed. There were no 'miracles' - those are part of the myth. > 3. Jesus says on the Cross: "My God ,My God ,why did You abandon me ? > Such words might even shock the reader. Why should they have been > written if they weren't true,then ? What else would such a person have said? It is necessary to explain away that a person who is effectively a minor deity is about to die just like the rest of us. So, his imaginary supreme being must have deserted him or he would have stopped them. You might bear in mind that Jesus did not die for your sins, or so that you might live. He died because he caused too much trouble. He was one of several so-called messiahs around that time. You might also bear in mind that Jesus, and his disciples, were all good Jewish men. None of them were 'christians' and none of them set out to start a new religion, or new offshoot of Judaism. Prior to your next posting, try studying religion rather than taking part in one.  SignatureBlue Sow > > 1. There is the historical proof the myth could not invent the > > Cross. > The cross was the means of execution employed by the ancient Romans > (among others). In that sense, it is equivalent to the gas chamber, > electric chair, gallows, or firing squad. It does not need mythical > invention. It was not the shape described in the myth however ... > more like a T, so the extra part with 'inri' written on it could not > have been affixed as described. But wasn't it quite usual for the crime to be written in the titulus? And often abbreviated? In this case INRI(tamentum) or "incitement" (to rebellion/against Rome). The "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum" bit (which does differ signicantly in all Gospels) is an invention explaining away the "INRI" appearing in later graphical representations. And wasn't the so-called "cross" often just a plain upright stake - the stauros, or the xylon - with both wrists nailed to it above the head? Almost all aspects in the tradition of the so-called crucifixion, however, point to a fakery. To give just one example, it has recently been ascertained that crucifixion would almost certainly result in a dangerous accumulation of fluid in the thoracic cavity; the piercing by Longinus relieved the pressure rather than being any sort of death blow. [Snip rest] SignatureDavid - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ > In article <461bcf80$0$10729$db0fe...@news.zen.co.uk>, Blue Sow > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > dangerous accumulation of fluid in the thoracic cavity; the piercing by > Longinus relieved the pressure rather than being any sort of death blow. Belief being a personal matter, as it is, and not to detract from either of your follow-up points, if the cross wasn't actually a cross then why do we have the word "cruciform", derived from Latin and meaning "a cross"? And why would we end up with the term "crucifixion" if no cross was involved? This is basic etymology, surely, or are these not words in the current lexicon? Just figeres of speech then? Is this why I haven't achieved boundless fame, wealth and influence? Because when I went down to the crossroads I went to a place where two roads crossed rather than to, say, a tollbridge? > [Snip rest] > > -- > David - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop ukhttp://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ G DAEB COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON -- [Snip] > > And wasn't the so-called "cross" often just a plain upright stake - > > the stauros, or the xylon - with both wrists nailed to it above the > > head? [Snip] > Belief being a personal matter, as it is, and not to detract from > either of your follow-up points, if the cross wasn't actually a cross > then why do we have the word "cruciform", derived from Latin and > meaning "a cross"? And why would we end up with the term > "crucifixion" if no cross was involved? > This is basic etymology, surely, or are these not words in the > current lexicon? Just figeres of speech then? Latin 'crux', 'crucis' means "a cross" but also means "torment or trouble"; 'crucio -are' means "to torture". The "cross" is an implement for torture and whilst it is generally held that the "torment" meaning is transferred from the "cross" meaning, most Latin 'cru-" words have to do with breaking or /crushing/ . As a full and proper crucifixion required the crushing of the legs so that the body's weight could not be supported on the feet but only on the nailed wrists, and as that can be achieved (probably best and most easily achieved) by nailing to a stake or even (probably originally) a tree, it is most likely that the torture named the instrument rather than the other way about. Having said that, I don't doubt that the so-called Jesus was hung on a "traditional" cross because that form is the easiest with which to fake a crucifixion with least damage to the hung man. SignatureDavid - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ > Belief being a personal matter, as it is, and not > to detract from either of your follow-up points You didn't. > if the cross wasn't actually a cross then why do > we have the word "cruciform", derived from Latin > and meaning "a cross"? And why would we end > up with the term "crucifixion" if no cross was > involved? The word cruciform does indeed derive from the Latin word meaning a cross (note: 'a' cross, not 'the' cross). Crucifixion derives similarly. The Romans did not invent the punishment, they 'borrowed' it from otherwhere. Their own favoured shape was a 'T'. I doubt that they felt the need to coin a new term 'tee-ifixion' when a commonly understood term 'crucifixion' meaning 'nailing people to lumps of wood' remained perfectly serviceable. > Is this why I haven't achieved boundless fame, > wealth and influence? No, it is the other reason (-: SignatureBlue Sow > > Belief being a personal matter, as it is, and not > > to detract from either of your follow-up points > > You didn't. Ah, extracts. > > if the cross wasn't actually a cross then why do > > we have the word "cruciform", derived from Latin [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The word cruciform does indeed derive from the Latin word meaning a cross (note: > 'a' cross, not 'the' cross). Was this not as implicit as the fact that one can hop on a train, or on a ferry, and even the pace- makers didn't refer to an article? > Crucifixion derives similarly. The Romans did not invent the punishment, they > 'borrowed' it from otherwhere. Their own favoured shape was a 'T'. I doubt > that they felt the need to coin a new term 'tee-ifixion' when a commonly > understood term 'crucifixion' meaning 'nailing people to lumps of wood' remained > perfectly serviceable. So, it is the Ancient Picts from whom we get the language of Latin then? Or some other Pagan people? I mean, waving whilst already smiling my most dazzlingest smile here, your logic seems somewhat flawed if it's a Latin word originally--in that it was a term they coined in the first place. Ah, boarest, I can just imagine it. > > Is this why I haven't achieved boundless fame, > > wealth and influence? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > -- > Blue Sow ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You mean I lack the beard the arran sweater and the beer gut that were Hendrix' trademark then. And I'm still too young. Ah, I see now. I shall have to upgrade my belligerence co-processor to at least a Cynix if I'm going to last here. G DAEB COPYRIGHT (C) 2007 SIPSTON -- > So, it is the Ancient Picts from whom we get the > language of Latin then? Or some other Pagan > people? I mean, waving whilst already smiling > my most dazzlingest smile here, your logic seems > somewhat flawed if it's a Latin word originally--in that > it was a term they coined in the first place. Now you are being silly (-: The Latin term for nailing people to lumps of tree is crucifixion. No Picts, old or young, are, or were, involved. The Romans copied the PROCESS of crucifixion from other cultures and indeed coined that word to describe that process. Deciding to make use of a differently shaped lump of wood did not necessitate having a new word for what was essentially the same process. So they continued to crucify people by nailing them to said wood, even if the wood was not shaped like the amulet of the sect in question. So, where is the flaw in the logic? > You mean I lack the beard the arran sweater and > the beer gut that were Hendrix' trademark then. > And I'm still too young. I could not know whether you do, or do not, meet any of the above criteria. > Ah, I see now. I shall have to upgrade my belligerence > co-processor to at least a Cynix if I'm going to last here. You think? SignatureBlue Sow > The Romans copied the PROCESS of crucifixion from other cultures and > indeed coined that word to describe that process. Not quite. It's just that we now use a Latin-derived word for it. We could just as easily have ripped a word from another language (English is English, after all). But this is an extremely dull discussion; best left for dead. > > The Romans copied the PROCESS of crucifixion from other cultures > > and indeed coined that word to describe that process. > Not quite. It's just that we now use a Latin-derived word for it. > We could just as easily have ripped a word from another language > (English is English, after all). > But this is an extremely dull discussion; best left for dead. Oh, I dunno...a little resurrection livens things up no end! (BTW, I've crossposted to apihna where yer fans've been keeping vigil.) SignatureDavid - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ > > > The Romans copied the PROCESS of crucifixion from other cultures > > > and indeed coined that word to describe that process. > > Not quite. It's just that we now use a Latin-derived word for it. > > We could just as easily have ripped a word from another language > > (English is English, after all). > > But this is an extremely dull discussion; best left for dead. > Oh, I dunno...a little resurrection livens things up no end! We had that celebrated a couple of weekends ago. > (BTW, I've crossposted to apihna where yer fans've been keeping > vigil.) Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? SignatureJohn M Ward, posting from the Apihna Arms' Comfy Chair My "Fun with English" web page can now be found at: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/english >>>> The Romans copied the PROCESS of crucifixion from other cultures >>>> and indeed coined that word to describe that process. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? "Whose", Shirley? :-) SignatureJohn Briggs [Some snipped] > > We had that celebrated a couple of weekends ago. > > > >> (BTW, I've crossposted to apihna where yer fans've been keeping > >> vigil.) > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > "Whose", Shirley? All right, then: "Whose this Shirley bird we've been keeping?" SignatureJohn M Ward, posting from the Apihna Arms' Comfy Chair My "Fun with English" web page can now be found at: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/english [Some snipped] > > >> (BTW, I've crossposted to apihna where yer fans've been keeping > > >> vigil.) [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > All right, then: "Whose this Shirley bird we've been keeping?" Eh? Shirley's really Virgil? We've been keeping a bird in dis guy's name? SignatureCheers, Daniel. > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > > "Whose", Shirley? No, "Who's" was correct, for "Who is". Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > > > > "Whose", Shirley? > No, "Who's" was correct, for "Who is". I think you'll find its "whose" whats right they're. SignatureDavid - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > > > > > > "Whose", Shirley? > > No, "Who's" was correct, for "Who is". > I think you'll find its "whose" whats right they're. Ah, rite yew arr. SignatureJohn M Ward, posting from the Apihna Arms' Comfy Chair My "Fun with English" web page can now be found at: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/english > > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > > > > > > > > "Whose", Shirley? > > > No, "Who's" was correct, for "Who is". > > I think you'll find its "whose" whats right they're. > Ah, rite yew arr. Ow! I quiver and bow to you're superior draw. SignatureDavid - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ > > > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > > > > > > > > > > "Whose", Shirley? > > > > No, "Who's" was correct, for "Who is". > > > I think you'll find its "whose" whats right they're. > > Ah, rite yew arr. > Ow! I quiver and bow to you're superior draw. My superior Draw is built into every proper desktop computer I have. SignatureJohn M Ward, posting from the Apihna Arms' Comfy Chair My "Fun with English" web page can now be found at: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/english >> > > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >> > > > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > My superior Draw is built into every proper desktop computer I have. Like you, I could Paint a wonderful picture of the Edit-ional features on my RPC desktop. SignatureTo kick-start your computer, please boot it. >>>>>>>> Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >>>>>>> "Whose", Shirley? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Like you, I could Paint a wonderful picture of the Edit-ional features > on my RPC desktop. would that be a Word (to the) Wise? > >>>>>>>> Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > >>>>>>> "Whose", Shirley? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > on my RPC desktop. > would that be a Word (to the) Wise? That seems to be the Impression that I got as I was Browse-ing this thread. Signature//\ // Chika <miyuki><at><crashnet><org><uk> // \// "Word to the wise guy; be nice or be dog food!" ... Hailing frequencies open Mr. Worf. - Hi, this is Steve Wright on 1 FM. >>> > > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >>> > > > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Like you, I could Paint a wonderful picture of the Edit-ional features > on my RPC desktop. Just for fun, hit the Windows key+r, type "edit", and hit return. Edlin's still there, too (but you have to add a filename as a parameter, or it just closes -- typing "edlin a" is enough). It's like seeing old friends whom you hoped had died. >>>>>>>>> Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > It's like seeing old friends whom you hoped had died. Not "whom", I think (unless it's me being whooshed this time.) SignatureJohn Briggs >>>>>>>>>> Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >>>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Not "whom", I think (unless it's me being whooshed this time.) Nope, not 'whom". Good ol' Usenet. >>>> > > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >>>> > > > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Just for fun, hit the Windows key+r, type "edit", and hit return. Sorry, but my 'Edit' isn't on a Windows machine, but a RiscPC, so I don't have a Windows key. Wendy SignatureThe early bird gets the worm, the late mouse didn't get the cheese. > > Just for fun, hit the Windows key+r, type "edit", and hit return. > Sorry, but my 'Edit' isn't on a Windows machine, but a RiscPC, so I > don't have a Windows key. I have a Windows key. I keep it in my key case, next to my back door key. SignatureDavid - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ >>>>> > > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >>>>> > > > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Sorry, but my 'Edit' isn't on a Windows machine, but a RiscPC, so I > don't have a Windows key. Well, you can always buy another keyboard. [some snipped, for clarity] > >>>> My superior Draw is built into every proper desktop computer I > >>>> have. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Well, you can always buy another keyboard. Or another computer. My Iyonix's keyboard (as supplied) has the three extra "Windows" keys, but I can allocate them to do anything I wish. I have one bathing the baby, another to put the kettle on, and the third ...ah, um... oh yes: the third calls up a menu. SignatureJohn M Ward, posting from the Apihna Arms' Comfy Chair My "Fun with English" web page can now be found at: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/english > [some snipped, for clarity] > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > I have one bathing the baby, another to put the kettle on, and the third > ...ah, um... oh yes: the third calls up a menu. I have a gadget that allows me to map any key (or combination of a plural thereof -- but it's the singular usage that's fun) to any action, and save the mapping to a .reg file, which can be applied to any Windows computer. It's a sheer joy to watch people opening porn sites, changing their screen resolution to 320x200, and uninstalling Adobe Acrobat because they were foolish enough to type "the". > > [some snipped, for clarity] > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I have one bathing the baby, another to put the kettle on, and the > > third ...ah, um... oh yes: the third calls up a menu. > I have a gadget that allows me to map any key (or combination of a > plural thereof -- but it's the singular usage that's fun) to any > action, and save the mapping to a .reg file, which can be applied to > any Windows computer. > It's a sheer joy to watch people opening porn sites, changing their > screen resolution to 320x200, and uninstalling Adobe Acrobat because > they were foolish enough to type "the". Very Clever! Keep it up. SignatureNew Marmite(TM): Not as thick! Not as dark! Not as te! David - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ >> [some snipped, for clarity] >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > resolution to 320x200, and uninstalling Adobe Acrobat because they were > foolish enough to type "the". Of wel 'het'? SignatureMy online bank account has just told me I'm virtually bankrupt. > >> [some snipped, for clarity] > >> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > > Of wel 'het'? A very interesting post. Thank you. SignatureNew Marmite(TM): Not as thick! Not as dark! Not as te! David - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ >>> [some snipped, for clarity] >>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >> > Of wel 'het'? Selfde, ja -- maar het porn lastse komst, jammer. > > > > > > Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > > > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Ow! I quiver and bow to you're superior draw. You'll never have a good quarrel if you bolt when first contradicted. SignatureOdysseus >>> Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? >> >> "Whose", Shirley? > > No, "Who's" was correct, for "Who is". That would be a "whoosh" :-) (Look closely at the "it's" which provoked the cross-posting to apihna.) SignatureJohn Briggs > >>> Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > (Look closely at the "it's" which provoked the cross-posting to apihna.) I did; it appeared to be correct, being a contraction, not a possessive. There's evidently some subtle humour I'm not understanding :-) Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > > >>> Eh? Who's this Virgil bloke we've been keeping? > > >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > (Look closely at the "it's" which provoked the cross-posting to > > apihna.) > I did; it appeared to be correct, being a contraction, not a > possessive. > There's evidently some subtle humour I'm not understanding :-) 'Tweren't the "it's", 'twere the Scarlet Pumpernickel hissel, Mr Wallace, whose resurrection[1] the denizens of apihna have this long lonely winter waited, he having walked off with our dictionary, occasioning Mr Ward no end of time and trouble. [1] He apparently keeps committing suicide. SignatureDavid - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/ [Some snippage] > > There's evidently some subtle humour I'm not understanding :-) > > 'Tweren't the "it's", 'twere the Scarlet Pumpernickel hissel, Mr > Wallace, whose resurrection[1] the denizens of apihna have this long > lonely winter waited, he having walked off with our dictionary, > occasioning Mr Ward no end of time and trouble. That's true: it will never end. > [1] He apparently keeps committing suicide. Well, it saves someone else having to keep doing it to him, like poor Kenny in South Park... SignatureJohn M Ward, posting from the Apihna Arms' Comfy Chair My "Fun with English" web page can now be found at: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/english > > > There's evidently some subtle humour I'm not understanding :-) Aha, it begins to make sense. Just had an amusing read of the above page and the FAQQUS MAXIMUS. And subscribed to apihna. Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org >> > The Romans copied the PROCESS of crucifixion from other cultures >> > and indeed coined that word to describe that process. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > (BTW, I've crossposted to apihna where yer fans've been keeping vigil.) On that topic, I recently moved my site to a Dutch server, but they ***ked up the DNS (and it doesn't look like it will be fixed soon) (largely because I'm too bone idle to do anything about it), so http://mwallace.net is currently reduced to the comparatively embarrassing http://84.243.219.114/~mwallace/, despite the fact that it is costing me three times what my former server charged. The World Dictionary is there. If there are updates from the last few months, I'm sure someone will let me know. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.