Dig unearths ancient cult figurines of Aphrodite
Matt Giwer
the big news.
The dating of this is interesting, to the 6th c. AD. That is well into the
convert of be fucked Christian period and after the Emperor took an interest
in the region going back to Constantine's mother.
What I would ask is how the worship of Astarte/Ashara can be distinguished
from Aphrodite among the civilized Judeans. It is the same goddess along with
Ishtar and with the most different name from Egypt Isis.
And this brings up the reported letter which claims the Maccabes and the
Spartans are brothers. Aphrodite is not surprising in this context.
=====
Haaretz
Thu., August 20, 2009 Av 30, 5769 | Israel Time: 02:09 (EST+7)
Dig unearths ancient cult figurines of Aphrodite
By Ofri Ilani
Remains of an ancient cult to the goddess of love have come to light in the
southern Golan Heights site of Susita
At the site, on a 350 meter-high-plateau overlooking the eastern shore of
Lake Kinneret, archaeologists found a cache of three figurines of Aphrodite
(whom the Romans called Venus), dating back about 1,500 years. The
figurines, made of clay, are about 30 centimeters tall. They depict the nude
goddess standing, with her right hand covering her private parts - a type of
statue scholars call "modest Venus."
According to Greek mythology, Aphrodite was born of the ocean foam at the
place where the testicles of the Titan Uranus were cast into the sea by his
son Cronus, who castrated him. According to another story, she is the
daughter of Zeus, king of the gods. Aphrodite was a popular goddess,
represented in statues all over the Greek and Roman world. The best known of
these is is the Venus de Milo, on display at the Louvre.
The figurines at Susita were unearthed in the excavations of the University
of Haifa's Zinman Institute of Archaeology, now in its 10th season, headed
by Prof. Arthur Segal and Dr. Michael Eisenberg.
Many statues and figurines of Aphrodite have been uncovered over the years.
One, from marble, which became known as the Venus of Beit She'an, was
uncovered in 1993 in the baths of that ancient city.
"Aphrodite was the goddess of love, but also the goddess of fertility and
childbirth," Segal says. "Pregnant woman hoping for a safe birth would
sacrifice to her, as would young girls hoping for love. Mainly, flowers,
rather than animals, would be sacrificed to Aphrodite. The figurines we
found were made in a mold in rather large numbers. They would be offered to
the goddess in a temple by supplicants, or kept above one's bed," Segal
said.
Another special find at Susita is an odeon - a small, roofed theater-like
structure with seats for about 600 people, uncovered for the first time in
Israel, according to the excavators. They said such structures were fairly
common in the Roman period and were used for the reading of poetry and
musical presentations to a select audience, in contrast to theaters, which
could seat around 4,000 people.
--
A real American only needs one finger while an Englishman requires two.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4176
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo3/ a12
Thu Aug 20 01:29:34 EDT 2009
Kendall K Down
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> What I would ask is how the worship of Astarte/Ashara can be distinguished
> from Aphrodite among the civilized Judeans.
Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he rides his
Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the sunset.
Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
Ken Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premier archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
Matt Giwer
> In message <4a8ce18e$0$4967$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> What I would ask is how the worship of Astarte/Ashara can be distinguished
>> from Aphrodite among the civilized Judeans.
> Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he rides his
> Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the sunset.
> Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
> region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
You can say whatever you wish to the little old ladies you rob blind. It will
not pass here.
The location of the find is clearly given in the article. There is no way to
claim there was a "greek" goddess in that area either, less than a day's walk
from Roman Judea, the only one known for a fact to have existed.
One of conceits of con artists like yourself is that places so close together
would have significantly worship practices. The gullible accept it because of
the cultural fantasy that the magical "jews" were in fact unique in their
religion. All educated people know that is not the case. You are excluded from
the category of educated of course.
--
When Israel talks about settlers it it talking about criminal squatters.
-- The Iron Webmater, 4162
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/ Antisemitism a10
Fri Aug 21 02:28:47 EDT 2009
Tom P
> Kendall K Down wrote:
>> In message <4a8ce18e$0$4967$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
>> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>> What I would ask is how the worship of Astarte/Ashara can be
>>> distinguished
>>> from Aphrodite among the civilized Judeans.
>
>> Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he rides his
>> Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the sunset.
>> Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
>> region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
>
> You can say whatever you wish to the little old ladies you rob
> blind. It will not pass here.
>
> The location of the find is clearly given in the article. There is
> no way to claim there was a "greek" goddess in that area either, less
> than a day's walk from Roman Judea, the only one known for a fact to
> have existed.
>
capitalize the word.
What is the origin of the Latin word "Iudea"?
Do you think the Romans just made up that word?
Do you think the Romans made it up in 63 BCE?
Or might the Romans have been using a Latin transliteration of the
earlier Greek "Ioudaios"?
What was Roman Judea called before Pompeii annexed it to the Roman Empire?
Who populated Roman Judea before Pompeii if not the Judeans?
Or do you believe the Romans simply imported a fully developed culture
and language onto the southern part of their Syrian province in 63 BCE?
Who were the people called who wrote those manuscripts in the Hebrew
language discovered in Judea from 1947 onwards that have been
radiocarbon dated to the 4th century BCE?
Have you ever read Pliny's "Natural History," Giwer? In particular may
I direct your attention to Book V, xvi?
Have you ever read Strabo's "Geography," especially XVI, ii?
Who, other than Judeans, wrote those 2nd, 3rd, and 4th century BCE
Hebrew manuscripts discovered in Judea from 1947 on that were published
in the "Discoveries in the Judean Desert" series, Giwer?
Silly questions, I know. And the correct answers are screamingly
obvious to everyone except Nazis, Hezbollah, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and
Matt Giwer. But you really should read the ancient sources before you
post on Usenet and your web page, Giwer.
> One of conceits of con artists like yourself is that places so close
> together would have significantly worship practices. The gullible accept
> it because of the cultural fantasy that the magical "jews" were in fact
> unique in their religion. All educated people know that is not the case.
> You are excluded from the category of educated of course.
>
And you are not a con artist, Giwer?
You espouse and manufacture conspiracy theories of history, and then try
to peddle your nincompoopery on Usenet and other forums. Shall we
recount certain of your absolutely counter factual and inane claims over
the past two months or so, Giwer?
Giwer claimed that "Semiticisms" were common in Koine Greek outside of
the Judeo-Christian corpus. Giwer was asked to produce even one
manuscript or fragment from among the thousands of extant manuscripts in
Koine bearing such a "Semiticism." Matt Giwer failed to produce even
one manuscript to support his claim.
Giwer boldly asserted that Hesiod's "Theogony" (Birth of the Gods) was
not a religious work, after implying he was familiar with Hesiod's corpus.
Giwer claimed there were no artifacts of the Old Testament ever found in
Judea. Giwer was obviously unaware of the discovery in Judea since 1947
of dozens of manuscripts containing parts of the Old Testament as well
as paraphrases and commentaries of the Old Testament in three different
languages, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. How ignorant is a poster who
propounds an entire theory of Jewish and Old Testament origins on his
web site and various other forums but has no idea what the Dead Sea
Scrolls actually refer to?
Of course, Giwer's web page also claims that the Holocaust didn't
happen. Millions of Jews were not gassed or shot, but rather relatively
few died of very sudden onset heart disease and miraculous plagues that
only killed Jews and Gypsys resident in German death camps. And anyway
millions of Jews secretly immigrated to the good old USA as part of an
international Zionist plot to make Arabs look bad.
And mine is not a comprehensive list of the various and sundry lies
Giwer has posted. Remember these instances of Giwer's kook theories of
history every time you read a post by Matt Giwer.
A suggestion: you need to get your facts right before you concoct weird
conspiracy theories of history, Giwer.
mof
> Fri Aug 21 02:28:47 EDT 2009
It is interesting to note that the hypercritical approach is suddenly
all gone. Where is the method in that?
These figurines are of Aphrodite because that is the interpretation of
the archaeologists. But they are believers ;) The hypercritical
conclusion is only that we are dealing with figurines of clay and with
pose similarities.
How can one even imagine that it is possible to create a somewhat
correct vision of the past, when one has different approaches to
different evidence?
Here is a link to a blog with pictures.
http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/?p=1440
So maybe we can have a discussion about why some evidence can be
accepted at face value, and why some has to be dismissed?
And about these figurines, maybe we can talk some about how relevant
they are for the other discussions? For, as Mr. Giwer noted, they are
perhaps only some 1500 years old.
Come to think of it, there is another relevant question that might
highlight methodology. Mr. Giwer mentioned temples constructed by some
Herod. Is there any archaeological evidence for these temples? Or do
we know of them only through what is written?
Matt Giwer
What is there to be critical of physical evidence? Physical evidence is to be
interpreted.
> These figurines are of Aphrodite because that is the interpretation of
> the archaeologists. But they are believers ;) The hypercritical
> conclusion is only that we are dealing with figurines of clay and with
> pose similarities.
> How can one even imagine that it is possible to create a somewhat
> correct vision of the past, when one has different approaches to
> different evidence?
> Here is a link to a blog with pictures.
> http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/?p=1440
Rather than everyone wasting time this is the only image worth the piss poor
server time.
http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/d795d7a0d795d7a12.jpg
I have previously shown my accumulation of images of Ashara and Ashara/Yahweh
votives and images.
http://www.giwersworld.org/ancient-history/ashara-images//index.html
Those also constitute physical evidence which is for interpretation not be be
explained away because they conflict with some supposed religious text which
is known to be either without evidenciary support or contrary to the physical
evidence.
> So maybe we can have a discussion about why some evidence can be
> accepted at face value, and why some has to be dismissed?
What physical evidence do you claim has been dismissed?
> And about these figurines, maybe we can talk some about how relevant
> they are for the other discussions? For, as Mr. Giwer noted, they are
> perhaps only some 1500 years old.
Which is odd. The less old the more interesting for it surviving the
Christian influence longer. 2200 years old would hardly be remarkable.
> Come to think of it, there is another relevant question that might
> highlight methodology. Mr. Giwer mentioned temples constructed by some
> Herod. Is there any archaeological evidence for these temples? Or do
> we know of them only through what is written?
Yes Herod's constructions have been found as well as the likely find of his
tomb last year based upon the ritual desecration. His palace in Jerusalem has
also been found and is one of the reasons why could not possibly have been on
the so-called temple mount.
You do not appear to know what you are trying to say. Please try again WITH
the physical evidence you wish to interpret differently than I.
--
We have learned from the religious riots in Israel that riots
are permitted on the Sabbath.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4171
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo3/holo-survivors.phtml a3
Sat Aug 22 01:01:24 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Kendall K Down wrote:
>>> In message <4a8ce18e$0$4967$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
>>> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>> What I would ask is how the worship of Astarte/Ashara can be
>>>> distinguished
>>>> from Aphrodite among the civilized Judeans.
>>> Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he rides his
>>> Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the sunset.
>>> Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
>>> region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
>> You can say whatever you wish to the little old ladies you rob
>> blind. It will not pass here.
>> The location of the find is clearly given in the article. There is
>> no way to claim there was a "greek" goddess in that area either, less
>> than a day's walk from Roman Judea, the only one known for a fact to
>> have existed.
> Ah, Giwer, since Greek is a proper noun, we who are literate in English
> capitalize the word.
Your murderous zionist ideology even prevents you from noting it is used as
an adjective and in quotes. Dr. Doolittle you are not.
> What is the origin of the Latin word "Iudea"?
>
> Do you think the Romans just made up that word?
>
> Do you think the Romans made it up in 63 BCE?
>
> Or might the Romans have been using a Latin transliteration of the
> earlier Greek "Ioudaios"?
>
> What was Roman Judea called before Pompeii annexed it to the Roman Empire?
>
> Who populated Roman Judea before Pompeii if not the Judeans?
The distinction, as you know full well, is to separate Roman Judea which did
exist from the mythical biblical Judea for which there is no evidence of
existence.
Why do you keep trying to play word games instead of producing physical
evidence?
--
The oldest terrorist organization in the United States
is the Jewish Defense League.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4167
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo2/ a11
Sat Aug 22 01:30:58 EDT 2009
Kendall K Down
Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> A suggestion: you need to get your facts right before you concoct weird
> conspiracy theories of history, Giwer.
Ah, come on, Tom P. If Matt the Pratt got his facts right, there
wouldn't be any basis for his kooky theories. He *can't* get his facts
right.
Kendall K Down
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he rides his
>> Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the sunset.
>> Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
>> region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
> You can say whatever you wish to the little old ladies you rob blind. It will
> not pass here.
> The location of the find is clearly given in the article. There is no way to
> claim there was a "greek" goddess in that area either, less than a day's walk
> from Roman Judea, the only one known for a fact to have existed.
I repeat: Matt the Pratt shows his usual ignorance.
Anyone who wishes to waste time proving that Matt the Pratt is an
ignoramus can look up Susita and Decapolis on Wikipedia.
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Kendall K Down wrote:
>>>> In message <4a8ce18e$0$4967$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
>>>> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>> What I would ask is how the worship of Astarte/Ashara can be
>>>>> distinguished
>>>>> from Aphrodite among the civilized Judeans.
>>>> Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he rides his
>>>> Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the sunset.
>>>> Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
>>>> region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
>>> You can say whatever you wish to the little old ladies you rob
>>> blind. It will not pass here.
>>> The location of the find is clearly given in the article. There
>>> is no way to claim there was a "greek" goddess in that area either,
>>> less than a day's walk from Roman Judea, the only one known for a
>>> fact to have existed.
>
>> Ah, Giwer, since Greek is a proper noun, we who are literate in
>> English capitalize the word.
>
> Your murderous zionist ideology even prevents you from noting it is
> used as an adjective and in quotes. Dr. Doolittle you are not.
>
when used as adjectives. See the Oxford English dictionary entry. Just
as Zionist is always capitalized, whether used as a noun, adjective, or
as a part of Nazi and Hezbollah hate speech, as you just used it.
>> What is the origin of the Latin word "Iudea"?
>>
>> Do you think the Romans just made up that word?
>>
>> Do you think the Romans made it up in 63 BCE?
>>
>> Or might the Romans have been using a Latin transliteration of the
>> earlier Greek "Ioudaios"?
>>
>> What was Roman Judea called before Pompeii annexed it to the Roman
>> Empire?
>>
>> Who populated Roman Judea before Pompeii if not the Judeans?
>
> The distinction, as you know full well, is to separate Roman Judea
> which did exist from the mythical biblical Judea for which there is no
> evidence of existence.
>
Were the questions too difficult for you, Giwer?
No such distinction as you refer to it is possible, Giwer. As you
should know but obviously do not. Which surprises no one, I am sure.
Judea did not suddenly come into existence in 63 BCE. What do the
sources have to say, Giwer? Have you checked Plutarch's "Lives"?
Plutarch wrote that Pompey " . . . conquered also Judea, and took its
king, Aristobulus, captive." What was Aristobulus of Judea king of,
Giwer, if not the people and land of Judea?
And yes, Giwer, those Judean people were already living in the land
called Judea before Pompey arrived in 63 BCE. Not because I say so, but
because the physical evidence in the form of the DJD manuscripts and the
contemporaneous sources say so. Your problem, Giwer, is that you have
no idea what the evidence is or what the sources have to say.
Have you examined the works of Nicholas of Damascus, Giwer? How about
the "Bibliotheca Historica" by Diodorus Siculus? How about Appian of
Alexandria's "Roman History"? Have you ever even heard of those, Giwer?
Are you getting this, Giwer? The fact that the ancient sources all
speak of a people calling themselves what was transliterated into Latin
as "Iudeai" organized into a kingdom in a land called Judea is evidence
of a Judea preexisting the Roman dependency of Judea established by
Pompey in 63 BCE. Only a knuckle head such as yourself or the equally
ignorant JTEM would maintain otherwise.
> Why do you keep trying to play word games instead of producing
> physical evidence?
>
I introduced you to 1QIsa and 4Q365 and these manuscripts are both
physical evidence, Giwer. So in fact I have produced physical evidence.
What part of that physical evidence is giving you so much trouble,
Giwer? Is it the part that utterly falsifies your kook conspiracy theories?
Could it be that your virulent anti-Semiticism, Nazi ideology, and
immersion in Hezbollah propaganda cause your prejudices to override your
reason?
All of the Dead Sea Scrolls are artifacts from Judea and many predate
Pompey's conquest in 63 BCE. 1QIsa and 4Q365 are two of those. Those
two alone are sufficient physical evidence to establish the existence of
the Jewish people before the Romans conquered them. Only the most
stubborn, prejudiced, obtuse, and ignorant person continues to ignore
that physical evidence.
One of those stubborn, prejudiced, obtuse, and ignorant persons is you,
Matt Giwer. Call me all the Nazi and Hezbollah insults you care to.
But all of that does not change the fact that your theory is demolished
by the physical evidence. Humbling, isn't it Giwer?
Tom P
> In message <4a8ee1a7$0$19644$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com>
> Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> A suggestion: you need to get your facts right before you concoct weird
>> conspiracy theories of history, Giwer.
>
> Ah, come on, Tom P. If Matt the Pratt got his facts right, there
> wouldn't be any basis for his kooky theories. He *can't* get his facts
> right.
>
> Ken Down
>
I embarked on a little journey of discovery over the past year or so by
reading the books by various people who deny the Holocaust. Giwer's web
site contains many of the ideas in that corpus of jackassery. The books
are truly frightening not only because they trivialize the Nazi mass
murders, but they also justify the Holocaust. In the context of the
kook conspiracy theories of history, the Jews were always the bad guys
who got what they deserved, and still get what they deserve today at the
hands of Hamas, Al Quaida, and Hezbollah terrorists. The corpus of
these loony later day Nazis even rejoices that most of Bernie Madoff's
victims were fellow Jews.
All of Giwer's lunatic ravings and nincompoopery from the ancient Near
East through contemporary happenings are linked by a truly virulent
hatred of everything Jewish, from their God, to the government and
people of Israel, to Christianity because it is a product of Judaism.
But oddly, the nincompoop Giwer allies himself with fundamentalist Shia
Islam and the Ayatollahs.
And we let this lunatic fringe own assault weapons and publish their
nincompoopery without prior restraint. The good ol' US of A . . .
Irrational nincompoops such as Giwer should be challenged at every
point. Every loose thread in his fabric of lies must be yanked hard at
every opportunity. And there is a wonderful schadenfreude watching
ninnies like Giwer spew their bile at all and sundry because their kook
theories crumble as they are steamrolled by evidence.
I experience a wonderful sense of schadenfreude watching Giwer squirm
and then ignore the evidence of 1QIsa and 4Q365. I think even the ninny
Giwer knows that the existence of these two manuscripts pretty much
kills his idiotic notion that the Jews were created from nothing in 63
BCE. And the truly wonderful thing about that evidence is that it meets
every criteria for truth Giwer has ever babbled about over the years.
But the fact that Giwer had obviously never heard of them until I hit
him with them in June or July made everything even funnier because Giwer
boasts that he keeps up with current scholarship.
Italo
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>
>> Kendall K Down wrote:
>>
>>> In message
>>> <4a8ce18e$0$4967$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
>>> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What I would ask is how the worship of
>>>> Astarte/Ashara can be distinguished from Aphrodite
>>>> among the civilized Judeans.
>>
>>
>>> Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he
>>> rides his Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the
>>> sunset. Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will
>>> be. It fell within the region of the Decapolis,
>>> which was gentile and Greek in origin.
Hippos/Susita seems just an extension of the earlier town
Gergesa. Presumably a town of the Girgashiy (Hitt. Karkisha).
>> You can say whatever you wish to the little old ladies
>> you rob blind. It will not pass here.
>>
>> The location of the find is clearly given in the
>> article. There is no way to claim there was a "greek"
>> goddess in that area either, less than a day's walk
>> from Roman Judea, the only one known for a fact to have
>> existed.
>>
> Ah, Giwer, since Greek is a proper noun, we who are
> literate in English capitalize the word.
>
> What is the origin of the Latin word "Iudea"?
Compare "Ya'diya" (Sa'mal), the toponym is likely of
Canaanite or Philistine origin.
--
Boycott American products
Christopher Ingham
> On 21 Aug, 08:42, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> > Kendall K Down wrote:
> > > In message <4a8ce18e$0$4967$9a6e1...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> > > Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> > >> What I would ask is how the worship of Astarte/Ashara can be distinguished
> > >> from Aphrodite among the civilized Judeans.
> > > Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
> > > region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
>
> > The location of the find is clearly given in the article. There is no way to
> > claim there was a "greek" goddess in that area either, less than a day's walk
> > from Roman Judea, the only one known for a fact to have existed.
>
> These figurines are of Aphrodite because that is the interpretation of
> the archaeologists. But they are believers ;) The hypercritical
> conclusion is only that we are dealing with figurines of clay and with
> pose similarities.
>
> Here is a link to a blog with pictures.http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/?p=1440
>
> And about these figurines, maybe we can talk some about how relevant
> they are for the other discussions? For, as Mr. Giwer noted, they are
> perhaps only some 1500 years old.
The pose of the figurine definitively establishes it as of a type of
statue of Aphrodite/Venus, called_Venus pudica_("modest Venus"),
modeled after a Hellenistic original dating to the third or second
century BCE. The votive statue therefore is of an Olympian deity, not
the Syro-Mesopotamian Astarte.
The elites of Susita, better known as Hippos, beginning in the
Hellenistic era were Macedonian Greeks. Hippos was one of the cities
of the Decapolis (a loose affiliation of cities with significant Greek
populations allied with Rome as a defensive measure against the rising
threat of Judea) before it was absorbed into the Roman Empire.
>
> Come to think of it, there is another relevant question that might
> highlight methodology. Mr. Giwer mentioned temples constructed by some
> Herod. Is there any archaeological evidence for these temples? Or do
> we know of them only through what is written
The evidence for this temple is extensive and well-documented.
Christopher Ingham
Martin Edwards
really know that. Mind your "P"s and "Q"s. These sources are all
consistent with Judea being the kingdom founded by Judas Maccabeus.
Herodotus refers only to "Palestine Syria" in his time subject to
Persia, which had recently conquered the Second Babylonian Empire. Now,
do you have an earlier source (than those you quote, not Herodotus)
outside the Bible for Judea?
--
As through this world I've rambled, I've met plenty of funny men,
Some rob you with a sixgun, some with a fountain pen.
Woody Guthrie
Martin Edwards
> In message <4a8ee1a7$0$19644$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com>
> Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> A suggestion: you need to get your facts right before you concoct weird
>> conspiracy theories of history, Giwer.
>
> Ah, come on, Tom P. If Matt the Pratt got his facts right, there
> wouldn't be any basis for his kooky theories. He *can't* get his facts
> right.
>
> Ken Down
>
the post which should come in above?
Tom P
in revolt by Judah Maccabeus? How long had they lived in Judea? What
language did they speak and write? What were the reasons for the
revolt? Were they circumcised? What was their religion? Where was
their religious center? Was it a temple? Was it a monumental temple?
Did these people cultivate cereal grains, olives, and grapes? Did they
raise livestock? Which species? Or did they just wander in from the
desert and decide to go to war with the remnants of the Seleucid
dynasty? Don't forget to cite your sources.
You are correct, indeed the Roman period sources are consistent with
Judas Maccabeus establishing a dynasty. But the same sources are just
as consistent with a Davidic dynasty, or any other Judean dynasty. But
the Roman era sources are only a portion of the evidence, don't you agree?
Both 1QIsa and 4Q365 predate the foundation of the Maccabean dynasty,
don't they?
And then there is the little matter of the Hebrew names in the Samaria
Papyrus from Wadi Daliyeh, internally and AMS dated to 352 or 351 BCE.
And those are not an exhaustive list of the dated manuscript record, as
you are doubtless aware.
As far as Herodotus' "Histories" 2:104, is it mere coincidence that a
people who just happened to reside in Syrian Palestine during the Roman
period happen to share certain cultural characteristics with people
Herodotus identifies as "Syrians of Palestine" who practiced
circumcision during the 5th century BCE?
Herodotus' reference to the "Kolchoi" having come out of Egypt is
another tantalizing reference. Obviously the Judeans also claimed to
have come out of Egypt. Merely another coincidence?
Obviously, none of those in and of themselves are conclusive.
So let's assemble the pieces. Herodotus reports "Syrians of Palestine"
or "Kolxoi" of Egyptian descent who practice circumcision resident in
what is now Israel during the 5th century BCE. Not only do these people
practice circumcision, but they consider it a duty to their deity as a
physical sign of their relationship to their god according to 4Q365. We
have the Hebrew names in the internally and AMS dated Samaria Papyrus,
also found in modern Israel. We have almost the entire Book of Isaiah in
the form of the Great Isaiah Scroll in Hebrew, 1QIsa, AMS dated to the
3rd or 4th centuries BCE. We have a paraphrase and commentary on the
Torah AMS dated to the 3rd or 4th centuries BCE. That same Torah
requires circumcision of all males as a physical sign of the covenant.
That Torah is at least as old as Herodotus. Can we stipulate the
accuracy of those points or do you disagree with any of them?
Remember too that Herodotus was exiled to Samos and Samos was a Greek
city known to have not only direct trade but a colony in Egypt during
the 6th and 5th centuries BCE. Where were the first monumental temples
of the Greek world built during the 6th and 5th centuries BCE? Did
these share certain design and construction aspects with Egyptian
temples? Where did Greek philosophy and mathematics originate? Do you
think that series of events might somehow be related?
Or do you subscribe to the notion of the "Greek miracle" with some
variation of the theme that Pythagoras, Anaximander, and Thales were
just sitting in the shade drinking good Samian wine and through "thought
problems" just spontaneously invented cool things like geometry,
philosophy, a full blown model of the cosmos, scale modeling of
monumental construction projects, and ethical systems?
The point of those questions is that Herodotus lived in a place and time
where Egyptian influences were known and acknowledged. Is it
unreasonable that he would fail utterly to recognize the same cultural
influences in Palestine?
That assemblage is a pretty good case that a certain clan or tribe or
cultural group of people were resident in Palestine during the 5th
century BCE and the Judeans of the Roman era were descended from them.
These people wrote in a unique Western Semitic language distinguishable
from other dialects and languages of the Western Semitic language group.
These people also had a highly developed philosophy that included
metaphysics, ethics, epistemology, and theology. These people had a
history with obvious mythological insertions, but no more so than the
Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, and every other people of that period I know
of. (Compare Genesis to Hesiod's "Theogony.") They had highly
developed dietary laws and customs. They had religious liturgies and
feast days. Compare those characteristics to Ionia, to Lydia, to
Attica, to Egypt, to Babylon, indeed to Rome during the 5th century BCE.
What above doesn't support the conclusion that the people with the
characteristics demonstrated by the evidence above were the Judeans of
the Roman period?
What of the evidence above doesn't fit a Semitic people residing on the
East end of the Mediterranean during the 5th century BCE?
Who is a better candidate for the descendants of these people than the
Judeans, Samaritans, and Galileans of the Roman period following
Pompey's conquest in 63 BCE?
I make no claims for Jewish exceptionalism or notions of being a chosen
people. Lots of ancient groups believed they were the chosen people of
their deity or deities, such as the Samians did about Hera, the
Athenians about Athena, the Milesians about Apollo, the Ephesians about
Artemis, the Halicarnassians about Poseidon and so on. I have made no
claims concerning most of the archaeology of Palestine, and surely there
is among that vast quantity of material a certain percentage that
supports the claim of a Yahweh worshiping, Hebrew writing, eastern
Mediterranean people resident in Palestine before the Maccabean revolt.
Not even Finkelstein claims the Hebrews never existed before the
Maccabeans, does he?
And you have surely noted that I have avoided any mention of Josephus,
Philo, and various other anonymously authored manuscripts from the
Discoveries in the Judean Desert publications. But these do exist and
make certain historical claims, some doubtless apocryphal and others
outright false, but some are just as doubtlessly true. And only a loony
conspiracy theorist such as Giwer or JTEM presumes all Jewish and
Christian authors lied at every point. I trust you are not among that
august company, despite the sniveling historiography proposed and likely
practiced by Eusebius.
The problem with ancient history is that most of the historical and
archaeological record is gone beyond recovery. So historical truth and
historical certainty are well nigh impossible, so probability is all
that remains. And every historical conclusion is subject to the whim of
the next discovery of a parchment or papyrus cache or set of monumental
inscriptions or collection of stelae.
"The Bible" is not an historical source. "The Bible" is a modern
cultural notion of slippery definition with modern baggage and consists
of a modern collection edited and redacted from various manuscripts
dated to Classical Antiquity. I do not refer to or discuss "The Bible"
as an historical source, or collection of historical sources. All of
the sources I refer to are "outside the Bible." I am perfectly willing
to debate the historicity of specific manuscripts. Do you have specific,
named, catalogued, manuscripts in mind?
For those reasons, I am not quite sure what you mean by "an earlier
source (than those you quote, not Herodotus) outside the Bible for
Judea." Do manuscripts dated before the Bible was redacted, edited, and
collated but bear text that was later included in the Bible count as
historical evidence?
It seems to me that manuscripts bearing religious texts are routinely
considered to be of evidential weight by real historians. Considering
that Classical Antiquity was drenched in religion, rejecting religious
artifacts and manuscripts out of hand is nothing short of idiotic. Much
of the monumental architecture disappears and city plans are rendered
insensible.
Besides, why do you require of me a source earlier than Herodotus?
I made no assertion of a people earlier than the 5th century BCE. I
think it is probable because peoples and cultures do not abruptly
appear, but since I can offer no evidence to confirm any such assertion,
I refrain from making any.
Besides, the manuscripts I have named indicate the probability that "the
Syrians who dwell in Palestine" of Herodotus are the same group
represented by the Hebrew names in the Samaria manuscript from Wadi
Daliyeh and the people who wrote 1QIsa and 4Q365 among other texts, and
their descendants are the people described by the Roman period authors.
The only alternative theories must involve conspiracy of some sort.
A whole bunch of people over a four or five century period got
together, made up a heretofore unknown language (from Greek roots
according to the tin foil hat mob represented by the likes of Giwer),
and wrote a few hundred scrolls of lies and then concealed these lies in
caves all over eastern Judea over a century or so? This gets truly and
absurdly fantastic very quickly.
I know very little of the archaeology of modern Israel and Palestine,
thus I have refrained from naming any particular artifact because I am
truly out of my depth. Which is not to say I don't read in the subject
occasionally. What do Finkelstein, his allies, and the so-called
"Biblical minimalists" have to say?
It seems to me that posters on Usenet go much further than the
specialists who study these events and artifacts for a living.
Do any of those people, or anyone else, indicate or hypothesize that the
people of Judea sprang from nowhere in the second century BCE as you
seem to assert?
How do you explain extant, dated manuscript narratives older than the
second century BCE Maccabean revolt?
Have you ever visited Delos? I bring it up because there is the little
problem of the inscriptions dated 250-175 BCE recording the dedication
of the Samaritan synagogue on Delos. (There are readable photographs at
http://www.pohick.org/sts/delos.html, or you can travel to Delos which
is truly worth the trip.) That is archaeological evidence in the form
of a monumental inscription that predates the Maccabean revolt. How do
you propose to resolve that evidence which clearly excludes the
Maccabean revolt as the beginning of the Roman period Judeans and
Samaritans?
Tom P
than the Hellenistic conquest of Judea, and far older than Pompey's
conquest of 63 BCE. Doesn't it?
Italo
In the 9th c. BCE Palastin was centered at Kunulua (Tayinat)
while Y'dy seems to've been at Sam'al (Zincirli), at some
50km distance.
Perhaps the Jebusite inhabitants of Jerusalem ("thy father
was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite") were the first
to apply the name Ya'udu/Judah to the region.
--
Boycott American products
Italo
> On Aug 21, 6:18 pm, mof <mof...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> These figurines are of Aphrodite because that is the
>> interpretation of the archaeologists. But they are
>> believers ;) The hypercritical conclusion is only that
>> we are dealing with figurines of clay and with pose
>> similarities.
>>
>> Here is a link to a blog with
>> pictures.http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/?p=1440
>>
>> And about these figurines, maybe we can talk some about
>> how relevant they are for the other discussions? For,
>> as Mr. Giwer noted, they are perhaps only some 1500
>> years old.
>
>
> The pose of the figurine definitively establishes it as
> of a type of statue of Aphrodite/Venus, called_Venus
> pudica_("modest Venus"), modeled after a Hellenistic
> original dating to the third or second century BCE. The
> votive statue therefore is of an Olympian deity, not the
> Syro-Mesopotamian Astarte.
Sometimes cults continued in Hellenized guise.
> The elites of Susita, better known as Hippos, beginning
> in the Hellenistic era were Macedonian Greeks.
Even the Macedonians at Antioch-Antigonia seem to've been a
small minority. The populace was drawn from preexisting
towns in the area.
Josephus notion of Hippo as a "Greek" town need not to mean
that its inhabitants were Greeks. The same goes for
Hellenistic Gaza. The religious doctrines that developed
from the 5th to 2nd centuries BCE in Judah had probably
always been alien to these areas.
> Hippos was one of the cities of the Decapolis (a loose
> affiliation of cities with significant Greek populations
>
Reference?
> allied with Rome as a defensive measure against the
> rising threat of Judea) before it was absorbed into the
> Roman Empire.
>
>> Come to think of it, there is another relevant question
>> that might highlight methodology. Mr. Giwer mentioned
>> temples constructed by some Herod. Is there any
>> archaeological evidence for these temples? Or do we
>> know of them only through what is written
>
>
> The evidence for this temple is extensive and
> well-documented.
>
> Christopher Ingham
--
Boycott American products
Kendall K Down
Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> While that may be true, or largely true, do you have any facts to answer
> the post which should come in above?
Of course we do - but I'm not going to waste time re-posting them for
Matt the Pratt's sock puppet.
Kendall K Down
Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> You are guitly of a little sleight of hand here, "P", but I am sure you
> really know that. Mind your "P"s and "Q"s. These sources are all
> consistent with Judea being the kingdom founded by Judas Maccabeus.
And, of course, Judas Maccabeus appeared on the scene out of nowhere,
found an army to follow him out of nowhere, attacked and defeated the
Seleucids who were persecuting a non-existent people and religion, and
liberated and cleansed a temple that didn't exist until Herod the
Great built it.
You are as big a fool as Matt the Pratt and JTEM.
Kendall K Down
Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I embarked on a little journey of discovery over the past year or so by
> reading the books by various people who deny the Holocaust. Giwer's web
> site contains many of the ideas in that corpus of jackassery. The books
> are truly frightening not only because they trivialize the Nazi mass
> murders, but they also justify the Holocaust. In the context of the
> kook conspiracy theories of history, the Jews were always the bad guys
> who got what they deserved, and still get what they deserve today at the
> hands of Hamas, Al Quaida, and Hezbollah terrorists. The corpus of
> these loony later day Nazis even rejoices that most of Bernie Madoff's
> victims were fellow Jews.
Quite so - and thoroughly distasteful. Nevertheless, we do need to
beware of going to the opposite extreme and ignoring the illegal and
oppressive actions of the state of Israel and the blind support it
gets from Jews around the world simply because of their racist
theories that any Jew is right at any time.
Bigotry in one direction is not countered by bigotry in another:
balance - that trait so rarely encountered in human affairs - is what
we need.
> But the fact that Giwer had obviously never heard of them until I hit
> him with them in June or July made everything even funnier because Giwer
> boasts that he keeps up with current scholarship.
Absolutely - and he always bangs on about "physical evidence".
Personally, I would be quite happy to let him moulder on his tatty
trailer park, stewing his mind on cheap beer and nazi fantasies, if he
didn't post here and put on such an authorative pose. If one were a
newbie, it would be easy to think that he knows what he is talking
about. That is why I keep posting against him - and thanks for your
help in exposing his ignorance.
Kendall K Down
Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Could it be that your virulent anti-Semiticism, Nazi ideology, and
> immersion in Hezbollah propaganda cause your prejudices to override your
> reason?
To imply that Matt the Pratt has any reason is to go beyond the
evidence and in the direction of undue flattery.
Kendall K Down
Italo <ola...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hippos/Susita seems just an extension of the earlier town
> Gergesa. Presumably a town of the Girgashiy (Hitt. Karkisha).
I fear not. Gergesa is another site entirely, about twelve miles south
of Galilee.
Martin Edwards
> In message <YLqkm.108595$wz2....@newsfe08.ams2>
> Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> You are guitly of a little sleight of hand here, "P", but I am sure you
>> really know that. Mind your "P"s and "Q"s. These sources are all
>> consistent with Judea being the kingdom founded by Judas Maccabeus.
>
> And, of course, Judas Maccabeus appeared on the scene out of nowhere,
> found an army to follow him out of nowhere, attacked and defeated the
> Seleucids who were persecuting a non-existent people and religion, and
> liberated and cleansed a temple that didn't exist until Herod the
> Great built it.
>
> You are as big a fool as Matt the Pratt and JTEM.
>
> Ken Down
>
revolt. Local revolts happened all the time. I'll not respond to your
personal remarks: you are entitled to your opinion.
Martin Edwards
> In message <5Nqkm.108596$wz2....@newsfe08.ams2>
> Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> While that may be true, or largely true, do you have any facts to answer
>> the post which should come in above?
>
> Of course we do - but I'm not going to waste time re-posting them for
> Matt the Pratt's sock puppet.
>
> Ken Down
>
when Geocities folds.
Matt Giwer
English has arbitrary capitalization. I reserve the right to equal
arbitrariness.
> Just
> as Zionist is always capitalized, whether used as a noun, adjective, or
> as a part of Nazi and Hezbollah hate speech, as you just used it.
Anti-zionism is a moral imperative.
And hyphens are not letters. The crazy Brits spell NATO, Nato. What a silly
people.
--
We have learned from the religious riots in Israel that riots
are permitted on the Sabbath.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4171
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo3/holo-survivors.phtml a3
Tue Aug 25 04:11:03 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
...
> One of those stubborn, prejudiced, obtuse, and ignorant persons is you,
> Matt Giwer. Call me all the Nazi and Hezbollah insults you care to. But
> all of that does not change the fact that your theory is demolished by
> the physical evidence. Humbling, isn't it Giwer?
I say only that you are a zionist. As such you are the lowest of the low, the
very of the earth BECAUSE the zionists were collaborators with the Nazis.
Ha'Avara/Transfer Agreement should you ever learn to use google. Not only does
Israel have a fascist government it is difficult to find an analysis in an
Israeli newspaper which says otherwise. Seig Heil the Chosen Race.
--
If a gay kills a gay is it a love crime?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4178
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/ Antisemitism a10
Tue Aug 25 04:14:33 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> In message <4a8e41da$0$5638$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>> Matt the Pratt showing his usual ignorance as he rides his
>>> Aphrodite/Astarte hobbyhorse off into the sunset.
>>> Susita is not in Judea, never was, never will be. It fell within the
>>> region of the Decapolis, which was gentile and Greek in origin.
>
>> You can say whatever you wish to the little old ladies you rob blind. It will
>> not pass here.
>> The location of the find is clearly given in the article. There is no way to
>> claim there was a "greek" goddess in that area either, less than a day's walk
>> from Roman Judea, the only one known for a fact to have existed.
>
> I repeat: Matt the Pratt shows his usual ignorance.
>
> Anyone who wishes to waste time proving that Matt the Pratt is an
> ignoramus can look up Susita and Decapolis on Wikipedia.
Criminals such as yourself are all the worse for knowing you are lying while
pretending piety.
--
The crime is so grave that innocence cannot be considered a defense.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4173
http://www.giwersworld.org/palestine/answers.phtml a9
Tue Aug 25 04:22:35 EDT 2009
Christopher Ingham
> Christopher Ingham wrote:
> > On Aug 21, 6:18 pm, mof <mof...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> These figurines are of Aphrodite because that is the
> >> interpretation of the archaeologists. But they are
> >> believers ;) The hypercritical conclusion is only that
> >> we are dealing with figurines of clay and with pose
> >> similarities.
>
> >> Here is a link to a blog with
> >> pictures.http://wordpress.haifa.ac.il/?p=1440
>
> >> And about these figurines, maybe we can talk some about
> >> how relevant they are for the other discussions? For,
> >> as Mr. Giwer noted, they are perhaps only some 1500
> >> years old.
>
> > The pose of the figurine definitively establishes it as
> > of a type of statue of Aphrodite/Venus, called_Venus
> > pudica_("modest Venus"), modeled after a Hellenistic
> > original dating to the third or second century BCE. The
> > votive statue therefore is of an Olympian deity, not the
> > Syro-Mesopotamian Astarte.
>
> Sometimes cults continued in Hellenized guise.
The assimilation of Venus with Astarte was common in the Hellenistic
and Roman Near East, and these votive statuettes may very well
represent such a syncretized deity. (Aphrodite may actually have
originated as Astarte in the Bronze Age, although this is uncertain.)
But Hippos was one of the "highly Hellenized" cities of the Decapolis,
according to many commentators (see below), and therefore one might
reasonably assume that these figurines are of a goddess primarily in
her Aphroditian aspect, especially as the pose is of a much-emulated
statue type of Aphrodite which, moreover, is antithetical in attitude
to the most common type of Astarte which exhibits wanton sexuality. We
need, though, to await reports on the archaeological context of the
finds in order possibly to arrive at certainty.
>
> > The elites of Susita, better known as Hippos, beginning
> > in the Hellenistic era were Macedonian Greeks.
>
> Even the Macedonians at Antioch-Antigonia seem to've been a
> small minority. The populace was drawn from preexisting
> towns in the area.
>
> Josephus notion of Hippo as a "Greek" town need not to mean
> that its inhabitants were Greeks. The same goes for
> Hellenistic Gaza. The religious doctrines that developed
> from the 5th to 2nd centuries BCE in Judah had probably
> always been alien to these areas.
I don't think anyone claims or has claimed that Greeks formed more
than a minority in any of the Decapolitan cities, several of which
existed as settlements prior to the Seleucid arrival. The Nabataeans
and other Arab peoples had a significant presence in this region; and
there were small Jewish enclaves in all of the cities.
But the layouts of the cities and the monumental architecture were
emphatically Greek. They were also organized as_poleis_. In the
imperial era several of the cities celebrated (in some cases wrongly)
their Greek foundation. All of which indicates a robust Greek and
Roman influence.
>
> > Hippos was one of the cities of the Decapolis (a loose
> > affiliation of cities with significant Greek populations
>
> Reference?
The Decapolis was "a loose association of about ten
cities" [Richardson, 11]; "an enclave of highly Hellenized city
states" [Butcher, 113]; "[composed of] Greek cities which had grown up
in the Hellenistic period" [Millar, 38]; "a loose confederation of
former Macedonian cities [which] has been regarded as a sort of
Hellenic alliance against the increasingly powerful Semitic states of
Judaea and Nabataea" [Ball, 181]; "a loose grouping of ten cities
serving as a buffer between the new Roman province of Syria and the
unstable kingdoms to the south" [Roller, 77]. "It seems the Romans [in
the first centuries] considerd the cities of the Decapolis as part of
the civilized Mediterranean world, whereas they simply left, for the
time being, tribal areas to native rulers" [Gawlikowski, 43].
Pliny the Elder (_HN_5,16.74) and Josephus (_AJ_14.76) give slightly
varying lists of cities of the Decapolis (Hippos is included in both).
The Synoptic Gospels and inscriptions from the early centuries CE also
refer to the Decapolis.
The nature of the affiliation of the Decapolitan cities in the
Hellenistic period has in recent years come under much scrutiny, and
many questions have not been resolved. The entity of the Decapolis is
more clearly attested beginning with Pompey, who may actually have
instituted it, although it was never an administative unit, being
partitioned at various times by the Romans as components of provinces
and client kingdoms before finally being made subject to the governor
of Arabia in 106, after which the Decapolis was nothing more than a
geographical concept.
Apart from the Hippodamian grid pattern of the streets and the wide
colonnaded decumanus on the Greek model, Hippos was little known. It
remained unexplored until an extensive excavation program was
commenced in 2000. Coins minted there in the first century CE depict
Tyche, Zeus, Hera, and tetrastyle temples. A second- or third-century
inscription in Greek seems to refer to the Nabataean deity Dushara.
Sources consulted:
-- Ball, W.,_Rome in the East_(New York, 2000).
-- Butcher, K.,_Roman Syria and the Near East_(Los Angeles, 2003).
-- Gawlikowski, M., "The Syrian Desert under the Romans," in S. E.
Alcock, ed.,_The Early Roman Empire in the East_(Oxford, 1997),
37-54.
-- Millar, F.,_The Roman Near East, 31 BC - AD 337_(Cambridge, MA,
1993).
-- Richardson, P.,_City and Sanctuary: Religion and Architecture in
the Roman Near East_(London, 2002).
-- Roller, D. W.,_The Building Program of Herod the Great_(Berkeley
and Los Angeles, 1998).
Christopher Ingham
Tom P
> In message <4a917970$0$24020$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com>
> Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Could it be that your virulent anti-Semiticism, Nazi ideology, and
>> immersion in Hezbollah propaganda cause your prejudices to override your
>> reason?
>
> To imply that Matt the Pratt has any reason is to go beyond the
> evidence and in the direction of undue flattery.
>
> Ken Down
>
towards Jews and Christians is not an answer. Of course he has reason.
It is just limited.
Tom P
>> Just as Zionist is always capitalized, whether used as a noun,
>> adjective, or as a part of Nazi and Hezbollah hate speech, as you just
>> used it.
>
> Anti-zionism is a moral imperative.
>
> And hyphens are not letters. The crazy Brits spell NATO, Nato. What
> a silly people.
>
Why don't you address the physical evidence that shatters your theories
as opposed to linguistic "Britishisms" and vacuous Nazi and Hezbollah
slogans?
There are lots of issues and questions concerning your theories of
history pending from three different threads. And you have fled from all
of them. But conspiracy theories of history do tend to unravel at the
slightest tug, don't they, Giwer?
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
> ...
>> One of those stubborn, prejudiced, obtuse, and ignorant persons is you,
>> Matt Giwer. Call me all the Nazi and Hezbollah insults you care to.
>> But all of that does not change the fact that your theory is
>> demolished by the physical evidence. Humbling, isn't it Giwer?
>
> I say only that you are a zionist. As such you are the lowest of the
> low, the very of the earth BECAUSE the zionists were collaborators with
> the Nazis. Ha'Avara/Transfer Agreement should you ever learn to use
> google. Not only does Israel have a fascist government it is difficult
> to find an analysis in an Israeli newspaper which says otherwise. Seig
> Heil the Chosen Race.
>
kook conspiracy theories of history?
There are lots of issues pending from at least three threads. And you
fled as opposed to producing evidence.
Hezbollah and Nazi epithets and slogans are not historical evidence.
You still have many things to explain concerning your kook theory that
Judea and Judeans sprang into existence in 63 BCE like Pallas Athena
from the forehead of Zeus.
Tom P
disbelieve the information you post. Thank you.
Tom P
> In message <4a917f60$0$19635$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com>
> Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I embarked on a little journey of discovery over the past year or so by
>> reading the books by various people who deny the Holocaust. Giwer's web
>> site contains many of the ideas in that corpus of jackassery. The books
>> are truly frightening not only because they trivialize the Nazi mass
>> murders, but they also justify the Holocaust. In the context of the
>> kook conspiracy theories of history, the Jews were always the bad guys
>> who got what they deserved, and still get what they deserve today at the
>> hands of Hamas, Al Quaida, and Hezbollah terrorists. The corpus of
>> these loony later day Nazis even rejoices that most of Bernie Madoff's
>> victims were fellow Jews.
>
> Quite so - and thoroughly distasteful. Nevertheless, we do need to
> beware of going to the opposite extreme and ignoring the illegal and
> oppressive actions of the state of Israel and the blind support it
> gets from Jews around the world simply because of their racist
> theories that any Jew is right at any time.
>
> Bigotry in one direction is not countered by bigotry in another:
> balance - that trait so rarely encountered in human affairs - is what
> we need.
>
justify Hamas and Hezbollah crimes. The cycle must be broken at some
point. Rabin and Sharon had the stature to break the cycle but were cut
down as they got close to touching the magic ring. Just my opinion . . .
>> But the fact that Giwer had obviously never heard of them until I hit
>> him with them in June or July made everything even funnier because Giwer
>> boasts that he keeps up with current scholarship.
>
> Absolutely - and he always bangs on about "physical evidence".
>
> Personally, I would be quite happy to let him moulder on his tatty
> trailer park, stewing his mind on cheap beer and nazi fantasies, if he
> didn't post here and put on such an authorative pose. If one were a
> newbie, it would be easy to think that he knows what he is talking
> about. That is why I keep posting against him - and thanks for your
> help in exposing his ignorance.
>
> Ken Down
>
You are welcome.
Matt Giwer
the interests of zionism does get tiring after a while.
--
The professional religious class has more committed atheists
than all the secular humanists combined.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4183
http://www.giwersworld.org/disinfo/occupied-2.phtml a6
Wed Aug 26 00:26:24 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Tom P wrote:
>> ...
>>> One of those stubborn, prejudiced, obtuse, and ignorant persons is you,
>>> Matt Giwer. Call me all the Nazi and Hezbollah insults you care to.
>>> But all of that does not change the fact that your theory is
>>> demolished by the physical evidence. Humbling, isn't it Giwer?
>> I say only that you are a zionist. As such you are the lowest of
>> the low, the very of the earth BECAUSE the zionists were collaborators
>> with the Nazis. Ha'Avara/Transfer Agreement should you ever learn to
>> use google. Not only does Israel have a fascist government it is
>> difficult to find an analysis in an Israeli newspaper which says
>> otherwise. Seig Heil the Chosen Race.
> Why don't you try to deal with the physical evidence that shatters your
> kook conspiracy theories of history?
Why do you continue to claim there is some kind of conspiracy I favor.
Zionism was and is a conspiracy that was openly conducted and was in fact
successful.
The only good zionist is a dead zionist.
> There are lots of issues pending from at least three threads. And you
> fled as opposed to producing evidence.
> Hezbollah and Nazi epithets and slogans are not historical evidence. You
> still have many things to explain concerning your kook theory that Judea
> and Judeans sprang into existence in 63 BCE like Pallas Athena from the
> forehead of Zeus.
The Palestinians were in existence in the mid 5th c. BC long predating any
imagined beginnings of the Yahwist cult. By the same measure Judeans first
appear in history when Pompey arrives in the region. Clearly both existed
before their first mention in history. You know that yet you keep pretending I
have said otherwise.
There is no evidence the Yahwist cult was ever dominant any place in Judea
including in Jerusalem where there is clearly contrary evidence of the Temple
of Ashara in the 1st c. AD as mentioned by Josephus. The archaeological
evidence for Judea shows the religion of the region was in the worship of
Ashara and Yahweh as a pair just as they were by the Nabateans and others
under different local names. This pair is better known to us under the pair
names Isis and Osiris, Venus and Adonis and other pair names.
--
The nature of the Old Testament from a history of the Jewish people down to
a distorted story of their history has never been more than a religious
tradition. We have no idea who started it nor when nor why.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4166
http://www.giwersworld.org/palestine/answers.phtml a9
Wed Aug 26 00:28:24 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
...
> German crimes do not justify Israeli crimes nor do Israeli crimes
> justify Hamas and Hezbollah crimes. The cycle must be broken at some
> point. Rabin and Sharon had the stature to break the cycle but were cut
> down as they got close to touching the magic ring. Just my opinion . . .
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
That is the sum and substance of all anyone needs to know about modern day
bibleland. All else is details.
--
As said by a criminal jew on 30 July 2009 regarding eleven new squattertowns:
"The message to that nigger Arab they call a president is that
this is Jewish land."
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4174
http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml a5
Wed Aug 26 00:42:55 EDT 2009
Kendall K Down
Italo <ola...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In the 9th c. BCE Palastin was centered at Kunulua (Tayinat)
> while Y'dy seems to've been at Sam'al (Zincirli), at some
> 50km distance.
It is tempting to assume a relationship between "Palastin" and
"Palestine" - see, an 'e' on the end is the only difference? - but
that is probably fallacious.
Kendall K Down
Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Why don't you try to deal with the physical evidence that shatters your
> kook conspiracy theories of history?
Simple: he can't.
> There are lots of issues pending from at least three threads. And you
> fled as opposed to producing evidence.
That is typical of Matt the Pratt. When cornered he first resorts to
abuse, then runs and hides.
Kendall K Down
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> There is no evidence the Yahwist cult was ever dominant any place in Judea
> including in Jerusalem where there is clearly contrary evidence of the Temple
> of Ashara in the 1st c. AD as mentioned by Josephus.
For the benefit of any newcomer, Matt the Pratt dismisses all the
"physical evidence" he claims to hold so dear - including the fact
that there is no evidence for a temple of Ashara - and bases his
ridiculous claim on a reference in Josephus to "Strato's Tower".
Only a mind as muddled as his could turn a tower into a temple!
Kendall K Down
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> I repeat: Matt the Pratt shows his usual ignorance.
>> Anyone who wishes to waste time proving that Matt the Pratt is an
>> ignoramus can look up Susita and Decapolis on Wikipedia.
> Criminals such as yourself are all the worse for knowing you are lying while
> pretending piety.
And there I was expecting Matt the Pratt to go into a rant about how
unreliable Wikipedia was. Seems he has given up on that tack and
relies on personal abuse these days.
Tom P
> You constant attempts to create a "people" independent of the
> religion in the interests of zionism does get tiring after a while.
>
are mistaken, Giwer. Thus your kook conspiracy theories remain nothing
but kook conspiracy theories because you willfully ignore the physical
evidence.
Giwer, why don't you address the physical evidence that demolishes your
kook theories as opposed to spewing vacuous Nazi and Hezbollah slogans?
Explain what temple Pompey profaned in 63 BCE, Giwer.
Explain the monumental evidence on Delos.
Explain the existence of 1QIsa, 4Q365, and hundreds of other manuscripts.
Explain the Hebrew names in the Wadi Daliyeh manuscript internally and
AMS dated to 351 or 352 BCE.
Those are physical evidence of Jews centuries before Pompey.
There are lots of issues and questions concerning your theories of
history pending from three different threads. And you have fled from all
of them. You really only have three choices here, Giwer. Either admit
you are mistaken about the existence of the physical evidence or slink
away with your tail between your legs. Or you can continue to post
nincompoopery but that makes you appear stupid. My money is on the
third option.
Your conspiracy theories of history do tend to unravel at the slightest
Tom P
> In message <4a940032$0$13190$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com>
> Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Why don't you try to deal with the physical evidence that shatters your
>> kook conspiracy theories of history?
>
> Simple: he can't.
>
>> There are lots of issues pending from at least three threads. And you
>> fled as opposed to producing evidence.
>
> That is typical of Matt the Pratt. When cornered he first resorts to
> abuse, then runs and hides.
>
> Ken Down
>
Let's keep him running by posting references to the physical evidence
Giwer professes to rely upon.
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Tom P wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> One of those stubborn, prejudiced, obtuse, and ignorant persons is you,
>>>> Matt Giwer. Call me all the Nazi and Hezbollah insults you care to.
>>>> But all of that does not change the fact that your theory is
>>>> demolished by the physical evidence. Humbling, isn't it Giwer?
>>> I say only that you are a zionist. As such you are the lowest of
>>> the low, the very of the earth BECAUSE the zionists were
>>> collaborators with the Nazis. Ha'Avara/Transfer Agreement should you
>>> ever learn to use google. Not only does Israel have a fascist
>>> government it is difficult to find an analysis in an Israeli
>>> newspaper which says otherwise. Seig Heil the Chosen Race.
>
>> Why don't you try to deal with the physical evidence that shatters
>> your kook conspiracy theories of history?
>
> Why do you continue to claim there is some kind of conspiracy I favor.
>
> Zionism was and is a conspiracy that was openly conducted and was in
> fact successful.
>
> The only good zionist is a dead zionist.
>
Is that a threat, Giwer?
I know brute force is the preferred method of Nazis and Hezbollah and
your sympathies for those thugs are well known.
>> There are lots of issues pending from at least three threads. And you
>> fled as opposed to producing evidence.
>
>> Hezbollah and Nazi epithets and slogans are not historical evidence.
>> You still have many things to explain concerning your kook theory that
>> Judea and Judeans sprang into existence in 63 BCE like Pallas Athena
>> from the forehead of Zeus.
>
> The Palestinians were in existence in the mid 5th c. BC long
> predating any imagined beginnings of the Yahwist cult. By the same
> measure Judeans first appear in history when Pompey arrives in the
> region. Clearly both existed before their first mention in history. You
> know that yet you keep pretending I have said otherwise.
>
You forgot to provide evidence again, Giwer. And since your word is
worthless, your comment above must be considered a lie until you back it
with evidence.
> There is no evidence the Yahwist cult was ever dominant any place in
> Judea including in Jerusalem where there is clearly contrary evidence of
> the Temple of Ashara in the 1st c. AD as mentioned by Josephus. The
> archaeological evidence for Judea shows the religion of the region was
> in the worship of Ashara and Yahweh as a pair just as they were by the
> Nabateans and others under different local names. This pair is better
> known to us under the pair names Isis and Osiris, Venus and Adonis and
> other pair names.
>
Hedging your bets now, Giwer? So now you have shifted from Jews did not
exist before Pompey to Jews being dominant. Nice try.
Your argument is getting slippery. You waver in your certainty. Now
your conjecture is reduced to "the Yahwist cult was ever dominant any
place in Judea including in Jerusalem"?
What happened to your certainty of August 22, 2009, when you confidently
assured us all that, "The distinction, as you know full well, is to
separate Roman Judea which did exist from the mythical biblical Judea
for which there is no evidence of existence."
Gosh, Giwer, from "no evidence of existence" to "no evidence the Yahwist
cult was ever dominant in Judea . . ."
Is this your recognition and back handed confession that your silly
conspiracy theory can not stand as you so confidently postulated a mere
four days ago?
Anyway, I never argued dominance in any way. I merely wrote that the
physical evidence proves conclusively the existence of a written Hebrew
language in the 4th century BCE, and that certain texts considered
sacred had been written before the 4th century BCE. The physical
evidence proves those two points.
Giwer, you forgot to list and specifically name the physical evidence
for your alleged "in Jerusalem where there is clearly contrary evidence
of the Temple of Ashara in the 1st c. AD." Where is you evidence?
Are you sure you want to rely on Josephus as your source for your
alleged "Temple of Ashara in the 1st c. AD"?
If so, why can we not rely upon the historicity of the remainder of the
corpus of Josephus?
Did you get that you just painted yourself into another corner, Giwer?
Is Josephus reliable or isn't he? Decide, Giwer.
Prove that the myths of Isis and Osiris, Ashara and Yahweh, Venus and
Adonis, Aphrodite and Adonis have a common source. Now, Giwer. I don't
mean Roman metamorphoses of these various legends into cults in the
first century CE and later. So get it right. Just for once. Aphrodite
goes back to at least the 8th century BCE. But then you have read the
8th century BCE texts of "Theogony," "Works and Days," "Iliad," and
"Odyssey" haven't you Giwer?
Or were you lying in that earlier thread where you made the backhanded
claim to have read Homer and Hesiod but then made the hilarious claim
that "Theogony" was not a religious text?
Why don't you address the physical evidence that shatters your theories
as opposed to vacuous Nazi and Hezbollah slogans? Begin with the Wadi
Daliyeh manuscript internally and AMS dated to 351-352 BCE containing
Hebrew names, 1QIsa, 4Q365, and the 2nd or 3rd century BCE Synagogue
dedication inscriptions on Delos. That is all very real physical
evidence, Giwer. Deal with it.
There are lots of issues and questions concerning your theories of
history pending from three different threads. And you have fled from all
of them. But conspiracy theories of history do tend to unravel at the
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
> ...
>> German crimes do not justify Israeli crimes nor do Israeli crimes
>> justify Hamas and Hezbollah crimes. The cycle must be broken at some
>> point. Rabin and Sharon had the stature to break the cycle but were
>> cut down as they got close to touching the magic ring. Just my
>> opinion . . .
>
> Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
>
> That is the sum and substance of all anyone needs to know about
> modern day bibleland. All else is details.
>
You have lied so many times that you can never be considered a
trustworthy source for any scrap of information.
Dragonblaze
[snip]
> > Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
>
> > That is the sum and substance of all anyone needs to know about
> > modern day bibleland. All else is details.
>
> Evidence, Giwer. You must provide evidence for your every contention.
> You have lied so many times that you can never be considered a
> trustworthy source for any scrap of information.
Not to mention the little fact that Giwer is so damn ignorant, he does
not even know that the Romans drove the Jews off only from Jerusalem.
Given that, now just who might have been the ancestors of the rural
Palestinian Arabs of today? That is the historical reality, but
unfortunately it is something neither side will ever acknowledge - let
alone bigots like Giwer.
Italo
Kendall K Down <webm...@diggingsonline.com> schreef:
> In message <1d799$4a932f60$524b090b$25...@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>
> Italo <ola...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > In the 9th c. BCE Palastin was centered at Kunulua (Tayinat)
> > while Y'dy seems to've been at Sam'al (Zincirli), at some
> > 50km distance.
>
> It is tempting to assume a relationship between "Palastin" and
> "Palestine" - see, an 'e' on the end is the only difference? - but
> that is probably fallacious.
The name is first understood as Padasatini or Wadasatini:
<http://books.google.nl/books?id=kl4s-G2b3p0C&pg=PA365>
"wadasatinizas (REGIO), "of the land of Wadasatini"".
then
<http://cat.une.edu.au/page/tell%20tayinat>
"On the basis of this [2007] year's work the Oriental Institute's many
Hittite Luwian fragments should be associated with Building XIV, which
dates from late EIA to early MIA. David Hawkins now reads the name of
this Neo-Hittite polity as Palasatini (not Padastini as previously
proposed)."
and
<http://www.artsci.utoronto.ca/main/tayinat-backgrounder.pdf>
"The early Iron Age settlement at Tayinat exhibits strong cultural ties
to the Aegean world, the traditional homeland of the Sea Peoples
famously depicted at Medinet Habu, the mortuary complex of Ramesses III
in Egypt. The land of Palastin, meanwhile, appears to have linguistic,
and possibly historical, ties to the Peleset, one of the Sea Peoples
recorded at Medinet Habu,and almost certainly the forebears of the
biblical Philistines."
--
Boycott American products
Italo
Kendall K Down <webm...@diggingsonline.com> schreef:
> In message <4f005$4a918dd8$524b090b$31...@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>
> Italo <ola...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Hippos/Susita seems just an extension of the earlier town
> > Gergesa. Presumably a town of the Girgashiy (Hitt. Karkisha).
>
> I fear not. Gergesa is another site entirely, about twelve miles south
> of Galilee.
Gadara?
More likely that 'Gadarenes' and 'Gerasenes' are mistaken corrections.
When Gergesa was supplanted by Hippo the region may still been called
Gergasene after the old town.
--
Boycott American products
Tom P
You have a point. Several points, actually.
Matt Giwer
You are admitting to being a Zionist. Therefore you are politically motivated.
--
A real American only needs one finger while an Englishman requires two.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4176
http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/sewer-bible.phtml a15
Thu Aug 27 00:56:25 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> In message <4a94bd33$0$4955$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> There is no evidence the Yahwist cult was ever dominant any place in Judea
>> including in Jerusalem where there is clearly contrary evidence of the Temple
>> of Ashara in the 1st c. AD as mentioned by Josephus.
>
> For the benefit of any newcomer, Matt the Pratt dismisses all the
> "physical evidence" he claims to hold so dear - including the fact
> that there is no evidence for a temple of Ashara - and bases his
> ridiculous claim on a reference in Josephus to "Strato's Tower".
>
> Only a mind as muddled as his could turn a tower into a temple!
So tell me the difference between BYT YHWH and BYT STRT.
You have been asked before and you have failed to answer. Why not answer now?
Will it hurt your business showing the rubes around occupied Jerusalem?
--
There are only two kinds of Jews. Those who
love Israel and those who hate themselves.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4179
http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml a2
Thu Aug 27 00:57:55 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> [snip]
>>> Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
>>> That is the sum and substance of all anyone needs to know about
>>> modern day bibleland. All else is details.
>> Evidence, Giwer. You must provide evidence for your every contention.
>> You have lied so many times that you can never be considered a
>> trustworthy source for any scrap of information.
> Not to mention the little fact that Giwer is so damn ignorant, he does
> not even know that the Romans drove the Jews off only from Jerusalem.
Given the fact I have debunked the Zionist lie about being expelled from the
entire land dozens of times and even quoted the earliest known debunking from
the 4th c. AD I suggest your ignorance is the only thing you are exposing.
> Given that, now just who might have been the ancestors of the rural
> Palestinian Arabs of today? That is the historical reality, but
> unfortunately it is something neither side will ever acknowledge - let
> alone bigots like Giwer.
The genetic evidence says they are the same as the Jews who continued living
in Palestine. Their ancestors simply changed religions. They share common
ancestors. The Ashkenazi are unrelated to either group.
--
To help mankind a degree in medicine requires great effort, intelligence and
dedication. A degree in divinity requires only dedication.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4184
http://www.haaretz.com What is Israel really like? http://www.jpost.com a7
Thu Aug 27 01:00:25 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
You are invited to present anything which is not covered by the jewish theft
and the owners wanting it back.
--
Atheism dignifies theism. There is no special name for
those who do not believe if faries.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4190
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/GAZA-pics/ a13
Thu Aug 27 01:03:25 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> In message <4a939f74$0$23953$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>> I repeat: Matt the Pratt shows his usual ignorance.
>>> Anyone who wishes to waste time proving that Matt the Pratt is an
>>> ignoramus can look up Susita and Decapolis on Wikipedia.
>
>> Criminals such as yourself are all the worse for knowing you are lying while
>> pretending piety.
>
> And there I was expecting Matt the Pratt to go into a rant about how
> unreliable Wikipedia was. Seems he has given up on that tack and
> relies on personal abuse these days.
If you had gone to college you would have been told at freshman orientation
that no encyclopedia is suitable for college level work.
--
The crime is so grave that innocence cannot be considered a defense.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4173
http://www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml a16
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. a16
Thu Aug 27 01:05:25 EDT 2009
Martin Edwards
those of the Greeks. Temples of Zeus, Hera, and the rest are, for him,
found all over the place. One thing he does not do is credit the
Palestine Syrians with a religion of their own, especially with an
invisible god.
--
As through this world I've rambled, I've met plenty of funny men,
Some rob you with a sixgun, some with a fountain pen.
Woody Guthrie
Martin Edwards
A very good point. Now why don't the settlers just piss off? Most of
them have family in the Tri-state.
Matt Giwer
> Tom P wrote:
...
>> Adonis, Aphrodite and Adonis have a common source. Now, Giwer. I
>> don't mean Roman metamorphoses of these various legends into cults in
>> the first century CE and later. So get it right. Just for once.
>> Aphrodite goes back to at least the 8th century BCE. But then you
>> have read the 8th century BCE texts of "Theogony," "Works and Days,"
>> "Iliad," and "Odyssey" haven't you Giwer?
> Let's go back to Herodotus. He conflates all kinds of deities with
> those of the Greeks. Temples of Zeus, Hera, and the rest are, for him,
> found all over the place. One thing he does not do is credit the
> Palestine Syrians with a religion of their own, especially with an
> invisible god.
The point is to handwave away what little historical evidence exists and
pretend that religious traditions are therefore true.
The conflation is hardly of interest. He likely found an equal variation of
stories around the same deities in Greece. We have a parochial tendency to
think the two modern collections of Greek mythology were cast in concrete for
all of Greece for all time even though they disagree with each other and were
both filtered through Christian modesty. The Greeks actually had a creative
tradition of making up better stories, better reimaginings, whereas there is
no indication of such an industry outside of Greece.
--
Government is a necessary evil. Religion is an unnecessary evil.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4187
http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml a2
Thu Aug 27 02:47:06 EDT 2009
Kendall K Down
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> If you had gone to college you would have been told at freshman orientation
> that no encyclopedia is suitable for college level work.
My dear Matt the Pratt, when talking to you I wouldn't dream of the
heights of college level work. Even kindergarten would be too high for
you.
Kendall K Down
Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> The genetic evidence
Oooo! Matt the Pratt has given up on the archaeological evidence -
'cos everyone here[1] knows way more about it than he does - and tries
genetics instead.
What happened to physical evidence, Matt the Pratt?
Ken Down
Note 1: Everyone, that is, apart from Matt the Pratt's fellow nazis -
Martin Edwards and JTEM.
Kendall K Down
Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> Let's go back to Herodotus.
Matt the Pratt's sock puppet rides to the rescue - or rather, tries
to. His argument is based on something he did *not* read in Herodotus.
Wow! Proof at last.
Ken Down
Tom P
My motivations are irrelevant. As are yours, Giwer. The evidence is
the evidence is the evidence. The evidence that demolishes your kook
conspiracy theories exists independently of you and me. Calling me a
Zionist doesn't change or falsify the evidence, Giwer. You are a Nazi,
but that doesn't change the evidence even a little tiny bit.
And you still haven't produced any evidence for your alleged
"Semiticisms," nor have you refuted the evidence of a Synagogue on Delos
250-175 BCE, or the internally and AMS dated manuscripts that go back to
the 4th century BCE.
Those, collectively, destroy your loony theory that Judaism began with
Pompey in 63 BCE.
Giwer, if you could buttress your kook conspiracy theory with evidence,
you would have produced it. You have no produced any evidence because
none exists.
How does it feel to be in full retreat because you have been confronted
with archaeological and historiographical evidence you can not refute or
falsify, Giwer?
Tom P
To be more precise, Herodotus did not specifically discuss the deities
of the "Syrians of Palestine." Did he, Mr Edwards?
Exactly what conclusions do you draw from the silence of Herodotus
concerning the religion of the "Syrians of Palestine"?
Are you making some kind of back handed claim or implication that
Herodotus credits the "Syrians of Palestine" with worshiping the deities
of Hellas?
I rather tend to believe that Herodotus was familiar with the
differences as well as the similarities between the pantheons of the
Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, and lesser peoples of the eastern
Mediterranean. Herodotus was reportedly exiled to Samos and he later
traveled in Egypt. Visit the Samos Archaeological Museum and Heraion so
you can see with your very own eyes Egyptian artifacts unearthed on
Samos and note the similarities between Egyptian statuary and Samian
statuary of the Archaic period. Do you really think Herodotus was
unable to unable the discern the differences between Greek and Egyptian
and Canaanite and Hebrew cultures and religions?
Produce your evidence that supports your theory. Please?
And you still have not responded to the extraordinarily inconvenient
(for you and Giwer) evidence of the Synagogue on Delos dated to 250-175
BCE, or pre-Maccabean, as you well know. The monumental inscriptions
are in Greek, so I presume you can read the inscriptions directly from
the photographs without the benefit of translation. And that inscription
does rather demolish your theory that Hebrew identity began with the
revolt of Judah Maccabee. I anxiously await your commentary on that
evidence.
It seems to me that people who deny the existence of a Hebrew people
before Pompey (Giwer) or Judah Maccabee (you) aren't very familiar with
the archaeological and manuscript records. If you were, you couldn't be
ambushed with facts. The monumental inscription of Delos, the DJD
manuscripts, the radiocarbon dating studies, the sometimes obscure
references in the manuscript record have quite obviously taken your side
by surprise.
That shouldn't happen to people who claim to have mature theories of
history. People who advertise mature theories of history ought first to
have studied the archaeological and historiographical records and only
then developed theories of history. You and Giwer seem to have
formulated a theory and then cherry picked the evidence for that which
supports your theories of history while fastidiously ignoring the vast
majority of the evidence.
Are you prepared to concede the existence in the 5th century BCE in what
is now modern Israel and the West Bank of a people who had developed a
written Hebrew language, were monotheistic, and were the ancestors of
the Judeans who participated in the Maccabean revolts and were conquered
by Pompey?
If you are not prepared to concede the screamingly obvious, please do
falsify the evidence of the archaeological and historiographical
records. I eagerly anticipate your rebuttal of the monumental
inscriptions on Delos, the mentions of Herodotus, the internal and AMS
datings of the Samaria manuscripts from Wadi Daliyeh, the AMS datings of
1QIsa and 4Q365, a recorded and articulated history, a developed
philosophy, and a highly developed theology, and the other evidence
introduced over the past several weeks. And when you are done disposing
of that evidence, I am pretty sure I can dig up even more.
Tom P
the nincompoop who boldly declared that Hesiod's "Theogony" was not a
religious work? Well, I shall remind you who that nincompoop was. It
was Matt Giwer.
Like you "handwave [sic] away" the Samaria manuscripts from Wadi
Daliyeh, 1QIsa, 4q365, the monumental inscriptions on Delos dedicating a
synagogue between 250 and 175 BCE, as well as the works of Pliny the
Elder, Nicholas of Damascus, Strabo, Herodotus, Josephus, Philo, and a
whole bunch more manuscripts and artifacts?
And you never produced even one, not a single "Semiticism" out of the
thousands of Greek manuscripts that are extant from Classical Antiquity.
Evidence, Giwer. You must produce evidence to support your historical
theory. Even though most of know that no such evidence exists. Come on,
Giwer. Produce some evidence, if you can.
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Tom P wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> German crimes do not justify Israeli crimes nor do Israeli crimes
>>>> justify Hamas and Hezbollah crimes. The cycle must be broken at
>>>> some point. Rabin and Sharon had the stature to break the cycle but
>>>> were cut down as they got close to touching the magic ring. Just my
>>>> opinion . . .
>>>
>>> Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
>>>
>>> That is the sum and substance of all anyone needs to know about
>>> modern day bibleland. All else is details.
>>>
>> Evidence, Giwer. You must provide evidence for your every contention.
>> You have lied so many times that you can never be considered a
>> trustworthy source for any scrap of information.
>
> You are invited to present anything which is not covered by the
>
You still haven't produced any evidence for any of your kook conspiracy
theories, Giwer.
Come on, Giwer, you claimed "Semiticisms" were sprinkled all over Koine
manuscripts. You have had four weeks to find one. Please, Giwer,
produce just one little "Semiticism"? If you don't, your readers just
might believe you know nothing about Classical Antiquity. Some of your
readers, Giwer, might even believe you lied about the presence of
"Semiticisms" in Koine.
And you never have address the internally dated and AMS dated Samaria
manuscripts from Wadi Daliyeh. Oh, the date is 352 or 351 BCE, Giwer.
And then you have never addressed the AMS datings or the textual content
of 4Q365 and 1QIsa, and both of those predate Pompey, and even the
Maccabean revolt. Don't they, Giwer?
How about that monumental inscription of the dedication of a synagogue
on Delos dated to 250-175 BCE, Giwer? That kind of screws up your whole
fairy tale of Jewish corruption of the archaeological record, doesn't
it? Or don't you know where Delos is, Giwer?
And 175 BCE is a bit before Pompey, isn't it Giwer? That means your
kook theory is false. Your theory is a lie, Giwer. Your theory is
baseless and flatly contradicted by the archaeological record, Giwer.
Tom P
> Kendall K Down wrote:
>> In message <4a939f74$0$23953$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
>> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> I repeat: Matt the Pratt shows his usual ignorance.
>>>> Anyone who wishes to waste time proving that Matt the Pratt is an
>>>> ignoramus can look up Susita and Decapolis on Wikipedia.
>>
>>> Criminals such as yourself are all the worse for knowing you are
>>> lying while
>>> pretending piety.
>>
>> And there I was expecting Matt the Pratt to go into a rant about how
>> unreliable Wikipedia was. Seems he has given up on that tack and
>> relies on personal abuse these days.
>
> If you had gone to college you would have been told at freshman
> orientation that no encyclopedia is suitable for college level work.
>
You still haven't produced even a single "Semiticism" nor have you been
able to falsify the physical evidence of the Samaria manuscripts, 4Q365,
1QIsa, or the Delos synagogue inscription. And those kill your kook
conspiracy theory dead, Giwer.
Matt Giwer
...
> How would you know about varieties of Greek religion, Giwer? Who was
> the nincompoop who boldly declared that Hesiod's "Theogony" was not a
> religious work? Well, I shall remind you who that nincompoop was. It
> was Matt Giwer.
As I never said that, why must you lie?
--
As said by a criminal jew on 30 July 2009 regarding eleven new squattertowns:
"The message to that nigger Arab they call a president is that
this is Jewish land."
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4174
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/GAZA-pics/ a13
Fri Aug 28 02:12:08 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> In message <4a9613a0$0$4977$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> The genetic evidence
>
> Oooo! Matt the Pratt has given up on the archaeological evidence -
> 'cos everyone here[1] knows way more about it than he does - and tries
> genetics instead.
>
> What happened to physical evidence, Matt the Pratt?
Genes are physical therefore they constitute physical evidence. Ask any trial
judge.
--
There are only two kinds of Jews. Those who
love Israel and those who hate themselves.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4179
http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml a2
Fri Aug 28 02:14:38 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Tom P wrote:
>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>>> Tom P wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> German crimes do not justify Israeli crimes nor do Israeli crimes
>>>>> justify Hamas and Hezbollah crimes. The cycle must be broken at
>>>>> some point. Rabin and Sharon had the stature to break the cycle
>>>>> but were cut down as they got close to touching the magic ring.
>>>>> Just my opinion . . .
>>>>
>>>> Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
>>>>
>>>> That is the sum and substance of all anyone needs to know about
>>>> modern day bibleland. All else is details.
>>>>
>>> Evidence, Giwer. You must provide evidence for your every contention.
>>> You have lied so many times that you can never be considered a
>>> trustworthy source for any scrap of information.
>>
>> You are invited to present anything which is not covered by the
>> Jewish theft and the owners wanting it back.
>>
> You still haven't produced any evidence for any of your kook conspiracy
> theories, Giwer.
When one declines an invitation it is polite to do so explicitly.
--
While it appears theoretically possible to reconcile science and religion
it requires religion to continue to concede territory if it is to happen.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4181
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/nizgas3.html a4
Fri Aug 28 02:15:38 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> In message <4a961452$0$4977$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> If you had gone to college you would have been told at freshman orientation
>> that no encyclopedia is suitable for college level work.
>
> My dear Matt the Pratt, when talking to you I wouldn't dream of the
> heights of college level work. Even kindergarten would be too high for
> you.
Not only a crook but a stupid crook.
--
To help mankind a degree in medicine requires great effort, intelligence and
dedication. A degree in divinity requires only dedication.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4184
http://www.haaretz.com What is Israel really like? http://www.jpost.com a7
Fri Aug 28 02:17:08 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
The criminal and immoral motivations of zionists are always relevant.
--
Religion puts food on the tables of priests. This
is the sole purpose of religion.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4186
http://www.giwersworld.org/palestine/answers.phtml a9
Fri Aug 28 02:18:08 EDT 2009
Martin Edwards
Frankly, I cannot see what point Mr G was trying to make there, but do
you have an answer to my point?
Martin Edwards
> In message <Huplm.2487$RV1....@newsfe26.ams2>
> Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Let's go back to Herodotus.
>
> Matt the Pratt's sock puppet rides to the rescue - or rather, tries
> to. His argument is based on something he did *not* read in Herodotus.
>
> Wow! Proof at last.
>
> Ken Down
>
Herodotus at all. This would be consistent with your reliance on "Bible
scholarship". Why do you go on with the sock puppet thing? I have
demonstrated my existence time and time again. Did you look at my
Website? Do you think that a piece of, in your eyes, trailer trash,
could have invented such a person? You've got a bad case of Split Enz,
mate.
Martin Edwards
> Martin Edwards wrote:
> In precisely what part of Herodotus' world do you believe he discovered
> "Temples of Zeus, Hera, and the rest are, for him, found all over the
> place"?
>
free to conclude that I am lying.
> To be more precise, Herodotus did not specifically discuss the deities
> of the "Syrians of Palestine." Did he, Mr Edwards?
A fair point, but if they had had an unusual, indeed unique religion, i
assume that he would have done.
>
> Exactly what conclusions do you draw from the silence of Herodotus
> concerning the religion of the "Syrians of Palestine"?
They followed a number of religions, which were around in Syria as a
whole. Now, of you have evidence of the ancestor of what became
Judaism, apart from the contemporary (at least in content) books of Ezra
and Nehemiah, please stump up.
> Are you making some kind of back handed claim or implication that
> Herodotus credits the "Syrians of Palestine" with worshiping the deities
> of Hellas?
>
No, sorry if I gave that impression. On my reading, albeit only in
English, he seems to have only a vague idea of what were Greek and what
were non-Greek gods. This may have been universal at the time.
> I rather tend to believe that Herodotus was familiar with the
> differences as well as the similarities between the pantheons of the
> Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, and lesser peoples of the eastern
> Mediterranean. Herodotus was reportedly exiled to Samos and he later
> traveled in Egypt. Visit the Samos Archaeological Museum and Heraion so
> you can see with your very own eyes Egyptian artifacts unearthed on
> Samos and note the similarities between Egyptian statuary and Samian
> statuary of the Archaic period. Do you really think Herodotus was
> unable to unable the discern the differences between Greek and Egyptian
> and Canaanite and Hebrew cultures and religions?
>
> Produce your evidence that supports your theory. Please?
Your points are valid, but my evidence is the text itself, unless the
nineteenth century translator made a balls of it. My Greek is not yet
up to it.
>
> And you still have not responded to the extraordinarily inconvenient
> (for you and Giwer) evidence of the Synagogue on Delos dated to 250-175
> BCE, or pre-Maccabean, as you well know. The monumental inscriptions
> are in Greek, so I presume you can read the inscriptions directly from
> the photographs without the benefit of translation. And that inscription
> does rather demolish your theory that Hebrew identity began with the
> revolt of Judah Maccabee. I anxiously await your commentary on that
> evidence.
>
Sorry, I'll check that out later today.
> It seems to me that people who deny the existence of a Hebrew people
> before Pompey (Giwer) or Judah Maccabee (you) aren't very familiar with
> the archaeological and manuscript records. If you were, you couldn't be
> ambushed with facts. The monumental inscription of Delos, the DJD
> manuscripts, the radiocarbon dating studies, the sometimes obscure
> references in the manuscript record have quite obviously taken your side
> by surprise.
>
I am not included here. By the time Pompey went into the Holy of Holies
there must have been some such cult, but was it the only religion in Judea.
> That shouldn't happen to people who claim to have mature theories of
> history. People who advertise mature theories of history ought first to
> have studied the archaeological and historiographical records and only
> then developed theories of history. You and Giwer seem to have
> formulated a theory and then cherry picked the evidence for that which
> supports your theories of history while fastidiously ignoring the vast
> majority of the evidence.
>
Fair comment. I am still studying the subject, but I am not doing a
master's or anything like that.
> Are you prepared to concede the existence in the 5th century BCE in what
> is now modern Israel and the West Bank of a people who had developed a
> written Hebrew language, were monotheistic, and were the ancestors of
> the Judeans who participated in the Maccabean revolts and were conquered
> by Pompey?
I think so, but even this is very different from the picture presented
by conscensus scholars and the media. To give one example, we
frequently hear of /Solomon's/ temple being destroyed by the Romans.
Who really built that temple, children?
>
> If you are not prepared to concede the screamingly obvious, please do
> falsify the evidence of the archaeological and historiographical
> records. I eagerly anticipate your rebuttal of the monumental
> inscriptions on Delos, the mentions of Herodotus, the internal and AMS
> datings of the Samaria manuscripts from Wadi Daliyeh, the AMS datings of
> 1QIsa and 4Q365, a recorded and articulated history, a developed
> philosophy, and a highly developed theology, and the other evidence
> introduced over the past several weeks. And when you are done disposing
> of that evidence, I am pretty sure I can dig up even more.
Thank you for a stimulating debate.
Martin Edwards
> In message <4a9613a0$0$4977$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> The genetic evidence
>
> Oooo! Matt the Pratt has given up on the archaeological evidence -
> 'cos everyone here[1] knows way more about it than he does - and tries
> genetics instead.
>
> What happened to physical evidence, Matt the Pratt?
>
> Ken Down
>
> Note 1: Everyone, that is, apart from Matt the Pratt's fellow nazis -
> Martin Edwards and JTEM.
>
decencies?
Martin Edwards
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Tom P wrote:
> Come on, Giwer, you claimed "Semiticisms" were sprinkled all over Koine
> manuscripts. You have had four weeks to find one. Please, Giwer,
> produce just one little "Semiticism"? If you don't, your readers just
> might believe you know nothing about Classical Antiquity. Some of your
> readers, Giwer, might even believe you lied about the presence of
> "Semiticisms" in Koine.
>
period. I am surprised that Mr G has not picked this up as it supports
his thesis of independent composition.
Kendall K Down
Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Exactly what conclusions do you draw from the silence of Herodotus
> concerning the religion of the "Syrians of Palestine"?
Every time Matt the Pratt gets into trouble, Martin Edwards
sycophantically rides to the rescue by trying to divert attention or
muddy the waters in some way. This is his brainless method of trying
to support Matt the Pratt's claim that the Jews are a relatively
recent phenomenon.
It would not surprise me in the least to find that Martin Edwards is
just another name for Matt the Pratt. (Well, it would surprise me, as
I doubt that Matt the Pratt is smart enough to munge addresses.)
Martin Edwards
> In message <4a96cfcc$0$24052$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com>
> Tom P <th_om...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Exactly what conclusions do you draw from the silence of Herodotus
>> concerning the religion of the "Syrians of Palestine"?
>
> Every time Matt the Pratt gets into trouble, Martin Edwards
> sycophantically rides to the rescue by trying to divert attention or
> muddy the waters in some way. This is his brainless method of trying
> to support Matt the Pratt's claim that the Jews are a relatively
> recent phenomenon.
>
> It would not surprise me in the least to find that Martin Edwards is
> just another name for Matt the Pratt. (Well, it would surprise me, as
> I doubt that Matt the Pratt is smart enough to munge addresses.)
>
> Ken Down
>
"sycophantic", but me? You got someone else. Of course all this is
simply little boy exploitation of the anonymity of the Internet. On the
Internet nobody knows that you have to hold a muskrat's tail to get around.
mof
> Tom P wrote:
> > Matt Giwer wrote:
> >> Tom P wrote:
> > Come on, Giwer, you claimed "Semiticisms" were sprinkled all over Koine
> > manuscripts. You have had four weeks to find one. Please, Giwer,
> > produce just one little "Semiticism"? If you don't, your readers just
> > might believe you know nothing about Classical Antiquity. Some of your
> > readers, Giwer, might even believe you lied about the presence of
> > "Semiticisms" in Koine.
>
> The point is that they were not Semitisms, but the ordinary Koine of the
> period. I am surprised that Mr G has not picked this up as it supports
> his thesis of independent composition.
Tom P has explained this; if that is so, you should easily be able to
prove it by finding mentioned examples in non biblical manuscripts.
Dragonblaze showed us a sentence, I think, both last year and now
again this summer. Just look it up and give us examples of a similar
construction in other manuscripts.
As for Mr. Thackeray's article that Giwer quoted, the truth of the
matter is that Thackeray's word "Hebraisms" doesn't mean exactly the
same thing as how the word Semiticisms is used in s.h.a.
Hebraisms in that text is probably a word invented by learned
Westerners who could read Greek, and found that the language of the
Septuagint had a different feel than classical works from Greece. So
it is a label created from a general feeling, and not something
created from a bunch of explicit examples.
Tom P
evidence to support his kook conspiracy theories of history.
My motivations remain irrelevant. As are yours still irrelevant, Giwer.
The evidence is still the evidence is still the evidence. The
evidence that demolishes your kook conspiracy theories exists
independently of you and me. Calling me a Zionist doesn't change or
falsify the evidence, Giwer. You are a Nazi,but that doesn't change the
Weland
> Tom P wrote:
>
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>
>>> Tom P wrote:
>>
>> Come on, Giwer, you claimed "Semiticisms" were sprinkled all over
>> Koine manuscripts. You have had four weeks to find one. Please,
>> Giwer, produce just one little "Semiticism"? If you don't, your
>> readers just might believe you know nothing about Classical Antiquity.
>> Some of your readers, Giwer, might even believe you lied about the
>> presence of "Semiticisms" in Koine.
>>
> The point is that they were not Semitisms, but the ordinary Koine of the
> period.
Except, as has been pointed out to you several times already in the
past, that isn't quite the case, which even the very book you cite,
Horrocks, tells you. Perhaps a rereading of the book is in order, eh
what, or perhaps reading also the primary texts to which he refers.
Tom P
anticipate your reply to several questions and issues. I am
particularly interested in your response to the Synagogue on Delos dated
before the Maccabean Revolt. Here is a copy of my response.
Martin Edwards wrote:
"Let's go back to Herodotus. He conflates all kinds of deities with
those of the Greeks. Temples of Zeus, Hera, and the rest are, for him,
found all over the place. One thing he does not do is credit the
Palestine Syrians with a religion of their own, especially with an
invisible god."
Tom P replied:
In precisely what part of Herodotus' world do you believe he discovered
"Temples of Zeus, Hera, and the rest are, for him, found all over the
place"?
To be more precise, Herodotus did not specifically discuss the deities
of the "Syrians of Palestine." Did he, Mr Edwards?
Exactly what conclusions do you draw from the silence of Herodotus
concerning the religion of the "Syrians of Palestine"?
Are you making some kind of back handed claim or implication that
Herodotus credits the "Syrians of Palestine" with worshiping the deities
of Hellas?
I rather tend to believe that Herodotus was familiar with the
differences as well as the similarities between the pantheons of the
Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, and lesser peoples of the eastern
Mediterranean. Herodotus was reportedly exiled to Samos and he later
traveled in Egypt. Visit the Samos Archaeological Museum and Heraion so
you can see with your very own eyes Egyptian artifacts unearthed on
Samos and note the similarities between Egyptian statuary and Samian
statuary of the Archaic period. Do you really think Herodotus was
unable to unable the discern the differences between Greek and Egyptian
and Canaanite and Hebrew cultures and religions?
Produce your evidence that supports your theory. Please?
And you still have not responded to the extraordinarily inconvenient
(for you and Giwer) evidence of the Synagogue on Delos dated to 250-175
BCE, or pre-Maccabean, as you well know. The monumental inscriptions
are in Greek, so I presume you can read the inscriptions directly from
the photographs without the benefit of translation. And that inscription
does rather demolish your theory that Hebrew identity began with the
revolt of Judah Maccabee. I anxiously await your commentary on that
evidence.
It seems to me that people who deny the existence of a Hebrew people
before Pompey (Giwer) or Judah Maccabee (you) aren't very familiar with
the archaeological and manuscript records. If you were, you couldn't be
ambushed with facts. The monumental inscription of Delos, the DJD
manuscripts, the radiocarbon dating studies, the sometimes obscure
references in the manuscript record have quite obviously taken your side
by surprise.
That shouldn't happen to people who claim to have mature theories of
history. People who advertise mature theories of history ought first to
have studied the archaeological and historiographical records and only
then developed theories of history. You and Giwer seem to have
formulated a theory and then cherry picked the evidence for that which
supports your theories of history while fastidiously ignoring the vast
majority of the evidence.
Are you prepared to concede the existence in the 5th century BCE in what
is now modern Israel and the West Bank of a people who had developed a
written Hebrew language, were monotheistic, and were the ancestors of
the Judeans who participated in the Maccabean revolts and were conquered
by Pompey?
If you are not prepared to concede the screamingly obvious, please do
Tom P
> Kendall K Down wrote:
>> In message <4a9613a0$0$4977$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
>> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The genetic evidence
>>
>> Oooo! Matt the Pratt has given up on the archaeological evidence -
>> 'cos everyone here[1] knows way more about it than he does - and tries
>> genetics instead.
>>
>> What happened to physical evidence, Matt the Pratt?
>
> Genes are physical therefore they constitute physical evidence. Ask
> any trial judge.
>
archaeologist. Or historian.
Monumental inscriptions are physical evidence. Ask any archaeologist.
Ask any historian.
Carbon decay is also physical evidence. Ask any chemist. Ask any physicist.
And the evidence for Jews before Pompey includes all of those variants
of physical evidence. Most of the world gets that set of facts, Giwer.
Why don't you?
Matt Giwer
Again, you are the only person who dates any scroll older than the 1st c. BC.
If you are trying to make it as old as the oldest possible standard deviation
that is not scientific at all.
Care to actually source the story about Pompey?
--
Atheism dignifies theism. There is no special name for
those who do not believe if faries.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4190
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/GAZA-pics/ a13
Fri Aug 28 23:23:59 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> Tom P wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Tom P wrote:
>> Come on, Giwer, you claimed "Semiticisms" were sprinkled all over
>> Koine manuscripts. You have had four weeks to find one. Please,
>> Giwer, produce just one little "Semiticism"? If you don't, your
>> readers just might believe you know nothing about Classical Antiquity.
>> Some of your readers, Giwer, might even believe you lied about the
>> presence of "Semiticisms" in Koine.
>>
> The point is that they were not Semitisms, but the ordinary Koine of the
> period. I am surprised that Mr G has not picked this up as it supports
> his thesis of independent composition.
Considering I started a thread on exactly that it is difficult to see how you
got that idea.
--
If a gay kills a gay is it a love crime?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4178
http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml a5
Fri Aug 28 23:28:30 EDT 2009
Kendall K Down
Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> Of course, I can't threaten to sue you, but can we observe the common
> decencies?
Stop acting like Matt the Pratt's sock puppet and you won't get
classed with him.
Kendall K Down
Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Matt the Pratt's sock puppet rides to the rescue - or rather, tries
>> to. His argument is based on something he did *not* read in Herodotus.
>> Wow! Proof at last.
> That is bollocks frankly. I can only conclude that you have not read
> Herodotus at all. This would be consistent with your reliance on "Bible
> scholarship".
I have the two volume Rawlinson translation, which I have read and to
which I refer frequently. "Bible scholarship" is your term for
anything which contradicts your nazi fantasies.
> Why do you go on with the sock puppet thing? I have
> demonstrated my existence time and time again. Did you look at my
> Website? Do you think that a piece of, in your eyes, trailer trash,
> could have invented such a person? You've got a bad case of Split Enz,
> mate.
Well, I have already stated my doubts that Matt the Pratt is smart
enough to fake addresses. On the other hand, Matt the Pratt is stupid
enough to invent someone like you who displays similar ignorance and
identical kookiness.
Kendall K Down
Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> A fair point, but if they had had an unusual, indeed unique religion, i
> assume that he would have done.
So your argument boils down to this: Herodotus didn't do what *I*
think he should have done, therefore I can ignore all other evidence
that contradicts my kooky theories.
> I think so, but even this is very different from the picture presented
> by conscensus scholars and the media. To give one example, we
> frequently hear of /Solomon's/ temple being destroyed by the Romans.
> Who really built that temple, children?
*You* may frequently hear that: I have never heard it except from 5
year olds and more than usually ignorant Americans. The fact that you
hear it frequently says a lot about the depths of your research and
the places from which you draw your information.
Why don't you try reading *real* archaeology and history instead of
hanging out with the likes of Matt the Pratt?
Kendall K Down
Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> Frankly, I cannot see what point Mr G was trying to make there, but do
> you have an answer to my point?
What point? You are simply trying to get your idol, Matt the Pratt,
out of trouble.
Martin Edwards
> In message <%GKlm.39771$I35....@newsfe24.ams2>
> Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Frankly, I cannot see what point Mr G was trying to make there, but do
>> you have an answer to my point?
>
> What point? You are simply trying to get your idol, Matt the Pratt,
> out of trouble.
>
> Ken Down
>
Martin Edwards
> In message <5LKlm.39772$I35....@newsfe24.ams2>
> Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> Matt the Pratt's sock puppet rides to the rescue - or rather, tries
>>> to. His argument is based on something he did *not* read in Herodotus.
>>> Wow! Proof at last.
>
>> That is bollocks frankly. I can only conclude that you have not read
>> Herodotus at all. This would be consistent with your reliance on "Bible
>> scholarship".
>
> I have the two volume Rawlinson translation, which I have read and to
> which I refer frequently. "Bible scholarship" is your term for
> anything which contradicts your nazi fantasies.
>
>> Why do you go on with the sock puppet thing? I have
>> demonstrated my existence time and time again. Did you look at my
>> Website? Do you think that a piece of, in your eyes, trailer trash,
>> could have invented such a person? You've got a bad case of Split Enz,
>> mate.
>
> Well, I have already stated my doubts that Matt the Pratt is smart
> enough to fake addresses. On the other hand, Matt the Pratt is stupid
> enough to invent someone like you who displays similar ignorance and
> identical kookiness.
>
> Ken Down
>
Martin Edwards
> In message <v%Klm.12968$e%2.1...@newsfe13.ams2>
> Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> A fair point, but if they had had an unusual, indeed unique religion, i
>> assume that he would have done.
>
> So your argument boils down to this: Herodotus didn't do what *I*
> think he should have done, therefore I can ignore all other evidence
> that contradicts my kooky theories.
>
>> I think so, but even this is very different from the picture presented
>> by conscensus scholars and the media. To give one example, we
>> frequently hear of /Solomon's/ temple being destroyed by the Romans.
>> Who really built that temple, children?
>
> *You* may frequently hear that: I have never heard it except from 5
> year olds and more than usually ignorant Americans. The fact that you
> hear it frequently says a lot about the depths of your research and
> the places from which you draw your information.
>
> Why don't you try reading *real* archaeology and history instead of
> hanging out with the likes of Matt the Pratt?
>
> Ken Down
>
Martin Edwards
> In message <l0Llm.12978$e%2.1...@newsfe13.ams2>
> Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Of course, I can't threaten to sue you, but can we observe the common
>> decencies?
>
> Stop acting like Matt the Pratt's sock puppet and you won't get
> classed with him.
>
> Ken Down
>
Martin Edwards
mof
What's the title of this book?
Tom P
> Tom P wrote: ...
>
>> How would you know about varieties of Greek religion, Giwer? Who
>> was the nincompoop who boldly declared that Hesiod's "Theogony" was
>> not a religious work? Well, I shall remind you who that
>> nincompoop was. It was Matt Giwer.
>
>
On July 24, 2009, in the thread "What believers in the bible believe," I
wrote:
"The historian or archaeologist is confronted by characters from
Hesiod's "Theogony" and the Homeric corpus at every turn. Most coins
depicted deities. Much pottery depicted scenes from Hesiod or Homer.
Ignorance of the religion means you are ignorant of Classical Antiquity.
. ."
About six hours later, also on July 24, 2009 in the same thread titled
"What believers in the bible believe," Matt Giwer replied and posted
this bit of laughable falsehood:
"And none of those are religious works and I only said religious works
as you know you read but choose to address what I did not say in an
openly dishonest manner."
So actually, Giwer, you may not have "said that" strictly speaking. But
you damned certainly did write it, and posted it, Giwer.
Now why don't you work on posting some actual evidence that actually
supports your kook conspiracy theories of history? Like maybe produce
even a single "Semiticism." Or explain the monumental inscriptions on
Delos before the first century BCE of words directly from a half dozen
or more texts that were later included in the Hebrew Bible. Those
Delian inscriptions falsify your kook theory that there were no Jews
before Pompey. But then 4Q365, the Samaria manuscripts from Wadi
Daliyeh, and 1QIsa already disproved that bit of your tripe, didn't
they, Giwer?
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Kendall K Down wrote:
>>>> In message <4a9613a0$0$4977$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>
>>>> Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>> The genetic evidence
>>>> Oooo! Matt the Pratt has given up on the archaeological
>>>> evidence - 'cos everyone here[1] knows way more about it than
>>>> he does - and tries genetics instead. What happened to physical
>>>> evidence, Matt the Pratt?
>>> Genes are physical therefore they constitute physical evidence.
>>> Ask any trial judge.
>
>> Manuscripts are physical evidence too. Ask any trial judge. Or
>> archaeologist. Or historian. Monumental inscriptions are physical
>> evidence. Ask any archaeologist. Ask any historian. Carbon decay
>> is also physical evidence. Ask any chemist. Ask any physicist. And
>> the evidence for Jews before Pompey includes all of those variants
>> of physical evidence. Most of the world gets that set of facts,
>> Giwer. Why don't you?
>
> Again, you are the only person who dates any scroll older than the
> 1st c. BC. If you are trying to make it as old as the oldest possible
> standard deviation that is not scientific at all.
>
"Radiocarbon." And the scientists who radiocarbon dated 34 manuscripts
including the Wadi Daliyeh bill of sale for a group of slaves, 4Q365,
and 1QIsa all dated them before the first century BCE. But we have been
through this time after time and the journal articles have been
repeatedly cited and quoted from at length. You choose to remain
willfully ignorant, Giwer. But that is understandable because those
radiocarbon datings demolish your kook theories of history.
> Care to actually source the story about Pompey?
I do know the sources for Pompey. So you didn't do your homework again,
eh Giwer?
And now you expect me to do it for you. As usual. You didn't bother to
do your homework about the manuscript record especially concerning
radiocarbon dating, so I had to educate about that. And you had no idea
there were any archaeological records of Jews on Delos, and I had to
educate you on that too. Well, this time I won't. Go look it up
yourself. Just for once Giwer do your homework.
But out of the goodness of my heart and a sense of sympathy for the
ignorant and less fortunate of my brethren, I give you a nudge in the
right direction even though you are a Nazi and supporter of Hezbollah,
thus a nincompoop. Since you rely on Josephus for your loony notions of
Jerusalem and environs during the first century, read Book 14 of
"Antiquities of the Jews" and Book 1 of "Jewish Wars." Then if I were
looking to find sources for Pompey, I would look in Plutarch first. But
then I have the advantage that I have read Plutarch so I have some idea
of what he had to say about Pompey. Then you could look in Livy, but
that part of Livy may not have come down to us. What do you think,
Giwer?
The you could search in Dio Cassius "Roman History," Pliny's "Natural
History" or Strabo's geography, anything that survived by Arrian of
Nicomedia outside of "Anabasis," perhaps Appian of Alexandria's "Roman
History," maybe Suetonius' "Twelve Caesars," or again maybe the "Annals"
of Tacitus just might have something, or maybe they only concentrated on
events important to Rome itself. What do you think, Giwer?
Nicholas of Damascus might be worth a look too, eh Giwer? Do you think
there might be a word or two about Pompey in the works of Aulus Gellius
or Lucianus of Samosata? Doubtful eh, Giwer? But maybe . . .
Don't forget the literary sources, such as the satires, romances,
dramas, comedies, and poetry. Every once in awhile you strike an
historical gem in those. And don't overlook Roman philosophy. After
all, Marcus Aurelius wrote of Christians in his "Meditations." Right,
Giwer?
How about the writings of Cicero, Julius Caesar, Augustus, Seneca, the
"Epistulae" of Plinius Secundus, Or maybe even Eusebius of Caesaria
might have a word or two about Pompey in Judea. How about Philo, do you
think he might have mentioned Pompey? Do you think there might be a
mention in the Mishnah or the Talmud, Giwer? How about the Bar Kochba
letters from Nahal Hever? Maybe something in the Sectarian Scrolls from
Qumran, eh? And I haven't even got to any of the obscure and relatively
lesser known sources. What do you think, Giwer?
Are those enough hints to point you in the right direction?
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Tom P wrote:
>>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> German crimes do not justify Israeli crimes nor do Israeli crimes
>>>>>> justify Hamas and Hezbollah crimes. The cycle must be broken at
>>>>>> some point. Rabin and Sharon had the stature to break the cycle
>>>>>> but were cut down as they got close to touching the magic ring.
>>>>>> Just my opinion . . .
>>>>>
>>>>> Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is the sum and substance of all anyone needs to know about
>>>>> modern day bibleland. All else is details.
>>>>>
>>>> Evidence, Giwer. You must provide evidence for your every
>>>> contention. You have lied so many times that you can never be
>>>> considered a trustworthy source for any scrap of information.
>>>
>>> You are invited to present anything which is not covered by the
>>> Jewish theft and the owners wanting it back.
>>>
>> You still haven't produced any evidence for any of your kook
>> conspiracy theories, Giwer.
>
> When one declines an invitation it is polite to do so explicitly.
>
Yet you still haven't produced any evidence for any of your kook
conspiracy theories, Giwer. Declining to provide what doesn't exist is
not sensible.
Come on, Giwer, you claimed "Semiticisms" were sprinkled all over Koine
manuscripts. You have had four weeks to find one. Please, Giwer,
produce just one little "Semiticism"? If you don't, your readers just
might believe you know nothing about Classical Antiquity. Some of your
readers, Giwer, might even believe you lied about the presence of
"Semiticisms" in Koine.
And you never have address the internally dated and AMS dated Samaria
manuscripts from Wadi Daliyeh. Oh, the date is 352 or 351 BCE, Giwer.
Not my dates Giwer. The internal date in the manuscript. Oh yes, and
radiocarbon dated to the 3rd or 4th century BCE.
And then you have never addressed the AMS datings or the textual content
of 4Q365 and 1QIsa, and both of those predate Pompey, and even the
Maccabean revolt. Don't they, Giwer?
How about that monumental inscription of the dedication of a synagogue
on Delos dated to 250-175 BCE, Giwer? That kind of screws up your whole
fairy tale of Jewish corruption of the archaeological record, doesn't
it? Or don't you know where Delos is, Giwer?
And 175 BCE is a bit before Pompey, isn't it Giwer? That means your
kook theory is false. Your theory is a lie, Giwer. Your theory is
baseless and flatly contradicted by the archaeological record, Giwer.
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>> Tom P wrote:
>> Come on, Giwer, you claimed "Semiticisms" were sprinkled all over
>> Koine manuscripts. You have had four weeks to find one. Please,
>> Giwer, produce just one little "Semiticism"? If you don't, your
>> readers just might believe you know nothing about Classical Antiquity.
>> Some of your readers, Giwer, might even believe you lied about the
>> presence of "Semiticisms" in Koine.
>>
> The point is that they were not Semitisms, but the ordinary Koine of the
> period. I am surprised that Mr G has not picked this up as it supports
> his thesis of independent composition.
>
instance of an "Hebraism" or "Semiticism" outside of the Judeo-Christian
corpus. There are thousands of manuscripts from which to choose. Giwer
has produced not one.
I am surprised he hasn't picked up on the earliest Delos inscription.
It is a quote that appears over 40 times in the Septuaginta. I
identified a dozen or more instances in your thread "The Delian Scam."
If the 250-175 BCE dating is accurate, that Delian inscription is the
earliest portion of the Septuaginta that survives. As far as I know,
none of the Greek scrolls from Caves 4, 7, or 11 at Qumran or Cave 8 at
Nahal Hever containing the text of Hebrew scripture are dated earlier
than the first century BCE.
Martin Edwards
I would have thought it was eminently sensible.