Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
On 8/5/2026 12:22 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Who has?
Are you including fantasy?
J. K. Rowling
Stephen King
Robert Heinlein
David Weber
John Ringo
Jerry Pournelle
Larry Niven
Lynn
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something. Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
Maybe, the original idea was to give people some good ideals to
live their lives by, but ultimately religion is a crutch for
weak minded people to get through life. I mean, look at Dave,
he's hardly a good advert for Christianity is he? It does seem
to be a profitable industry though, it must be said.
Religion also seems to be a good reason for people who preach
peace to go around killing one another...
Verily, in article <114uj1t$2nlju$1@dont-email.me>, did Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> deliver unto us this message:
On 8/5/2026 12:22 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Who has?
Are you including fantasy?
Robert Heinlein
You'd put Robert Heinlein in the fantasy column? Interesting. He seems squarely science fiction to me.
In article <xn0pt5wgdd02vtn002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
Atheists are highly delusional and unstable.
Pagan influence.
Verily, in article <114uo80$2p8k4$1@dont-email.me>, did Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> deliver unto us this message:
On 8/5/2026 12:22 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
L. Ron Hubbard said you don't get rich writing sci-fi
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the ridiculous
Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something? Then it
proved lucrative, and here we are.
That's the vague version I heard, at least. I never heard details or saw evidence.
Verily, in article <114uj1t$2nlju$1@dont-email.me>, did Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> deliver unto us this message:
On 8/5/2026 12:22 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Who has?
Are you including fantasy?
Robert Heinlein
You'd put Robert Heinlein in the fantasy column? Interesting. He seems squarely science fiction to me.
On 8/5/26 05:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots. People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down. When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
But YHWH is the God of Storms a Zeus.Jupiter equivalent and t
ake a look at the Universe and it is full of storm-like activity.
Not that I think it is more than coincidence.
On 8/5/26 06:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something.˙ Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
˙˙˙˙Well why not multiple Gods? Humans invented specialized roles
for workers as soon as they had enough language to
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
˙˙˙˙Actually before writing they were passed down orally. That
led to forgetting important details like the fact that most of the patriarchs have the names of women. Judaism was originally a
matriarchal religion as shown in the rule that Only a Jewish
woman can birth Jewish men.˙ The rite of circumcision which
was Egyptian as well is meant to match the menstrual flow
in magical power.
Maybe, the original idea was to give people some good ideals to
live their lives by, but ultimately religion is a crutch for
weak minded people to get through life. I mean, look at Dave,
he's hardly a good advert for Christianity is he? It does seem
to be a profitable industry though, it must be said.
˙˙˙˙Look at the rules and you will see that it was meant to enrich
the priestly families the cohens and the levites.˙ When they sacrificed
an animal the god only got the skin bones and fat burned. The high
protein part went to the people who slaughtered the animal.
Religion also seems to be a good reason for people who preach
peace to go around killing one another...
˙˙˙˙Oh it is all about real estate and God is dragged into it for
the foolish soldiers who kill each other.
˙˙˙˙WW I "Gott Mit Uns"
˙˙˙˙bliss
On 05/08/2026 16:50, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 06:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something.˙ Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
˙˙˙˙˙Well why not multiple Gods? Humans invented specialized roles
for workers as soon as they had enough language to
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
˙˙˙˙˙Actually before writing they were passed down orally. That
That is PURE BOLLOCKS!
Even Parry himself, the inventor of this stupid nonsense of "oral traditions" said in his papers that the oral poets WROTE EVERYTHING DOWN after they had composed it, otherwise how could they possibly remember
any of it? How could Parry even verify the it was a "tradition"
otherwise? He even concluded at the start of his doctoral thesis that he wouldn't possible do so, it was all speculation.
NO ONE can possibly compose, not one, but two poems consisting of 15,000
and 12,000 verses of hexameter each in a dialect NO ONE spoke 400 years later at the time of Herodotus who spoke the closest living descendent
of Homeric Greek, without the use of writing, let alone have passed it
on in that now extinct dialect. PERIOD! Even Parry accepted from the
very beginning that the Iliad and the Odyssey were written down and that
is why they remained unchained for 400 years even until the time of Herodotus who was able to verify the age of these works by comparing
them with literature which came after them which could be precisely
dated and whose dialects were clearly older than that of Herodotus but
more recent than Homer. Parry himself stated that oral poetry must necessarily undergo substantial change by every oral poet who acquires
it and retells it in his own way. Parry stated that this poetry was
passed down IN WRITING not orally, was then changed during performance
and then written down immediately afterwards. WRITTEN DOWN!
Parry's only substantiated claim was that oral poets used stock phrases
in their composition. And how did Parry substantiate this? Because those stock phrases had already been written down in writing beforehand,
before they were learned by the oral poets. To Parry who invented this BULLSHIT, oral tradition emerged from an existing written tradition
through corruption of the original literature and the creation of new literature.
There is NO SUCH THING as Oral Tradition. What parry was writing about
was Composition Through Oral Performance, which he admitted could not
even be proven to be a tradition and which was facilitated by the use of writing.
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
On 05/08/2026 16:50, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 06:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something.˙ Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
˙˙˙˙˙Well why not multiple Gods? Humans invented specialized roles
for workers as soon as they had enough language to
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
˙˙˙˙˙Actually before writing they were passed down orally. That
That is PURE BOLLOCKS!
Even Parry himself, the inventor of this stupid nonsense of "oral traditions" said in his papers that the oral poets WROTE EVERYTHING DOWNThe oral tradition is real and preexisted written
You have to have a written language before you can write anything down.
Homer's works were composed in writing. They could not have been
composed otherwise let alone transmitted in a dialect no one else spoke. Some stock phrases were repeated over and over again because they were derived from earlier WRITTEN material containing earlier poetry which
Parry and no one can verify contained those phrases because those texts
were not longer extant even in the time of Herodotus.
The ancient Greeks possessed writing since 1900 BC in the from of Linear Syllabic script which was in constant use and never died out until 300
BC when Cypriot Syllabic was completely replaced with the regular Greek Alphabet.
Maybe, the original idea was to give people some good ideals to
live their lives by, but ultimately religion is a crutch for
weak minded people to get through life. I mean, look at Dave,
he's hardly a good advert for Christianity is he? It does seem
to be a profitable industry though, it must be said.
˙˙˙˙˙Look at the rules and you will see that it was meant to enrich
the priestly families the cohens and the levites.˙ When they sacrificed
an animal the god only got the skin bones and fat burned. The high
protein part went to the people who slaughtered the animal.
That was imported from Greek religion because of what Zeus did to Prometheus.
Religion also seems to be a good reason for people who preach
peace to go around killing one another...
˙˙˙˙˙Oh it is all about real estate and God is dragged into it for
the foolish soldiers who kill each other.
˙˙˙˙˙WW I "Gott Mit Uns"
˙˙˙˙˙bliss
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something. Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
Maybe, the original idea was to give people some good ideals to
live their lives by, but ultimately religion is a crutch for
weak minded people to get through life. I mean, look at Dave,
he's hardly a good advert for Christianity is he? It does seem
to be a profitable industry though, it must be said.
Religion also seems to be a good reason for people who preach
peace to go around killing one another...
On 8/5/2026 1:25 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:50, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 06:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something.˙ Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
˙˙˙˙˙Well why not multiple Gods? Humans invented specialized roles
for workers as soon as they had enough language to
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
˙˙˙˙˙Actually before writing they were passed down orally. That
That is PURE BOLLOCKS!
Even Parry himself, the inventor of this stupid nonsense of "oral
traditions" said in his papers that the oral poets WROTE EVERYTHING
DOWN after they had composed it, otherwise how could they possibly
remember any of it? How could Parry even verify the it was a
"tradition" otherwise? He even concluded at the start of his doctoral
thesis that he wouldn't possible do so, it was all speculation.
NO ONE can possibly compose, not one, but two poems consisting of
15,000 and 12,000 verses of hexameter each in a dialect NO ONE spoke
400 years later at the time of Herodotus who spoke the closest living
descendent of Homeric Greek, without the use of writing, let alone
have passed it on in that now extinct dialect. PERIOD! Even Parry
accepted from the very beginning that the Iliad and the Odyssey were
written down and that is why they remained unchained for 400 years
even until the time of Herodotus who was able to verify the age of
these works by comparing them with literature which came after them
which could be precisely dated and whose dialects were clearly older
than that of Herodotus but more recent than Homer. Parry himself
stated that oral poetry must necessarily undergo substantial change by
every oral poet who acquires it and retells it in his own way. Parry
stated that this poetry was passed down IN WRITING not orally, was
then changed during performance and then written down immediately
afterwards. WRITTEN DOWN!
Parry's only substantiated claim was that oral poets used stock
phrases in their composition. And how did Parry substantiate this?
Because those stock phrases had already been written down in writing
beforehand, before they were learned by the oral poets. To Parry who
invented this BULLSHIT, oral tradition emerged from an existing
written tradition through corruption of the original literature and
the creation of new literature.
There is NO SUCH THING as Oral Tradition. What parry was writing about
was Composition Through Oral Performance, which he admitted could not
even be proven to be a tradition and which was facilitated by the use
of writing.
Can we drop the expletives?
Memorizing epic poems is something people really do.
Today, you can find 'oral repositories' in many pre-literate cultures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oral_repositories
That includes people who know the longest poem in the world, the
Epic of Manas, 20 times the length of the Odyssey and Iliad. There
are people who can recite this today. They exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Manas
pt
In article <114vl64$33ot8$2@dont-email.me>,
BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/5/26 03:33, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <114uo80$2p8k4$1@dont-email.me>, did Your NameNo dare. He wanted to escape taxes.
<YourName@YourISP.com> deliver unto us this message:
On 8/5/2026 12:22 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
L. Ron Hubbard said you don't get rich writing sci-fi
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the ridiculous
Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something? Then it
proved lucrative, and here we are.
That's the vague version I heard, at least. I never heard details or saw >>> evidence.
Got you.
Verily, in article <114vlbl$33ot8$3@dont-email.me>, did BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> deliver unto us this message:
On 8/5/26 05:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt
<blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you >>> read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like >>> what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not
omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down. >>> When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. >>> Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
But YHWH is the God of Storms a Zeus.Jupiter equivalent and t
ake a look at the Universe and it is full of storm-like activity.
Not that I think it is more than coincidence.
He began as a god of volcanoes, though. He became god of storms when he crowded out Baal.
This is a great video which examines the Bible and concludes that Yahweh
was originally envisoned as a dragon, not a human.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XogaHpV5oUs
That certainly has some interesting ties to Gnostic thinking.
There's probably a better newsgroup for this.
Verily, in article <114uj1t$2nlju$1@dont-email.me>, did Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> deliver unto us this message:
On 8/5/2026 12:22 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Who has?
Are you including fantasy?
Robert Heinlein
You'd put Robert Heinlein in the fantasy column? Interesting. He seems squarely science fiction to me.
On 05/08/2026 18:58, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/5/2026 1:25 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:50, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 06:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something.˙ Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
˙˙˙˙˙Well why not multiple Gods? Humans invented specialized roles
for workers as soon as they had enough language to
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
˙˙˙˙˙Actually before writing they were passed down orally. That
That is PURE BOLLOCKS!
Even Parry himself, the inventor of this stupid nonsense of "oral
traditions" said in his papers that the oral poets WROTE EVERYTHING
DOWN after they had composed it, otherwise how could they possibly
remember any of it? How could Parry even verify the it was a
"tradition" otherwise? He even concluded at the start of his doctoral
thesis that he wouldn't possible do so, it was all speculation.
NO ONE can possibly compose, not one, but two poems consisting of
15,000 and 12,000 verses of hexameter each in a dialect NO ONE spoke
400 years later at the time of Herodotus who spoke the closest living
descendent of Homeric Greek, without the use of writing, let alone
have passed it on in that now extinct dialect. PERIOD! Even Parry
accepted from the very beginning that the Iliad and the Odyssey were
written down and that is why they remained unchained for 400 years
even until the time of Herodotus who was able to verify the age of
these works by comparing them with literature which came after them
which could be precisely dated and whose dialects were clearly older
than that of Herodotus but more recent than Homer. Parry himself
stated that oral poetry must necessarily undergo substantial change
by every oral poet who acquires it and retells it in his own way.
Parry stated that this poetry was passed down IN WRITING not orally,
was then changed during performance and then written down immediately
afterwards. WRITTEN DOWN!
Parry's only substantiated claim was that oral poets used stock
phrases in their composition. And how did Parry substantiate this?
Because those stock phrases had already been written down in writing
beforehand, before they were learned by the oral poets. To Parry who
invented this BULLSHIT, oral tradition emerged from an existing
written tradition through corruption of the original literature and
the creation of new literature.
There is NO SUCH THING as Oral Tradition. What parry was writing
about was Composition Through Oral Performance, which he admitted
could not even be proven to be a tradition and which was facilitated
by the use of writing.
Can we drop the expletives?
Memorizing epic poems is something people really do.
They do nothing of the kind unless they have written texts to follow, no different to memorising Shakespeare which is even longer than your
example, and they don't memorise them in extinct delicts nobody even
speaks.
Today, you can find 'oral repositories' in many pre-literate cultures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oral_repositories
ALL OF WHICH IS PURE BOLLCOCKS.
Even Parry said the oral poets wrote everything down and assumes a pre- existant written culture pretended them. Only a totally and utter
imbecile would assume the absence of writing, especially when it has
existed for over 5000 years, and there's absolutely NOTHING, no poetry,
no history, zitto, NOTHING, that exists before that. NOTHING!
That includes people who know the longest poem in the world, the
Epic of Manas, 20 times the length of the Odyssey and Iliad. There
are people who can recite this today. They exist.
That is also PURE BULLEXCREMENT. The length of the poem is of the
PUBLISHED WRITTEN TEXT. NO ONE has memorised to full text, even after it
was made up and written down.
On 05/08/2026 13:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt
<blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
They did nothing of the kind. We know exactly where the Greek and
Egyptian gods came from because Herodotus and other writers tell us.
They were the biological ancestors (mathematically proven) of the people
who worshipped them. All recorded ancient religions were ancestor cults.
We can even date the exact time at which these gods lived as historical kings of the people who made them into gods because of the benefits they gave to them. All the Greek gods date to around 1700 BC according to the Chronicon. They were basically Minoan period kings that ruled over
Greece and Phoenicia (Philo, Porphyry, Sanchuniathon). The Egyptian gods were the direct ancestors of the Pharaoh?s who preceded the first
Pharaoh Min (Herodotus citing the Egyptians and witnessing the bodies of
the Pharaohs back to the time of Min himself).
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not
omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
The Jewish god is the personification of the Pharaoh of Egypt who
controlled Syria-Palestine and demanded tribute from the people who
lived there. He even told Moses his name was "On", meaning The One, and
that translates to the Egyptian name Ktes (also named Proteus according
to Diodorus) which means he was the Pharaoh Setnakte. Other Pharaohs
that were turned into the god of the Jews (not all of them were regarded
as gods when they were opposed by other Pharaohs, which is why the bible talks about prophets of false gods) include Ramses III the god of Joshua
and Necho (named in the Bible) who as the Bible describes handed over
the land of Syria-Palestine to Nebuchadnezzar II, as corroborated by Herodotus and the inscription of Nebuchadnezzar II himself.
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing.
Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
Correct. Jehovah was the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the son of Elyon, the Most-High God to whom the Jewish temple was dedicated.
Jehovah's brothers included Mot, Hubal (Apollo), Set/Sutekh/Suduc/
Typhon, Shaddai, El the younger, and Dushara (Zeus Belus)
Also among Jehovah's brothers was his possibly half-brother Baal Hadad
who was also the basis for the Greek god Hades and later Adonis and thus
the Hebrew god Adonai, gods of the dead. El was Kronos or Saturn and is testified to in Linear A inscriptions at the Cretan king Satur dating to around 1700 BC the same time as when El lived. Jehovah's name is
preserved in Egyptian inscriptions from the same period as Meruserenre Yakubher, and this explains why the Jews worshipped the successive
Pharaoh's of Egypt as their god.
The Hebrew god Tsebaoth (Atlas) was the brother of El along with Dagon
and Bartylus, and his sisters were Astarte (Aphrodite), Ashera (Rhea),
and Baaltis (Dione/Demeter). Anat (Athena) was also a daughter of El.
Baal-Hadad (Adonai) was the son of a concubine of Baal-Shamen that El
gave in marriage to Dagon so all three of these people have claim to be
his father.
El was married to his sister Ashera who he offered as wife to Jehovah,
Yam Nahar (River Sea, hence Pontus in Greece), or Yaw in the Baal Epic
which explained why the Elephantine letters describe her as the wife of Jehovah.
The Elohim or Gods which the book of Genesis claims created the heaven
and the earth were the basis for the Greek Titans. They were the god who fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen as ruler, after which he castrated him with a sickle.
The key to the Bible is LORD means Jehovah, GOD means El, God means the Elohim who are mixed up with the Holy Spirit, and Lord means Adonsi (Adonis/Hades/Baal-Hadad).
On 8/5/26 10:25, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:50, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 06:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
˙˙˙˙Ignorance is the deepest root of all.
˙˙˙˙Language once invented made it possible to invent stories
about the gods and the strange reasons that they did things to
people like disease and striking down people with lightening
and horrid diseases.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something.˙ Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
˙˙˙˙Because they were ignorant and had to invent reasons for the
reality around them.
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
˙˙˙˙˙Well why not multiple Gods? Humans invented specialized roles
for workers as soon as they had enough language to
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
˙˙˙˙Not true. The Jewish elders in BC decided on the contents to be
included in the Old Testament.˙ The Catholics agreed that this happened
then they decided at various councils what could be included in the
New Testament.
˙˙˙˙And strangely enough it was nothing that could
˙˙˙˙˙Actually before writing they were passed down orally. That
That is PURE BOLLOCKS!
˙˙˙˙And why did the Romans and earlier the Greeks lament the invention
of writing as destructive of memory?
˙The oral tradition is real and preexisted written
Even Parry himself, the inventor of this stupid nonsense of "oral
traditions" said in his papers that the oral poets WROTE EVERYTHING
DOWN ˙˙˙˙You have to have a written language before you can write
anything down.
language.˙ Parry was a victim of writing and had lost contact with
his own memory.
.
Homer's works were composed in writing. They could not have been
composed otherwise let alone transmitted in a dialect no one else
spoke. Some stock phrases were repeated over and over again because
they were derived from earlier WRITTEN material containing earlier
poetry which Parry and no one can verify contained those phrases
because those texts were not longer extant even in the time of Herodotus.
˙˙˙˙Baloney! I used to drink and compose poetry while inspired by
Backus and Sileneus, speaking in a figurative sense.˙ It is easy to do
if you have a organized memory or not.
˙˙˙˙Again you have to have written language first and language itself
was an invention.˙ You have to have it before you can invent
a written language.
The ancient Greeks possessed writing since 1900 BC in the from of
Linear Syllabic script which was in constant use and never died out
until 300 BC when Cypriot Syllabic was completely replaced with the
regular Greek Alphabet.
˙˙˙˙And the Trojan War was not that long before:
From Wiki:
The earliest written evidence is a Linear B clay tablet found in
Messenia that dates to between 1450 and 1350 BC, [21] making Greek the world's oldest recorded living language. [22] Among the Indo-European languages,
You like the word bollocks but I think most of what you write is
just that, Patriachal Bollocks.
The handle you use here The True Doctor reminds me of the
Doctress who used be a a regular annoyance.
Maybe, the original idea was to give people some good ideals to
live their lives by, but ultimately religion is a crutch for
weak minded people to get through life. I mean, look at Dave,
he's hardly a good advert for Christianity is he? It does seem
to be a profitable industry though, it must be said.
˙˙˙˙No the original idea was control of the people through the common beliefs whether multiple or unitary divinity.
˙˙˙˙˙Look at the rules and you will see that it was meant to enrich
the priestly families the cohens and the levites.˙ When they sacrificed
an animal the god only got the skin bones and fat burned. The high
protein part went to the people who slaughtered the animal.
That was imported from Greek religion because of what Zeus did to
Prometheus.
˙˙˙˙The Hebrews might disagree but it means nothing. The real matter is
who profits by the sacrifices and it is the priestly classes. which
in the case of the ancient Jews were hereditary positions.
Religion also seems to be a good reason for people who preach
peace to go around killing one another...
˙˙˙˙˙Oh it is all about real estate and God is dragged into it for
the foolish soldiers who kill each other.
˙˙˙˙˙WW I "Gott Mit Uns"
˙˙˙˙˙bliss
˙˙˙˙Don't depend on outworn scholarship to defend your religion.
˙˙˙˙Join Dalton in obscurity.
˙˙˙˙bliss - through study and experience
On 8/5/26 05:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt
<blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not
omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing.
Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
˙˙˙˙But YHWH is the God of Storms a Zeus.Jupiter equivalent and t
ake a look at the Universe and it is full of storm-like activity.
˙˙˙˙Not that I think it is more than coincidence.
In article <1150vbi$3h7j3$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:37, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 05:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt
<blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal >>>> hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*. >>>> Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you >>>> read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like >>>> what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not >>>> omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down. >>>> When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. >>>> Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
˙˙˙˙But YHWH is the God of Storms a Zeus.Jupiter equivalent and t
ake a look at the Universe and it is full of storm-like activity.
˙˙˙˙Not that I think it is more than coincidence.
Jehovah was a sea god. He is named as Yaw or Yam Nahar (Rive Sea) in the
Baal Epic. His Greek equivalent was Pontus as stated by Eusebius, Philo,
and Pliny. He might also be the Lotan of the Baal Epic and Leviathan of
the Bible. If so his origin is from Asia-Minor, and he was a Luwian king
who ruled over the Pontus or Black Sea hence his given name since
Leviathan means The Luwian. He was defeated by Baal Hadad, ie. Hades in
the Baal Epic and his ships scattered over the sea. That's your Jehovah.
It's likely, based on Snorri's identification of Asgard as Troy in
Asia-Minor (the Bosphorus is the basis of the Bi-Frost bridge, and
Midgard was Mygdonia or Minoan Greece), that he was worshipped by the
Vikings ie. Varangians or Phrygians as Odin
Yahweh you mean?
That means Zeus was Sheshi (Saasitepis ie. Ausstaeb/Istaveon in Linear A
inscriptions found in Crete from between 1700 and 1650 BC), Poseidon was
Odin or Jehovah (Meruserenre Yakubher, who ruled Egypt in ~1675 BC), and
Baal-Hadad was the basis for Hades and the Jewish god Adonai.
The Baal Epic dates to around 1600 BC and as confirmed by Philo and
Porphyry following Sanchiniathon was written close to the time the
events that it describes occurred.
This is where all the Indo-European and Hebrew religions come from.
They're all based on the Hyksos (Foreign Rulers) 15th Dynasty rule of
Egypt between 1750 and 1600 BC.
It's pretty obvious really once you know the literature and chronology.
On 8/5/2026 2:01 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 13:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt
<blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
They did nothing of the kind. We know exactly where the Greek and
Egyptian gods came from because Herodotus and other writers tell us.
They were the biological ancestors (mathematically proven) of the
people who worshipped them. All recorded ancient religions were
ancestor cults. We can even date the exact time at which these gods
lived as historical kings of the people who made them into gods
because of the benefits they gave to them. All the Greek gods date to
around 1700 BC according to the Chronicon. They were basically Minoan
period kings that ruled over Greece and Phoenicia (Philo, Porphyry,
Sanchuniathon). The Egyptian gods were the direct ancestors of the
Pharaoh?s who preceded the first Pharaoh Min (Herodotus citing the
Egyptians and witnessing the bodies of the Pharaohs back to the time
of Min himself).
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you >>> read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like >>> what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not
omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
The Jewish god is the personification of the Pharaoh of Egypt who
controlled Syria-Palestine and demanded tribute from the people who
lived there. He even told Moses his name was "On", meaning The One,
and that translates to the Egyptian name Ktes (also named Proteus
according to Diodorus) which means he was the Pharaoh Setnakte. Other
Pharaohs that were turned into the god of the Jews (not all of them
were regarded as gods when they were opposed by other Pharaohs, which
is why the bible talks about prophets of false gods) include Ramses
III the god of Joshua and Necho (named in the Bible) who as the Bible
describes handed over the land of Syria-Palestine to Nebuchadnezzar
II, as corroborated by Herodotus and the inscription of Nebuchadnezzar
II himself.
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down. >>> When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. >>> Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
Correct. Jehovah was the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the son of
Elyon, the Most-High God to whom the Jewish temple was dedicated.
Jehovah's brothers included Mot, Hubal (Apollo), Set/Sutekh/Suduc/
Typhon, Shaddai, El the younger, and Dushara (Zeus Belus)
Also among Jehovah's brothers was his possibly half-brother Baal Hadad
who was also the basis for the Greek god Hades and later Adonis and
thus the Hebrew god Adonai, gods of the dead. El was Kronos or Saturn
and is testified to in Linear A inscriptions at the Cretan king Satur
dating to around 1700 BC the same time as when El lived. Jehovah's
name is preserved in Egyptian inscriptions from the same period as
Meruserenre Yakubher, and this explains why the Jews worshipped the
successive Pharaoh's of Egypt as their god.
The Hebrew god Tsebaoth (Atlas) was the brother of El along with Dagon
and Bartylus, and his sisters were Astarte (Aphrodite), Ashera (Rhea),
and Baaltis (Dione/Demeter). Anat (Athena) was also a daughter of El.
Baal-Hadad (Adonai) was the son of a concubine of Baal-Shamen that El
gave in marriage to Dagon so all three of these people have claim to
be his father.
El was married to his sister Ashera who he offered as wife to Jehovah,
Yam Nahar (River Sea, hence Pontus in Greece), or Yaw in the Baal Epic
which explained why the Elephantine letters describe her as the wife
of Jehovah.
The Elohim or Gods which the book of Genesis claims created the heaven
and the earth were the basis for the Greek Titans. They were the god
who fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen as ruler, after
which he castrated him with a sickle.
The key to the Bible is LORD means Jehovah, GOD means El, God means
the Elohim who are mixed up with the Holy Spirit, and Lord means
Adonsi (Adonis/Hades/Baal-Hadad).
OK, we've got enough evidence that this guy is Loony Tunes, and not
to be engaged with seriously (he may be fun to tease, though).
pt
In article <11511og$3hs4j$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 06/08/2026 04:48, The Doctor wrote:
In article <1150vbi$3h7j3$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:37, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 05:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt >>>>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots. >>>>>> People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal >>>>>> hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*. >>>>>> Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you >>>>>> read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like >>>>>> what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not >>>>>> omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down. >>>>>> When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. >>>>>> Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is >>>>>> only one of those gods.
˙˙˙˙But YHWH is the God of Storms a Zeus.Jupiter equivalent and t >>>>> ake a look at the Universe and it is full of storm-like activity.
˙˙˙˙Not that I think it is more than coincidence.
Jehovah was a sea god. He is named as Yaw or Yam Nahar (Rive Sea) in the >>>> Baal Epic. His Greek equivalent was Pontus as stated by Eusebius, Philo, >>>> and Pliny. He might also be the Lotan of the Baal Epic and Leviathan of >>>> the Bible. If so his origin is from Asia-Minor, and he was a Luwian king >>>> who ruled over the Pontus or Black Sea hence his given name since
Leviathan means The Luwian. He was defeated by Baal Hadad, ie. Hades in >>>> the Baal Epic and his ships scattered over the sea. That's your Jehovah. >>>> It's likely, based on Snorri's identification of Asgard as Troy in
Asia-Minor (the Bosphorus is the basis of the Bi-Frost bridge, and
Midgard was Mygdonia or Minoan Greece), that he was worshipped by the
Vikings ie. Varangians or Phrygians as Odin
Yahweh you mean?
No I mean Jehovah. The correct pronunciation is recorded in the Egyptian
transliteration of the name of Meruserenre Yakubher.
There is also a Yakobaam Sekkhaenre who may be the same Pharaoh as
Meruserenre Yakubher or more likely Jehovah the grandson of Zeus-Belus
ie. Dushara or Teshub.
The WH in the name of Jehovah is therefore a corruption of the word
Baal. YHWH therefore means "I am Baal" or "I am the Lord" which is the
name Jehovah gives to Moses when he asks for his name. This translates
to "On" or "The One" in the Greek text of the Bible which is equivalent
to Ktes in Egyptian, meaning that the god of Moses was the Pharaoh
Setnakte also known as Proteus or Ktes (The One) to the Greeks as stated
by Diodorus. This places the Exodus at the same time as the Trojan War.
We already know this from the Inscription of Merneptah (Amenophis in
Manetho) which names Israel as one of the peoples expelled from Egypt
when a Trojan lead alliance of Sea Peoples invaded Egypt, as confirmed
by Herodotus at the time of Proteus who Herodotus states controlled
Egypt at this time. According to Manetho the Jews were expelled from
Egypt by an alliance between Amenophis (Merneptah), his son Seti, and
the king of Aethiopia, ie. Proteus (Setnakte). The Aethiopian kings list
for this period also confirms their successive rule and the expulsion of
an Ahmoses (ie. Moses) from Egypt by Proteus (Setnakte) at this time as
also stated by Diodorus.
Amenophis or Merneptah is also known by his full name
Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae which means he is the Tithonus of Homer,
Aktisanes of Diodorus, and the Petissonius referred to as ruling Egypt
in the same sequence in the account of the Coptic Christian Bishop John
Nikiu.
What about in the Hebrew?
That means Zeus was Sheshi (Saasitepis ie. Ausstaeb/Istaveon in Linear A >>>> inscriptions found in Crete from between 1700 and 1650 BC), Poseidon was >>>> Odin or Jehovah (Meruserenre Yakubher, who ruled Egypt in ~1675 BC), and >>>> Baal-Hadad was the basis for Hades and the Jewish god Adonai.
The Baal Epic dates to around 1600 BC and as confirmed by Philo and
Porphyry following Sanchiniathon was written close to the time the
events that it describes occurred.
This is where all the Indo-European and Hebrew religions come from.
They're all based on the Hyksos (Foreign Rulers) 15th Dynasty rule of
Egypt between 1750 and 1600 BC.
It's pretty obvious really once you know the literature and chronology. >>>>
It clear to everyone who is educated that you've not read Eusebius, Sanchuniathon, the Baal Epic, Diodorus, Herodotus, the Inscriptions of Merneptah and Ramses III, the works of Snorri Sturluson, John Nikiu,
Jerome, or even the Bible itself, so your opinion is totally worthless
and everything you say is a complete pile shit that has no merit
whatsoever.
Don't enter discussions where you are totally out of your depth and
learn to respect those who are more knowledgeable and better educated
than you are you stupid moron.
On 8/5/2026 2:57 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 18:58, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/5/2026 1:25 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:50, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 06:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message: >>>>>>>> The True Melissa wrote:
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all
any of them are... made-up money making machines to part
fools from their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit
up.
I don't know about that.
Deffo!
The old religions probably had deeper roots.
Old or new, all made up and believed in by delusional people
with nothing better to do with their time.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility
cults to archetypal hero worship to hallucinations, but surely
it was based on something.˙ Why else would anyone else even
believe anything as superficially unlikely?
The problem is people all over the world believe in a swathe of
different gods. They can't all be real, can they? So by
definition some of those religions have to be wrong... at least.
So who gets to decide who worships the real god(s) and who are
the fools worshipping fake gods?
˙˙˙˙˙Well why not multiple Gods? Humans invented specialized roles
for workers as soon as they had enough language to
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language, edited
by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by scholars, revised
again with improved translations and now in 2026 are nothing
more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
˙˙˙˙˙Actually before writing they were passed down orally. That
That is PURE BOLLOCKS!
Even Parry himself, the inventor of this stupid nonsense of "oral
traditions" said in his papers that the oral poets WROTE EVERYTHING
DOWN after they had composed it, otherwise how could they possibly
remember any of it? How could Parry even verify the it was a
"tradition" otherwise? He even concluded at the start of his
doctoral thesis that he wouldn't possible do so, it was all
speculation.
NO ONE can possibly compose, not one, but two poems consisting of
15,000 and 12,000 verses of hexameter each in a dialect NO ONE spoke
400 years later at the time of Herodotus who spoke the closest
living descendent of Homeric Greek, without the use of writing, let
alone have passed it on in that now extinct dialect. PERIOD! Even
Parry accepted from the very beginning that the Iliad and the
Odyssey were written down and that is why they remained unchained
for 400 years even until the time of Herodotus who was able to
verify the age of these works by comparing them with literature
which came after them which could be precisely dated and whose
dialects were clearly older than that of Herodotus but more recent
than Homer. Parry himself stated that oral poetry must necessarily
undergo substantial change by every oral poet who acquires it and
retells it in his own way. Parry stated that this poetry was passed
down IN WRITING not orally, was then changed during performance and
then written down immediately afterwards. WRITTEN DOWN!
Parry's only substantiated claim was that oral poets used stock
phrases in their composition. And how did Parry substantiate this?
Because those stock phrases had already been written down in writing
beforehand, before they were learned by the oral poets. To Parry who
invented this BULLSHIT, oral tradition emerged from an existing
written tradition through corruption of the original literature and
the creation of new literature.
There is NO SUCH THING as Oral Tradition. What parry was writing
about was Composition Through Oral Performance, which he admitted
could not even be proven to be a tradition and which was facilitated
by the use of writing.
Can we drop the expletives?
Memorizing epic poems is something people really do.
They do nothing of the kind unless they have written texts to follow,
no different to memorising Shakespeare which is even longer than your
example, and they don't memorise them in extinct delicts nobody even
speaks.
Today, you can find 'oral repositories' in many pre-literate cultures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oral_repositories
ALL OF WHICH IS PURE BOLLCOCKS.
Even Parry said the oral poets wrote everything down and assumes a
pre- existant written culture pretended them. Only a totally and utter
imbecile would assume the absence of writing, especially when it has
existed for over 5000 years, and there's absolutely NOTHING, no
poetry, no history, zitto, NOTHING, that exists before that. NOTHING!
That includes people who know the longest poem in the world, the
Epic of Manas, 20 times the length of the Odyssey and Iliad. There
are people who can recite this today. They exist.
That is also PURE BULLEXCREMENT. The length of the poem is of the
PUBLISHED WRITTEN TEXT. NO ONE has memorised to full text, even after
it was made up and written down.
It's rare to see to pure a case of Proof by Vigorous Assertion.
Please provide evidence, or shut up.
pt
On 05/08/2026 14:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years,
by many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language,
edited by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by
scholars, revised again with improved translations and now
in 2026 are nothing more than fantasy tales for the simple
folk to believe in.
Absolute poppycock. If you are referring to the Bible, it was
written in Hebrew based on Egyptian, Hittite,
Assyro-Babylonian, Phoenician, Greek, and Jewish historical
texts from the periods that it covers.
On 8/5/2026 1:25 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
Can we drop the expletives?
Memorizing epic poems is something people really do.
Today, you can find 'oral repositories' in many pre-literate cultures >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oral_repositories
That includes people who know the longest poem in the world, the
Epic of Manas, 20 times the length of the Odyssey and Iliad. There
are people who can recite this today. They exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Manas
On 8/5/2026 2:57 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
It's rare to see to pure a case of Proof by Vigorous Assertion.
The Hebrews might disagree but it means nothing. The real matter is who
profits by the sacrifices and it is the priestly classes. which
in the case of the ancient Jews were hereditary positions.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 14:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years,
by many different people... then translated, mistranslated,
revised, translated again to another different language,
edited by church elders (with agendas), tidied up by
scholars, revised again with improved translations and now
in 2026 are nothing more than fantasy tales for the simple
folk to believe in.
Absolute poppycock. If you are referring to the Bible, it was
written in Hebrew based on Egyptian, Hittite,
Assyro-Babylonian, Phoenician, Greek, and Jewish historical
texts from the periods that it covers.
Just because something is written down doesn't mean it is
factual... I can write down a ton of crazy ideas, leave it for
people in the future to be amazed at, yet it will still be a
load of made-up nonsense.
However, even accepting that the bible is based on ancient
historical events - and they were documented accurately - with
the amount of corruptions and exaggerations that have taken
place with those stories over the centuries, (Including errors
with the textual transmission and revisions that served theological/institutional interests.) the sheeple who follow the
various branches of Christianity today are generally
unknowledgeable about the primary sources of those ancient tales.
So what they are left with today, on face value, is basically a
book of fantasy tales and well meaning fables.
The bible is a propaganda tool for the Christian religion to
enrich itself with and the people running the various factions
within it. L. Ron Hubbard knew what he was doing creating his
own religion. People are generally simple and gullible. The
weaknesses within their minds crave for something to follow and
be a part of... and they will happily part with their money for
that sense of belonging.
On 06/08/2026 16:34, The True Doctor wrote:
It clear to everyone who is educated that you've not read Eusebius,
Sanchuniathon, the Baal Epic, Diodorus, Herodotus, the Inscriptions of
Merneptah and Ramses III, the works of Snorri Sturluson, John Nikiu,
Jerome, or even the Bible itself, so your opinion is totally worthless
and everything you say is a complete pile shit that has no merit
whatsoever.
Thank you for apparently being on topic. Please refresh my memory as I
can't remember any of your above mentioned authors winning HUGOs or even nominations.
(P.S. Are you claiming that some piles of shit do have merit?)
Don't enter discussions where you are totally out of your depth and
learn to respect those who are more knowledgeable and better educated
than you are you stupid moron.
As a moron myself, I would just like to say that sometimes for the most stupid of us, it can be difficult to recognise those who are more knowledgeable and better educated.
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 11:20:07 -0700, BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
The Hebrews might disagree but it means nothing. The real matter is who >> profits by the sacrifices and it is the priestly classes. which
in the case of the ancient Jews were hereditary positions.
Ah. You cite Ayn Rand.
On 06/08/2026 03:06, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/5/2026 2:01 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 13:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt
<blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal >>>> hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*. >>>> Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
They did nothing of the kind. We know exactly where the Greek and
Egyptian gods came from because Herodotus and other writers tell us.
They were the biological ancestors (mathematically proven) of the
people who worshipped them. All recorded ancient religions were
ancestor cults. We can even date the exact time at which these gods
lived as historical kings of the people who made them into gods
because of the benefits they gave to them. All the Greek gods date to
around 1700 BC according to the Chronicon. They were basically Minoan
period kings that ruled over Greece and Phoenicia (Philo, Porphyry,
Sanchuniathon). The Egyptian gods were the direct ancestors of the
Pharaoh?s who preceded the first Pharaoh Min (Herodotus citing the
Egyptians and witnessing the bodies of the Pharaohs back to the time
of Min himself).
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If
you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much
like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not >>>> omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
The Jewish god is the personification of the Pharaoh of Egypt who
controlled Syria-Palestine and demanded tribute from the people who
lived there. He even told Moses his name was "On", meaning The One,
and that translates to the Egyptian name Ktes (also named Proteus
according to Diodorus) which means he was the Pharaoh Setnakte. Other
Pharaohs that were turned into the god of the Jews (not all of them
were regarded as gods when they were opposed by other Pharaohs, which
is why the bible talks about prophets of false gods) include Ramses
III the god of Joshua and Necho (named in the Bible) who as the Bible
describes handed over the land of Syria-Palestine to Nebuchadnezzar
II, as corroborated by Herodotus and the inscription of
Nebuchadnezzar II himself.
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come
down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're
doing.
Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
Correct. Jehovah was the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the son
of Elyon, the Most-High God to whom the Jewish temple was dedicated.
Jehovah's brothers included Mot, Hubal (Apollo), Set/Sutekh/Suduc/
Typhon, Shaddai, El the younger, and Dushara (Zeus Belus)
Also among Jehovah's brothers was his possibly half-brother Baal
Hadad who was also the basis for the Greek god Hades and later Adonis
and thus the Hebrew god Adonai, gods of the dead. El was Kronos or
Saturn and is testified to in Linear A inscriptions at the Cretan
king Satur dating to around 1700 BC the same time as when El lived.
Jehovah's name is preserved in Egyptian inscriptions from the same
period as Meruserenre Yakubher, and this explains why the Jews
worshipped the successive Pharaoh's of Egypt as their god.
The Hebrew god Tsebaoth (Atlas) was the brother of El along with
Dagon and Bartylus, and his sisters were Astarte (Aphrodite), Ashera
(Rhea), and Baaltis (Dione/Demeter). Anat (Athena) was also a
daughter of El.
Baal-Hadad (Adonai) was the son of a concubine of Baal-Shamen that El
gave in marriage to Dagon so all three of these people have claim to
be his father.
El was married to his sister Ashera who he offered as wife to
Jehovah, Yam Nahar (River Sea, hence Pontus in Greece), or Yaw in the
Baal Epic which explained why the Elephantine letters describe her as
the wife of Jehovah.
The Elohim or Gods which the book of Genesis claims created the
heaven and the earth were the basis for the Greek Titans. They were
the god who fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen as ruler,
after which he castrated him with a sickle.
The key to the Bible is LORD means Jehovah, GOD means El, God means
the Elohim who are mixed up with the Holy Spirit, and Lord means
Adonsi (Adonis/Hades/Baal-Hadad).
OK, we've got enough evidence that this guy is Loony Tunes, and not
to be engaged with seriously (he may be fun to tease, though).
We've got enough evidence that you are a stupid ignorant imbecile who doesn't have the faintest clue or understanding about history, the
Bible, or ancient religion.
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 13:58:37 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/5/2026 1:25 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
<snippo, this is getting excessively weird>
Can we drop the expletives?
Sadly, something seems to have triggered fear of a threat to a deeply
held religious belief (in this case, the belief that everything was
written down immediately by its author [1]).
Today, you can find 'oral repositories' in many pre-literate cultures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oral_repositories
That includes people who know the longest poem in the world, the
Epic of Manas, 20 times the length of the Odyssey and Iliad. There
are people who can recite this today. They exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Manas
Not, perhaps, entirely on topic (as I said, the prior discussion is confusing) but, in /Old Testament Theology, Gerhard von Radt has a
chart tracing the development of the OT (this is, of course, from the perspective of Modern Scholarship) from the original oral traditions
through various phases of collecting them and writing them down, and
then finally producing an early version of the OT we have today.
Closer to being on-topic are the claims that Aristotle's books and the Homeric poems were, indeed, reduced to writing from their oral form.
These claims were written as if we have written proof from
way-back-when -- ie, that some ancient author recorded the process for
us.
As to alleged memory problems -- I have read assertions that Homer was
so popular that audiences memorized the poems and shouted out
corrections if the bard messed up.
And, lastly, there is a theory that human culture began when people
started living long enough to make themselves useful (and so entitled
to food) by caring for the kiddies. And how do you keep the kids out
of the adult's hair? By telling them stories, some of which the Grimms
may well have collected.
[1] That isn't even true in music. I have CD set of Harpsichord works
by one of the Scarlatti's that exists because his patron paid him to
play his works in front of a skilled scribe who recorded the notes.
The composer, himself, never wrote any of his music down. There are
quite a lot of them, BTW. Imagine being able to write down the notes
from hearing the music. The things people could do before technology
took over!
The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 14:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by many
different people... then translated, mistranslated, revised, translated >>> again to another different language, edited by church elders (with
agendas), tidied up by
scholars, revised again with improved translations and now in 2026 are
nothing more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
Absolute poppycock. If you are referring to the Bible, it was written
in Hebrew based on Egyptian, Hittite, Assyro-Babylonian, Phoenician,
Greek, and Jewish historical texts from the periods that it covers.
Just because something is written down doesn't mean it is factual... I
can write down a ton of crazy ideas, leave it for people in the future
to be amazed at, yet it will still be a load of made-up nonsense.
However, even accepting that the bible is based on ancient historical
events - and they were documented accurately - with the amount of corruptions and exaggerations that have taken place with those stories
over the centuries, (Including errors with the textual transmission and revisions that served theological/institutional interests.) the sheeple
who follow the various branches of Christianity today are generally unknowledgeable about the primary sources of those ancient tales. So
what they are left with today, on face value, is basically a book of
fantasy tales and well meaning fables.
The bible is a propaganda tool for the Christian religion to enrich
itself with and the people running the various factions within it. L.
Ron Hubbard knew what he was doing creating his own religion. People
are generally simple and gullible. The weaknesses within their minds
crave for something to follow and be a part of... and they will happily
part with their money for that sense of belonging.
On 8/6/26 00:19, Titus G wrote:
On 06/08/2026 16:34, The True Doctor wrote:
It clear to everyone who is educated that you've not read Eusebius,
Sanchuniathon, the Baal Epic, Diodorus, Herodotus, the Inscriptions of
Merneptah and Ramses III, the works of Snorri Sturluson, John Nikiu,
Jerome, or even the Bible itself, so your opinion is totally worthless
and everything you say is a complete pile shit that has no merit
whatsoever.
Thank you for apparently being on topic. Please refresh my memory as I
can't remember any of your above mentioned authors winning HUGOs or
even nominations. (P.S. Are you claiming that some piles of shit do
have merit?)
Don't enter discussions where you are totally out of your depth and
learn to respect those who are more knowledgeable and better educated
than you are you stupid moron.
As a moron myself, I would just like to say that sometimes for the most
stupid of us, it can be difficult to recognise those who are more
knowledgeable and better educated.
Some piles of shit are better than other piles of shit and I think that some shit is really good shit. Maybe that is a quote from the
comedian, George Carlin.
Personally I have studied the Bible in 3 Protestant Sunday Schools in the 1940s and in a Catholic High School in the 1950s but my mother and
I really cracked up over some of the lives of alleged Saints. We also
liked "Pogo (the thoughtful) Possum" by old Walt Kelly, especially
during the McCarthy Era.
Some piles of shit are really funnier than other piles of excrement.
bliss - by study, practice and experience
On 2026-08-06 17:43:48 +0000, BobbieSellers said:
On 8/6/26 00:19, Titus G wrote:
On 06/08/2026 16:34, The True Doctor wrote:
It clear to everyone who is educated that you've not read Eusebius,
Sanchuniathon, the Baal Epic, Diodorus, Herodotus, the Inscriptions of >>>> Merneptah and Ramses III, the works of Snorri Sturluson, John Nikiu,
Jerome, or even the Bible itself, so your opinion is totally worthless >>>> and everything you say is a complete pile shit that has no merit
whatsoever.
Thank you for apparently being on topic. Please refresh my memory as I
can't remember any of your above mentioned authors winning HUGOs or
even nominations. (P.S. Are you claiming that some piles of shit do
have merit?)
Don't enter discussions where you are totally out of your depth and
learn to respect those who are more knowledgeable and better educated >>>> than you are you stupid moron.
As a moron myself, I would just like to say that sometimes for the most >>> stupid of us, it can be difficult to recognise those who are more
knowledgeable and better educated.
Some piles of shit are better than other piles of shit and I think
that some shit is really good shit. Maybe that is a quote from the
comedian, George Carlin.
"One man's crap is another man's fertiliser." is another version.
Basically just a re-working of the saying "One' man's trash is another
man's treasure."
In article <11517oo$3jeii$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 06/08/2026 06:31, The Doctor wrote:
In article <11511og$3hs4j$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 06/08/2026 04:48, The Doctor wrote:
In article <1150vbi$3h7j3$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:37, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 05:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt >>>>>>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something? >>>>>>>>>> Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any >>>>>>>>> of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from >>>>>>>>> their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots. >>>>>>>> People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal >>>>>>>> hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially >>>>>>>> unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not >>>>>>>> omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an >>>>>>>> ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing.
Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is >>>>>>>> only one of those gods.
˙˙˙˙But YHWH is the God of Storms a Zeus.Jupiter equivalent and t >>>>>>> ake a look at the Universe and it is full of storm-like activity. >>>>>>> ˙˙˙˙Not that I think it is more than coincidence.
Jehovah was a sea god. He is named as Yaw or Yam Nahar (Rive Sea) in the >>>>>> Baal Epic. His Greek equivalent was Pontus as stated by Eusebius, Philo, >>>>>> and Pliny. He might also be the Lotan of the Baal Epic and Leviathan of >>>>>> the Bible. If so his origin is from Asia-Minor, and he was a Luwian king >>>>>> who ruled over the Pontus or Black Sea hence his given name since
Leviathan means The Luwian. He was defeated by Baal Hadad, ie. Hades in >>>>>> the Baal Epic and his ships scattered over the sea. That's your Jehovah. >>>>>> It's likely, based on Snorri's identification of Asgard as Troy in >>>>>> Asia-Minor (the Bosphorus is the basis of the Bi-Frost bridge, and >>>>>> Midgard was Mygdonia or Minoan Greece), that he was worshipped by the >>>>>> Vikings ie. Varangians or Phrygians as Odin
Yahweh you mean?
No I mean Jehovah. The correct pronunciation is recorded in the Egyptian >>>> transliteration of the name of Meruserenre Yakubher.
There is also a Yakobaam Sekkhaenre who may be the same Pharaoh as
Meruserenre Yakubher or more likely Jehovah the grandson of Zeus-Belus >>>> ie. Dushara or Teshub.
The WH in the name of Jehovah is therefore a corruption of the word
Baal. YHWH therefore means "I am Baal" or "I am the Lord" which is the >>>> name Jehovah gives to Moses when he asks for his name. This translates >>>> to "On" or "The One" in the Greek text of the Bible which is equivalent >>>> to Ktes in Egyptian, meaning that the god of Moses was the Pharaoh
Setnakte also known as Proteus or Ktes (The One) to the Greeks as stated >>>> by Diodorus. This places the Exodus at the same time as the Trojan War. >>>> We already know this from the Inscription of Merneptah (Amenophis in
Manetho) which names Israel as one of the peoples expelled from Egypt
when a Trojan lead alliance of Sea Peoples invaded Egypt, as confirmed >>>> by Herodotus at the time of Proteus who Herodotus states controlled
Egypt at this time. According to Manetho the Jews were expelled from
Egypt by an alliance between Amenophis (Merneptah), his son Seti, and
the king of Aethiopia, ie. Proteus (Setnakte). The Aethiopian kings list >>>> for this period also confirms their successive rule and the expulsion of >>>> an Ahmoses (ie. Moses) from Egypt by Proteus (Setnakte) at this time as >>>> also stated by Diodorus.
Amenophis or Merneptah is also known by his full name
Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae which means he is the Tithonus of Homer,
Aktisanes of Diodorus, and the Petissonius referred to as ruling Egypt >>>> in the same sequence in the account of the Coptic Christian Bishop John >>>> Nikiu.
What about in the Hebrew?
What about what in the Hebrew?
For starters, El refers to of Yahweh.
That means Zeus was Sheshi (Saasitepis ie. Ausstaeb/Istaveon in Linear A >>>>>> inscriptions found in Crete from between 1700 and 1650 BC), Poseidon was >>>>>> Odin or Jehovah (Meruserenre Yakubher, who ruled Egypt in ~1675 BC), and >>>>>> Baal-Hadad was the basis for Hades and the Jewish god Adonai.
The Baal Epic dates to around 1600 BC and as confirmed by Philo and >>>>>> Porphyry following Sanchiniathon was written close to the time the >>>>>> events that it describes occurred.
This is where all the Indo-European and Hebrew religions come from. >>>>>>
They're all based on the Hyksos (Foreign Rulers) 15th Dynasty rule of >>>>>> Egypt between 1750 and 1600 BC.
It's pretty obvious really once you know the literature and chronology. >>>>>>
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> writes:
On 2026-08-06 17:43:48 +0000, BobbieSellers said:
On 8/6/26 00:19, Titus G wrote:
On 06/08/2026 16:34, The True Doctor wrote:
It clear to everyone who is educated that you've not read Eusebius,
Sanchuniathon, the Baal Epic, Diodorus, Herodotus, the Inscriptions of >>>>> Merneptah and Ramses III, the works of Snorri Sturluson, John Nikiu, >>>>> Jerome, or even the Bible itself, so your opinion is totally worthless >>>>> and everything you say is a complete pile shit that has no merit
whatsoever.
Thank you for apparently being on topic. Please refresh my memory as I >>>> can't remember any of your above mentioned authors winning HUGOs or
even nominations. (P.S. Are you claiming that some piles of shit do
have merit?)
Don't enter discussions where you are totally out of your depth and
learn to respect those who are more knowledgeable and better educated >>>>> than you are you stupid moron.
As a moron myself, I would just like to say that sometimes for the most >>>> stupid of us, it can be difficult to recognise those who are more
knowledgeable and better educated.
Some piles of shit are better than other piles of shit and I think
that some shit is really good shit. Maybe that is a quote from the
comedian, George Carlin.
"One man's crap is another man's fertiliser." is another version.
Basically just a re-working of the saying "One' man's trash is another
man's treasure."
I suspect Carlin's "really good shit" is also known as Canabis.
On 8/6/2026 12:34 AM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 06/08/2026 03:06, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/5/2026 2:01 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 13:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt >>>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots. >>>>> People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal >>>>> hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on
*something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
They did nothing of the kind. We know exactly where the Greek and
Egyptian gods came from because Herodotus and other writers tell us.
They were the biological ancestors (mathematically proven) of the
people who worshipped them. All recorded ancient religions were
ancestor cults. We can even date the exact time at which these gods
lived as historical kings of the people who made them into gods
because of the benefits they gave to them. All the Greek gods date
to around 1700 BC according to the Chronicon. They were basically
Minoan period kings that ruled over Greece and Phoenicia (Philo,
Porphyry, Sanchuniathon). The Egyptian gods were the direct
ancestors of the Pharaoh?s who preceded the first Pharaoh Min
(Herodotus citing the Egyptians and witnessing the bodies of the
Pharaohs back to the time of Min himself).
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though.
If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much >>>>> like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not >>>>> omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
The Jewish god is the personification of the Pharaoh of Egypt who
controlled Syria-Palestine and demanded tribute from the people who
lived there. He even told Moses his name was "On", meaning The One,
and that translates to the Egyptian name Ktes (also named Proteus
according to Diodorus) which means he was the Pharaoh Setnakte.
Other Pharaohs that were turned into the god of the Jews (not all of
them were regarded as gods when they were opposed by other Pharaohs,
which is why the bible talks about prophets of false gods) include
Ramses III the god of Joshua and Necho (named in the Bible) who as
the Bible describes handed over the land of Syria-Palestine to
Nebuchadnezzar II, as corroborated by Herodotus and the inscription
of Nebuchadnezzar II himself.
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come
down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're
doing.
Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is >>>>> only one of those gods.
Correct. Jehovah was the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the son
of Elyon, the Most-High God to whom the Jewish temple was dedicated.
Jehovah's brothers included Mot, Hubal (Apollo), Set/Sutekh/Suduc/
Typhon, Shaddai, El the younger, and Dushara (Zeus Belus)
Also among Jehovah's brothers was his possibly half-brother Baal
Hadad who was also the basis for the Greek god Hades and later
Adonis and thus the Hebrew god Adonai, gods of the dead. El was
Kronos or Saturn and is testified to in Linear A inscriptions at the
Cretan king Satur dating to around 1700 BC the same time as when El
lived. Jehovah's name is preserved in Egyptian inscriptions from the
same period as Meruserenre Yakubher, and this explains why the Jews
worshipped the successive Pharaoh's of Egypt as their god.
The Hebrew god Tsebaoth (Atlas) was the brother of El along with
Dagon and Bartylus, and his sisters were Astarte (Aphrodite), Ashera
(Rhea), and Baaltis (Dione/Demeter). Anat (Athena) was also a
daughter of El.
Baal-Hadad (Adonai) was the son of a concubine of Baal-Shamen that
El gave in marriage to Dagon so all three of these people have claim
to be his father.
El was married to his sister Ashera who he offered as wife to
Jehovah, Yam Nahar (River Sea, hence Pontus in Greece), or Yaw in
the Baal Epic which explained why the Elephantine letters describe
her as the wife of Jehovah.
The Elohim or Gods which the book of Genesis claims created the
heaven and the earth were the basis for the Greek Titans. They were
the god who fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen as
ruler, after which he castrated him with a sickle.
The key to the Bible is LORD means Jehovah, GOD means El, God means
the Elohim who are mixed up with the Holy Spirit, and Lord means
Adonsi (Adonis/Hades/Baal-Hadad).
OK, we've got enough evidence that this guy is Loony Tunes, and not
to be engaged with seriously (he may be fun to tease, though).
We've got enough evidence that you are a stupid ignorant imbecile who
doesn't have the faintest clue or understanding about history, the
Bible, or ancient religion.
I'll simply ask you to provide checkable references to your claim
that Parry said the Homeric poems were composed in written form.
It doesn't seem consistent with what I know of him.
pt
On 06/08/2026 18:58, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/6/2026 12:34 AM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 06/08/2026 03:06, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/5/2026 2:01 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 13:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt >>>>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots. >>>>>> People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to
archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on
*something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
They did nothing of the kind. We know exactly where the Greek and
Egyptian gods came from because Herodotus and other writers tell
us. They were the biological ancestors (mathematically proven) of
the people who worshipped them. All recorded ancient religions were >>>>> ancestor cults. We can even date the exact time at which these gods >>>>> lived as historical kings of the people who made them into gods
because of the benefits they gave to them. All the Greek gods date
to around 1700 BC according to the Chronicon. They were basically
Minoan period kings that ruled over Greece and Phoenicia (Philo,
Porphyry, Sanchuniathon). The Egyptian gods were the direct
ancestors of the Pharaoh?s who preceded the first Pharaoh Min
(Herodotus citing the Egyptians and witnessing the bodies of the
Pharaohs back to the time of Min himself).
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. >>>>>> If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not
much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but >>>>>> not
omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
The Jewish god is the personification of the Pharaoh of Egypt who
controlled Syria-Palestine and demanded tribute from the people who >>>>> lived there. He even told Moses his name was "On", meaning The One, >>>>> and that translates to the Egyptian name Ktes (also named Proteus
according to Diodorus) which means he was the Pharaoh Setnakte.
Other Pharaohs that were turned into the god of the Jews (not all
of them were regarded as gods when they were opposed by other
Pharaohs, which is why the bible talks about prophets of false
gods) include Ramses III the god of Joshua and Necho (named in the
Bible) who as the Bible describes handed over the land of Syria-
Palestine to Nebuchadnezzar II, as corroborated by Herodotus and
the inscription of Nebuchadnezzar II himself.
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come >>>>>> down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're >>>>>> doing.
Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is >>>>>> only one of those gods.
Correct. Jehovah was the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the son >>>>> of Elyon, the Most-High God to whom the Jewish temple was
dedicated. Jehovah's brothers included Mot, Hubal (Apollo), Set/
Sutekh/Suduc/ Typhon, Shaddai, El the younger, and Dushara (Zeus
Belus)
Also among Jehovah's brothers was his possibly half-brother Baal
Hadad who was also the basis for the Greek god Hades and later
Adonis and thus the Hebrew god Adonai, gods of the dead. El was
Kronos or Saturn and is testified to in Linear A inscriptions at
the Cretan king Satur dating to around 1700 BC the same time as
when El lived. Jehovah's name is preserved in Egyptian inscriptions >>>>> from the same period as Meruserenre Yakubher, and this explains why >>>>> the Jews worshipped the successive Pharaoh's of Egypt as their god.
The Hebrew god Tsebaoth (Atlas) was the brother of El along with
Dagon and Bartylus, and his sisters were Astarte (Aphrodite),
Ashera (Rhea), and Baaltis (Dione/Demeter). Anat (Athena) was also
a daughter of El.
Baal-Hadad (Adonai) was the son of a concubine of Baal-Shamen that
El gave in marriage to Dagon so all three of these people have
claim to be his father.
El was married to his sister Ashera who he offered as wife to
Jehovah, Yam Nahar (River Sea, hence Pontus in Greece), or Yaw in
the Baal Epic which explained why the Elephantine letters describe
her as the wife of Jehovah.
The Elohim or Gods which the book of Genesis claims created the
heaven and the earth were the basis for the Greek Titans. They were >>>>> the god who fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen as
ruler, after which he castrated him with a sickle.
The key to the Bible is LORD means Jehovah, GOD means El, God means >>>>> the Elohim who are mixed up with the Holy Spirit, and Lord means
Adonsi (Adonis/Hades/Baal-Hadad).
OK, we've got enough evidence that this guy is Loony Tunes, and not
to be engaged with seriously (he may be fun to tease, though).
We've got enough evidence that you are a stupid ignorant imbecile who
doesn't have the faintest clue or understanding about history, the
Bible, or ancient religion.
I'll simply ask you to provide checkable references to your claim
that Parry said the Homeric poems were composed in written form.
Parry said that ALL of his so called oral traditions involved the
writing down of what was composed. Everything he studied was in the form
of writing. He didn't even speak Serbian so had to use a translator and written translations. Writing was the ONLY way he had to substantiate
his claims that oral poetry was a tradition, and even then he said he
could never prove it. Why? Because he didn't have any written texts that date even earlier than the ones that he had in order to prove repetition
of common passages and themes, and that they appeared differently.
According to Parry's definition of oral poetry every time the work was passed to another oral poet, implicitly in writing (Parry always refers
to the work being written down after initial performance), it would have
to undergo change when the next poet performed it in order to be defined
as an oral composition or oral poetry. Otherwise it would just be
repeating what was written and NOT part of an oral tradition.
In article <11534nd$82if$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 06/08/2026 13:32, The Doctor wrote:
In article <11517oo$3jeii$1@dont-email.me>,though. If you
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 06/08/2026 06:31, The Doctor wrote:
In article <11511og$3hs4j$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 06/08/2026 04:48, The Doctor wrote:
In article <1150vbi$3h7j3$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 05/08/2026 16:37, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/5/26 05:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt >>>>>>>>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something? >>>>>>>>>>>> Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any >>>>>>>>>>> of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from >>>>>>>>>>> their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially >>>>>>>>>> unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it,
much likeread the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not
come down.what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not
omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an >>>>>>>>>> ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to
we're doing.When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what
equivalent and tAlso, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is >>>>>>>>>> only one of those gods.
˙˙˙˙But YHWH is the God of Storms a Zeus.Jupiter
ake a look at the Universe and it is full of storm-like activity. >>>>>>>>> ˙˙˙˙Not that I think it is more than coincidence.
Jehovah was a sea god. He is named as Yaw or Yam Nahar (Rive Sea) in the
Baal Epic. His Greek equivalent was Pontus as stated by Eusebius, Philo,
and Pliny. He might also be the Lotan of the Baal Epic and Leviathan of
the Bible. If so his origin is from Asia-Minor, and he was a Luwian king
who ruled over the Pontus or Black Sea hence his given name since >>>>>>>> Leviathan means The Luwian. He was defeated by Baal Hadad, ie. Hades in
the Baal Epic and his ships scattered over the sea. That's your Jehovah.
It's likely, based on Snorri's identification of Asgard as Troy in >>>>>>>> Asia-Minor (the Bosphorus is the basis of the Bi-Frost bridge, and >>>>>>>> Midgard was Mygdonia or Minoan Greece), that he was worshipped by the >>>>>>>> Vikings ie. Varangians or Phrygians as Odin
Yahweh you mean?
No I mean Jehovah. The correct pronunciation is recorded in the Egyptian >>>>>> transliteration of the name of Meruserenre Yakubher.
There is also a Yakobaam Sekkhaenre who may be the same Pharaoh as >>>>>> Meruserenre Yakubher or more likely Jehovah the grandson of Zeus-Belus >>>>>> ie. Dushara or Teshub.
The WH in the name of Jehovah is therefore a corruption of the word >>>>>> Baal. YHWH therefore means "I am Baal" or "I am the Lord" which is the >>>>>> name Jehovah gives to Moses when he asks for his name. This translates >>>>>> to "On" or "The One" in the Greek text of the Bible which is equivalent >>>>>> to Ktes in Egyptian, meaning that the god of Moses was the Pharaoh >>>>>> Setnakte also known as Proteus or Ktes (The One) to the Greeks as stated >>>>>> by Diodorus. This places the Exodus at the same time as the Trojan War. >>>>>> We already know this from the Inscription of Merneptah (Amenophis in >>>>>> Manetho) which names Israel as one of the peoples expelled from Egypt >>>>>> when a Trojan lead alliance of Sea Peoples invaded Egypt, as confirmed >>>>>> by Herodotus at the time of Proteus who Herodotus states controlled >>>>>> Egypt at this time. According to Manetho the Jews were expelled from >>>>>> Egypt by an alliance between Amenophis (Merneptah), his son Seti, and >>>>>> the king of Aethiopia, ie. Proteus (Setnakte). The Aethiopian kings list >>>>>> for this period also confirms their successive rule and the expulsion of >>>>>> an Ahmoses (ie. Moses) from Egypt by Proteus (Setnakte) at this time as >>>>>> also stated by Diodorus.
Amenophis or Merneptah is also known by his full name
Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae which means he is the Tithonus of Homer,
Aktisanes of Diodorus, and the Petissonius referred to as ruling Egypt >>>>>> in the same sequence in the account of the Coptic Christian Bishop John >>>>>> Nikiu.
What about in the Hebrew?
What about what in the Hebrew?
For starters, El refers to of Yahweh.
No it doesn't. El refers to El and Jehovah refers to Jehovah. Jehovah is
the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the son of Elyon the Most High.
You've obviously never read the Bible and don't have the remotest clue
about what it actually says.
And what is Jevovah in Hebrew?
On 8/6/2026 8:12 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 06/08/2026 18:58, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/6/2026 12:34 AM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 06/08/2026 03:06, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/5/2026 2:01 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 13:53, The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt >>>>>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any >>>>>>>> of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from >>>>>>>> their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper
roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to
archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on
*something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially >>>>>>> unlikely?
They did nothing of the kind. We know exactly where the Greek and >>>>>> Egyptian gods came from because Herodotus and other writers tell
us. They were the biological ancestors (mathematically proven) of >>>>>> the people who worshipped them. All recorded ancient religions
were ancestor cults. We can even date the exact time at which
these gods lived as historical kings of the people who made them
into gods because of the benefits they gave to them. All the Greek >>>>>> gods date to around 1700 BC according to the Chronicon. They were >>>>>> basically Minoan period kings that ruled over Greece and Phoenicia >>>>>> (Philo, Porphyry, Sanchuniathon). The Egyptian gods were the
direct ancestors of the Pharaoh?s who preceded the first Pharaoh
Min (Herodotus citing the Egyptians and witnessing the bodies of
the Pharaohs back to the time of Min himself).
The Jewish god is the personification of the Pharaoh of Egypt who >>>>>> controlled Syria-Palestine and demanded tribute from the people
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. >>>>>>> If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not
much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty
but not
omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an >>>>>>
who lived there. He even told Moses his name was "On", meaning The >>>>>> One, and that translates to the Egyptian name Ktes (also named
Proteus according to Diodorus) which means he was the Pharaoh
Setnakte. Other Pharaohs that were turned into the god of the Jews >>>>>> (not all of them were regarded as gods when they were opposed by
other Pharaohs, which is why the bible talks about prophets of
false gods) include Ramses III the god of Joshua and Necho (named >>>>>> in the Bible) who as the Bible describes handed over the land of
Syria- Palestine to Nebuchadnezzar II, as corroborated by
Herodotus and the inscription of Nebuchadnezzar II himself.
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to
come down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're >>>>>>> doing.
Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is >>>>>>> only one of those gods.
Correct. Jehovah was the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the
son of Elyon, the Most-High God to whom the Jewish temple was
dedicated. Jehovah's brothers included Mot, Hubal (Apollo), Set/
Sutekh/Suduc/ Typhon, Shaddai, El the younger, and Dushara (Zeus
Belus)
Also among Jehovah's brothers was his possibly half-brother Baal
Hadad who was also the basis for the Greek god Hades and later
Adonis and thus the Hebrew god Adonai, gods of the dead. El was
Kronos or Saturn and is testified to in Linear A inscriptions at
the Cretan king Satur dating to around 1700 BC the same time as
when El lived. Jehovah's name is preserved in Egyptian
inscriptions from the same period as Meruserenre Yakubher, and
this explains why the Jews worshipped the successive Pharaoh's of >>>>>> Egypt as their god.
The Hebrew god Tsebaoth (Atlas) was the brother of El along with
Dagon and Bartylus, and his sisters were Astarte (Aphrodite),
Ashera (Rhea), and Baaltis (Dione/Demeter). Anat (Athena) was also >>>>>> a daughter of El.
Baal-Hadad (Adonai) was the son of a concubine of Baal-Shamen that >>>>>> El gave in marriage to Dagon so all three of these people have
claim to be his father.
El was married to his sister Ashera who he offered as wife to
Jehovah, Yam Nahar (River Sea, hence Pontus in Greece), or Yaw in >>>>>> the Baal Epic which explained why the Elephantine letters describe >>>>>> her as the wife of Jehovah.
The Elohim or Gods which the book of Genesis claims created the
heaven and the earth were the basis for the Greek Titans. They
were the god who fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen
as ruler, after which he castrated him with a sickle.
The key to the Bible is LORD means Jehovah, GOD means El, God
means the Elohim who are mixed up with the Holy Spirit, and Lord
means Adonsi (Adonis/Hades/Baal-Hadad).
OK, we've got enough evidence that this guy is Loony Tunes, and not
to be engaged with seriously (he may be fun to tease, though).
We've got enough evidence that you are a stupid ignorant imbecile
who doesn't have the faintest clue or understanding about history,
the Bible, or ancient religion.
I'll simply ask you to provide checkable references to your claim
that Parry said the Homeric poems were composed in written form.
Parry said that ALL of his so called oral traditions involved the
writing down of what was composed. Everything he studied was in the
form of writing. He didn't even speak Serbian so had to use a
translator and written translations. Writing was the ONLY way he had
to substantiate his claims that oral poetry was a tradition, and even
then he said he could never prove it. Why? Because he didn't have any
written texts that date even earlier than the ones that he had in
order to prove repetition of common passages and themes, and that they
appeared differently.
According to Parry's definition of oral poetry every time the work was
passed to another oral poet, implicitly in writing (Parry always
refers to the work being written down after initial performance), it
would have to undergo change when the next poet performed it in order
to be defined as an oral composition or oral poetry. Otherwise it
would just be repeating what was written and NOT part of an oral
tradition.
Please read for comprehension. I asked you to provide a checkable
reference. You failed to do so, just spewing more Vigorous Assertion.
Any academic conference would laugh you out of the room.
Your claim that all the oral traditionalists he encountered used
written texts does not hold up to scrutiny.
From his Wikipedia article:
"Between 1933 and 1935 Parry, at the time an assistant professor at
Harvard University, made two visits to Yugoslavia, where he studied and recorded oral traditional poetry in Serbo-Croat with the help on his
second visit of his assistant Albert Lord, and a native singer and fixer named Nikola Vujnovi?, who became essential to finding and communicating with other singers, known as the guslar. They worked in Bosnia, where literacy was lowest and the oral tradition was, in the term used by
Parry and Lord, "purest". They made thousands[6] of hours of recordings
in remote mountain villages of illiterate farmers who sang epic songs of prodigious length from memory. Parry and Lord recorded on newly invented equipment, flat aluminum records instead of vinyl, custom made for the expedition, with only a five minute recording time. Discs were
continually swapped with a special two-disc machine to create a single
long recording, later transcribed."
If there were written texts existing, Parry wouldn't have gone to the
trouble of recording and then transcribing the poems.
Can you provide actual references to these 'written texts'?
The point here is that oral transmission of epic poems has a
long and well-attested history.
pt
Verily, in article <xn0pt5texcvytvm002@post.eweka.nl>, did Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa wrote:
But Ron L. Hubbard was a looney ... he invented the
ridiculous Scientology 'religion'.
Didn't he originally do this as a bet or dare or something?
Then it proved lucrative, and here we are.
Of course his made-up religion proved lucrative, that's all any
of them are... made-up money making machines to part fools from
their money. Simple gullible people lap that shit up.
I don't know about that. The old religions probably had deeper roots.
People have hypothesized everything from fertility cults to archetypal
hero worship to hallucinations, but surely it was based on *something*.
Why else would anyone else even believe anything as superficially
unlikely?
Older religion was different from how we now think of it, though. If you
read the Old Testament without modern interpretation, it's not much like
what we now call either Judaism or Christianity. God is mighty but not omnipotent; in fact, he's frequently stymied by humans. He has an
ordinary body and can walk around on Earth when he chooses to come down.
When he's not down here, he doesn't automatically know what we're doing. Also, the Earth is a flat square with gods in the sky, and Yahweh is
only one of those gods.
--
The meek shall inherit, we're told,
But I'm not so easily sold.
For supposing they should,
It would do them no good --
They'd lose it at once to the bold.
On 8/6/26 09:29, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 11:20:07 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
The Hebrews might disagree but it means nothing. The real matter is who
profits by the sacrifices and it is the priestly classes. which
in the case of the ancient Jews were hereditary positions.
Ah. You cite Ayn Rand.
No I cite my reading of the scriptures and commentaries by various
thoughtful people.
On 2026-08-06 10:44:19 +0000, Blueshirt said:translated
The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 14:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by many
different people... then translated, mistranslated, revised,
areagain to another different language, edited by church elders (with
agendas), tidied up by
scholars, revised again with improved translations and now in 2026
nothing more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
Absolute poppycock. If you are referring to the Bible, it was written
in Hebrew based on Egyptian, Hittite, Assyro-Babylonian, Phoenician,
Greek, and Jewish historical texts from the periods that it covers.
Just because something is written down doesn't mean it is factual... I
can write down a ton of crazy ideas, leave it for people in the future
to be amazed at, yet it will still be a load of made-up nonsense.
Yep. Someone idiot in the future will find a copy of Harry Potter and
think wizards were real (some loonies today already think Harry Potter
is real!).
However, even accepting that the bible is based on ancient historical
events - and they were documented accurately - with the amount of
corruptions and exaggerations that have taken place with those stories
andover the centuries, (Including errors with the textual transmission
sheeplerevisions that served theological/institutional interests.) the
happilywho follow the various branches of Christianity today are generally
unknowledgeable about the primary sources of those ancient tales. So
what they are left with today, on face value, is basically a book of
fantasy tales and well meaning fables.
The bible is a propaganda tool for the Christian religion to enrich
itself with and the people running the various factions within it. L.
Ron Hubbard knew what he was doing creating his own religion. People
are generally simple and gullible. The weaknesses within their minds
crave for something to follow and be a part of... and they will
part with their money for that sense of belonging.
I don't know about "happy". In the early days, people were forced to
give up their money and land to the church. In some cases, if they
didn't convert to whichever looney religion the "missionaries" were >peddling, the non-believers were simply killed.
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
On Thu, 6 Aug 2026 10:45:11 -0700, BobbieSellers ><bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/6/26 09:29, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 11:20:07 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
=20
The Hebrews might disagree but it means nothing. The real matter is = >who=20
profits by the sacrifices and it is the priestly classes. which
in the case of the ancient Jews were hereditary positions.
Ah. You cite Ayn Rand.
No I cite my reading of the scriptures and commentaries by various=20 >>thoughtful people.
And yet, in my reading experience, it is Ayn Rand who asserted that,
to understand a religion, look at those receiving the offerings.
Of course, being an arch Capitalist, she was prone to see everything
in terms of cash flow.
And by "profits", you presumably mean their /food/ -- food for them
and their wives' and little ones' food as well.
And what is Jevovah in Hebrew?
YHWH. Pronounced Jehovah.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True
Doctor is a troll? Or, worse, a potty-mouthed
bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence
of real usenet bots. He basically posts random
crap to the drwho groups and drives off real
discussion, but occasionally will get threads
crossposted into other groups. Whether he is
a an offical troll is hard to say.
On Thu, 6 Aug 2026 20:55:33 +0100, The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
<snippo>
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or, >worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet bots. He basically posts random crap to the drwho groups and drives off real discussion,
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups. Whether he is a an offical troll is hard to say.
On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 07:43:58 +0100, The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
<snippo a lot of the nonsense>
On 07/08/2026 06:32, The Doctor wrote:
<snippo a whole lot of nonsense>
And what is Jevovah in Hebrew?
YHWH. Pronounced Jehovah.
Actually, it's not supposed to be pronounced at all. "Adonai" is said instead.
"Jehovah" combines the letters of YHWH with the vowels of "Adonai"
(or, it appears, "Elohim".
For those actually interested:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah>
This gets quite interesting in places. Well, I found it so, anyway.
On Thu, 6 Aug 2026 20:55:33 +0100, The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
<snippo>
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
On 7/08/2026 5:55 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 06/08/2026 17:18, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 13:58:37 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/5/2026 1:25 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
<snippo, this is getting excessively weird>
Can we drop the expletives?
Sadly, something seems to have triggered fear of a threat to a deeply
held religious belief (in this case, the belief that everything was
written down immediately by its author [1]).
And yet another clueless imbecile who is totally out of his depth and
ignores all the warnings not to expose his complete and utter stupidity
Aggy, you should stop belittling yourself like this.
We all know, already. ;-P
In article <1153urf$emul$1@dont-email.me>,Jehovah is the way the Egyptians pronounced it which means that Jehovah
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 07/08/2026 06:32, The Doctor wrote:
In article <11534nd$82if$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
Sea) in theJehovah was a sea god. He is named as Yaw or Yam Nahar (Rive
Eusebius, Philo,Baal Epic. His Greek equivalent was Pontus as stated by
Luwian kingand Pliny. He might also be the Lotan of the Baal Epic and Leviathan of
the Bible. If so his origin is from Asia-Minor, and he was a
Jehovah.who ruled over the Pontus or Black Sea hence his given name since >>>>>>>>>> Leviathan means The Luwian. He was defeated by Baal Hadad, ie. Hades in
the Baal Epic and his ships scattered over the sea. That's your
It's likely, based on Snorri's identification of Asgard as Troy in >>>>>>>>>> Asia-Minor (the Bosphorus is the basis of the Bi-Frost bridge, and >>>>>>>>>> Midgard was Mygdonia or Minoan Greece), that he was worshipped by the
Vikings ie. Varangians or Phrygians as Odin
Yahweh you mean?
No I mean Jehovah. The correct pronunciation is recorded in the Egyptian
transliteration of the name of Meruserenre Yakubher.
There is also a Yakobaam Sekkhaenre who may be the same Pharaoh as >>>>>>>> Meruserenre Yakubher or more likely Jehovah the grandson of Zeus-Belus >>>>>>>> ie. Dushara or Teshub.
The WH in the name of Jehovah is therefore a corruption of the word >>>>>>>> Baal. YHWH therefore means "I am Baal" or "I am the Lord" which is the >>>>>>>> name Jehovah gives to Moses when he asks for his name. This translates >>>>>>>> to "On" or "The One" in the Greek text of the Bible which is equivalent
to Ktes in Egyptian, meaning that the god of Moses was the Pharaoh >>>>>>>> Setnakte also known as Proteus or Ktes (The One) to the Greeks as stated
by Diodorus. This places the Exodus at the same time as the Trojan War.
We already know this from the Inscription of Merneptah (Amenophis in >>>>>>>> Manetho) which names Israel as one of the peoples expelled from Egypt >>>>>>>> when a Trojan lead alliance of Sea Peoples invaded Egypt, as confirmed >>>>>>>> by Herodotus at the time of Proteus who Herodotus states controlled >>>>>>>> Egypt at this time. According to Manetho the Jews were expelled from >>>>>>>> Egypt by an alliance between Amenophis (Merneptah), his son Seti, and >>>>>>>> the king of Aethiopia, ie. Proteus (Setnakte). The Aethiopian kings list
for this period also confirms their successive rule and the expulsion of
an Ahmoses (ie. Moses) from Egypt by Proteus (Setnakte) at this time as
also stated by Diodorus.
Amenophis or Merneptah is also known by his full name
Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae which means he is the Tithonus of Homer, >>>>>>>> Aktisanes of Diodorus, and the Petissonius referred to as ruling Egypt >>>>>>>> in the same sequence in the account of the Coptic Christian Bishop John
Nikiu.
What about in the Hebrew?
What about what in the Hebrew?
For starters, El refers to of Yahweh.
No it doesn't. El refers to El and Jehovah refers to Jehovah. Jehovah is >>>> the son of El, the son of Baal-Shamen, the son of Elyon the Most High. >>>>
You've obviously never read the Bible and don't have the remotest clue >>>> about what it actually says.
And what is Jevovah in Hebrew?
YHWH. Pronounced Jehovah.
Yahweh! Jevovah is Latinisation.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
And by "profits", you presumably mean their /food/ -- food for them
and their wives' and little ones' food as well.
There are religions where people can eat the sacrifices after the spiritual part of them has been removed. There are others where the sacrifices have
to be burnt or in some other way made inedible. There are certainly OT references to the latter but that doesn't mean the former didn't exist
there at that time.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet bots. He basically posts random crap to the drwho groups and drives off real discussion,
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups. Whether he is a an offical troll is hard to say.
--scott
In article <11551jh$qinl$1@dont-email.me>, oldernow <oldernow@dev.null> wrote:
In article <1154vif$jlk$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True
Doctor is a troll? Or, worse, a potty-mouthed
bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence
of real usenet bots. He basically posts random
crap to the drwho groups and drives off real
discussion, but occasionally will get threads
crossposted into other groups. Whether he is
a an offical troll is hard to say.
Troll-calling is a USENET context form of
virtue-signalling.
Point well taken
In article <11555su$s8ju$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 07/08/2026 17:18, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 07:43:58 +0100, The True Doctor
<agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
<snippo a lot of the nonsense>
On 07/08/2026 06:32, The Doctor wrote:
<snippo a whole lot of nonsense>
And what is Jevovah in Hebrew?
YHWH. Pronounced Jehovah.
Actually, it's not supposed to be pronounced at all. "Adonai" is said
instead.
"Jehovah" combines the letters of YHWH with the vowels of "Adonai"
So I was right all the long. The Jews syncretised both of the main
protagonists of the Baal Epic, Jehovah (Yaw/Yam Nahar) and Baal-Hadad
(Adodus) and turned this gestalt into their god, since Baal-Hadad is
Adonai in Hebrew (equivalent to the Greek underworld gods Hades and
Adonis) and Jehovah from the Baal Epic is the Hyksos Pharoah Meruserenre
Yakubher or Yakobaam Sekkhaenre. Thus YHWH's name is "I am Baal" = "I am
the Lord" as he states to Noah in the book of Genesis. Yaku-bher =
Yako-baam = YH-WH = I'm Baal literally and Baal means Lord.
(or, it appears, "Elohim".
Elohim means The Gods in Hebrew. They were literally the gods or Titans
who were led by Jehovah (Pontus=Yam Nahar=River Sea) and fought with El
(Kronos) against his father Baal-Shamen (Uranus) to depose him according
to Sanchuniathon's Phoenician history.
For those actually interested:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah>
This gets quite interesting in places. Well, I found it so, anyway.
and Nephelim?
On 07/08/2026 17:02, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor
is a troll? Or, worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real
usenet bots. He basically posts random crap to the drwho
groups and drives off real discussion,
I do nothing of the kind.
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other
groups. Whether he is a an offical troll is hard to say.
On 8/08/2026 7:41 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:.... but he will tell you that he is merely trying to attract other
On 07/08/2026 17:02, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor
is a troll? Or, worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real
usenet bots. He basically posts random crap to the drwho
groups and drives off real discussion,
I do nothing of the kind.
I think some people might have mixed you up with Dave, because
you have Doctor in your nym.
There's more than one Doctor but there's only one Agamemnon!
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other
groups. Whether he is a an offical troll is hard to say.
That sounds more like Dave, aka The Doctor, to me. He loves
cross-posting everywhere to spread his chaos.
posters into the 'Doctor Who' groups.
Scott Dorsey wrote in article <1154vif$jlk$1@panix2.panix.com>:He
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet bots.
Whether hebasically posts random crap to the drwho groups and drives off real discussion,
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups.
is a an offical troll is hard to say.
I think you're speaking of the Doctor (Dave). The True Doctor (AGA) is a
different poster.
Neither are trolls, but AGA/the True Doctor definitely has some unusual >views.
In article <1154vif$jlk$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True
Doctor is a troll? Or, worse, a potty-mouthed
bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence
of real usenet bots. He basically posts random
crap to the drwho groups and drives off real
discussion, but occasionally will get threads
crossposted into other groups. Whether he is
a an offical troll is hard to say.
Troll-calling is a USENET context form of
virtue-signalling.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:is =
On Thu, 6 Aug 2026 10:45:11 -0700, BobbieSellers >><bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/6/26 09:29, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 11:20:07 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
=20
The Hebrews might disagree but it means nothing. The real matter
various=20who
profits by the sacrifices and it is the priestly classes. which=20
in the case of the ancient Jews were hereditary positions.
Ah. You cite Ayn Rand.
No I cite my reading of the scriptures and commentaries by
shethoughtful people.
And yet, in my reading experience, it is Ayn Rand who asserted that,
to understand a religion, look at those receiving the offerings.
Ayn Rand did in fact say that. But many people said that long before
did, including Jesus. So you are not wrong, but you may benefit from >broadening your reading experience.spiritual
Of course, being an arch Capitalist, she was prone to see everything
in terms of cash flow.
Economists, no matter what side of the spectrum they are on, tend to do
that. It's a useful viewpoint but a limited one.
And by "profits", you presumably mean their /food/ -- food for them
and their wives' and little ones' food as well.
There are religions where people can eat the sacrifices after the
part of them has been removed. There are others where the sacrificeshave
to be burnt or in some other way made inedible. There are certainly OT >references to the latter but that doesn't mean the former didn't exist
there at that time.
In article <e90c7ltcm3t17ohoqpv86uictvcka1ukqp@4ax.com>,many
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 09:15:43 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2026-08-06 10:44:19 +0000, Blueshirt said:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 05/08/2026 14:39, Blueshirt wrote:
The ancient scriptures were written over hundreds of years, by
translateddifferent people... then translated, mistranslated, revised,
again to another different language, edited by church elders (with
areagendas), tidied up by
scholars, revised again with improved translations and now in 2026
writtennothing more than fantasy tales for the simple folk to believe in.
Absolute poppycock. If you are referring to the Bible, it was
Phoenician,in Hebrew based on Egyptian, Hittite, Assyro-Babylonian,
IGreek, and Jewish historical texts from the periods that it covers.
Just because something is written down doesn't mean it is factual...
futurecan write down a ton of crazy ideas, leave it for people in the
to be amazed at, yet it will still be a load of made-up nonsense.
Yep. Someone idiot in the future will find a copy of Harry Potter and >>>think wizards were real (some loonies today already think Harry Potter
historicalis real!).
However, even accepting that the bible is based on ancient
storiesevents - and they were documented accurately - with the amount of
corruptions and exaggerations that have taken place with those
andover the centuries, (Including errors with the textual transmission
sheeplerevisions that served theological/institutional interests.) the
who follow the various branches of Christianity today are generally
unknowledgeable about the primary sources of those ancient tales. So
what they are left with today, on face value, is basically a book of
L.fantasy tales and well meaning fables.
The bible is a propaganda tool for the Christian religion to enrich
itself with and the people running the various factions within it.
Ron Hubbard knew what he was doing creating his own religion. People
are generally simple and gullible. The weaknesses within their minds
happilycrave for something to follow and be a part of... and they will
part with their money for that sense of belonging.
I don't know about "happy". In the early days, people were forced to >>>give up their money and land to the church. In some cases, if they >>>didn't convert to whichever looney religion the "missionaries" were >>>peddling, the non-believers were simply killed.
Yes, the holodomor in the Ukraine of those who refused to convert to >>Marxism-Leninism was quite awful.
Marxism-Leninism is satanic evil.
In article <hd0c7l50v5odp1rvl93dmt7jpk8h79v42r@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 07:43:58 +0100, The True Doctor >><agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
<snippo a lot of the nonsense>
On 07/08/2026 06:32, The Doctor wrote:
<snippo a whole lot of nonsense>
And what is Jevovah in Hebrew?
YHWH. Pronounced Jehovah.
Actually, it's not supposed to be pronounced at all. "Adonai" is said >>instead.
"Jehovah" combines the letters of YHWH with the vowels of "Adonai"
(or, it appears, "Elohim".
For those actually interested:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah>
This gets quite interesting in places. Well, I found it so, anyway.
And your opinion on drwho ?
On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 16:37:05 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <oldernow@dev.null>
wrote:
In article <1154vif$jlk$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True
Doctor is a troll? Or, worse, a potty-mouthed
bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence
of real usenet bots. He basically posts random
crap to the drwho groups and drives off real
discussion, but occasionally will get threads
crossposted into other groups. Whether he is
a an offical troll is hard to say.
Troll-calling is a USENET context form of
virtue-signalling.
Well, then it's a good thing I didn't actually
/call/ him a troll, isn't it.
In article <1156t6q$1c9oi$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 07/08/2026 22:41, The Doctor wrote:
In article <11555su$s8ju$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 07/08/2026 17:18, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 07:43:58 +0100, The True Doctor
<agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
<snippo a lot of the nonsense>
On 07/08/2026 06:32, The Doctor wrote:
<snippo a whole lot of nonsense>
And what is Jevovah in Hebrew?
YHWH. Pronounced Jehovah.
Actually, it's not supposed to be pronounced at all. "Adonai" is said >>>>> instead.
"Jehovah" combines the letters of YHWH with the vowels of "Adonai"
So I was right all the long. The Jews syncretised both of the main
protagonists of the Baal Epic, Jehovah (Yaw/Yam Nahar) and Baal-Hadad
(Adodus) and turned this gestalt into their god, since Baal-Hadad is
Adonai in Hebrew (equivalent to the Greek underworld gods Hades and
Adonis) and Jehovah from the Baal Epic is the Hyksos Pharoah Meruserenre >>>> Yakubher or Yakobaam Sekkhaenre. Thus YHWH's name is "I am Baal" = "I am >>>> the Lord" as he states to Noah in the book of Genesis. Yaku-bher =
Yako-baam = YH-WH = I'm Baal literally and Baal means Lord.
(or, it appears, "Elohim".
Elohim means The Gods in Hebrew. They were literally the gods or Titans >>>> who were led by Jehovah (Pontus=Yam Nahar=River Sea) and fought with El >>>> (Kronos) against his father Baal-Shamen (Uranus) to depose him according >>>> to Sanchuniathon's Phoenician history.
For those actually interested:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah>
This gets quite interesting in places. Well, I found it so, anyway.
and Nephelim?
They're the same as the Niflheim in Norse mythology and refer to
European people from the north, specifically those from the Netherlands
who are the tallest people in the entire world.
Noah as was demonstrated by Josephus in his Antiquities was Ogygus the
historical King of Athens at the time of the Ogygian Deluge (ie. the
Thera Eruption of 1628 BC) and Janus the historical King of Italy at the
same time. All of these people are exactly the same person and are
derived from the same common written account which was still extant in
Egypt at the time of Solon (c.570 BC) which also forms the basis of the
story of Atlantis and Thymaetes' Phyrgia which we know from Diodorus,
who preserves the text of both the Atlantean account and Thymaetes, is
the same account as Ctesias' Persica and Berosus' Babylonica all of
which are quoted one after the other and tell exactly the same story.
There are only very minor differences between them. The full Roman
account of the Phrygia is preserved in The Travels of Noah Into Europe
by Robert Lynche who derives it from Annius de Viterbo (born Giovanni
Nanni), who derives it from pseudo-Berosus which derives from
pseudo-Ctesias, which derives from Alexander Polyhistor (the genuine
Berosus and Ctesias no longer being extant and Diodorus' accounts
probably being pseudo-Berosus and pseudo-Ctesias too) who probably
derives the account from Antiochus of Syracuse given the names of the
kings mentioned by Lynche are known to have been present in Antiochus'
no longer extant text of the Colonising of Italy and History of Sicily,
who wrote at the same time as the real Ctesias.
You can find the complete transcript into modern English here (along
with links to the original printed versions):
https://www.argyrou.uk/homepage/myths/bible/Travels.htm
Josephus is a must read.
You have your own website I see.
In article <MPG.44dfd9b03f334a098a292@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote in article <1154vif$jlk$1@panix2.panix.com>:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet bots. He >>> basically posts random crap to the drwho groups and drives off real >>discussion,
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups. Whether he
is a an offical troll is hard to say.
I think you're speaking of the Doctor (Dave). The True Doctor (AGA) is a >>different poster.
Neither are trolls, but AGA/the True Doctor definitely has some unusual >>views.
That is why AGA nd I get along.
The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
In article <MPG.44dfd9b03f334a098a292@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote in article <1154vif$jlk$1@panix2.panix.com>:
discussion,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll?
Or, worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet
bots. He basically posts random crap to the drwho groups and
drives off real
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups.
Whether he is a an offical troll is hard to say.
I think you're speaking of the Doctor (Dave). The True Doctor (AGA)
is a different poster.
Neither are trolls, but AGA/the True Doctor definitely has some
unusual views.
That is why AGA nd I get along.
Sorry for the confusion. It's hard to keep track of all the mess
coming out of rec.arts.drwho.
PS: ALL HAI TEEDOTBEE.
On 07/08/2026 17:02, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person˙ <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet bots.˙ He
basically posts random crap to the drwho groups and drives off real
discussion,
I do nothing of the kind. The ones posting crap into this group are
those demonstrating the enormity of their total imbecilitude (is that my word of the Captain's?) by repeating the unfounded popular lie that
Homer's works and the Bible were the product of an oral tradition,
despite writing having existed for over a millennium before both works
were composed and the historicity of both being verified by modern archaeology and the discovery (even in the time of Herodotus) of
Egyptian, Hittite, and Assyro-Babylonian inscriptions testifying to the historical people and events these texts mention. The Merneptah Stela
not only corroborates the account of the outbreak of the Trojan War and
the attack on Egypt by the Trojans as described by Herodotus but also of
the Exodus as described by Manetho and the Bible even naming Israel
itself as being left devoid of seed. Then there's the Inscription and
mural or Ramses III which corroborates the attack on Egypt by Achaeans (named) led by Menelaus and Teukrians (named) led by Teucer the founder
of Salamis from a base in Cyprus which is referred to in the Odyssey and
is the basis of Euripides' play Helen.
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups.
Whether he
is a an offical troll is hard to say.
--scott
When we don't bow down to their claimed expertise, they get upset, and eventually decamp. I fully expect 'The True Doctor' to do so in time.
Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote:
PS: ALL HAI TEEDOTBEE.
Indeed. Now, in those days we had trolls that were real trolls. We
will never see the likes of Carasso again. These kids have but a pale
shadow of his trolling.
--scott
On 8/7/2026 11:48 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 07/08/2026 17:02, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person˙ <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or,
worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet bots.˙ He >>> basically posts random crap to the drwho groups and drives off real
discussion,
I do nothing of the kind. The ones posting crap into this group are
those demonstrating the enormity of their total imbecilitude (is that
my word of the Captain's?) by repeating the unfounded popular lie that
Homer's works and the Bible were the product of an oral tradition,
despite writing having existed for over a millennium before both works
were composed and the historicity of both being verified by modern
archaeology and the discovery (even in the time of Herodotus) of
Egyptian, Hittite, and Assyro-Babylonian inscriptions testifying to
the historical people and events these texts mention. The Merneptah
Stela not only corroborates the account of the outbreak of the Trojan
War and the attack on Egypt by the Trojans as described by Herodotus
but also of the Exodus as described by Manetho and the Bible even
naming Israel itself as being left devoid of seed. Then there's the
Inscription and mural or Ramses III which corroborates the attack on
Egypt by Achaeans (named) led by Menelaus and Teukrians (named) led by
Teucer the founder of Salamis from a base in Cyprus which is referred
to in the Odyssey and is the basis of Euripides' play Helen.
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups.
Whether he
is a an offical troll is hard to say.
--scott
We have people like this drop into rasfw periodically. They all follow
the same pattern: They have some elaborate theory that they desperately
want to˙ be taken seriously, but which falls apart under expert academic scrutiny.
They come to rasfw thinking we'll be more open minded and accepting, but don't realize that decades of reading SF leaves fans with the most
sensitive bullshit detectors on the planet.
When we don't bow down to their claimed expertise, they get upset, and eventually decamp. I fully expect 'The True Doctor' to do so in time.
pt
Why do we have odd characters coming from rasfw?
What about King James version?
Ateism is a spawn of Satan.
----
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
We have people like this drop into rasfw periodically.
They all follow the same pattern: They have some elaborate
theory that they desperately want to be taken seriously, but
which falls apart under expert academic scrutiny.
They come to rasfw thinking we'll be more open minded and
accepting, but don't realize that decades of reading SF leaves
fans with the most sensitive bullshit detectors on the planet.
When we don't bow down to their claimed expertise, they get
upset, and eventually decamp. I fully expect 'The True Doctor'
to do so in time.
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in
news:1158f8t$rpl$1@panix2.panix.com:
Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote:
PS: ALL HAI TEEDOTBEE.
Indeed. Now, in those days we had trolls that were real trolls. We
will never see the likes of Carasso again. These kids have but a pale
shadow of his trolling.
Back in those days I had to wade uphill past 400 other posts just to beg to >be allowed to get in line to be trolled by CARASSO.
--
"I've known for over a year that this guy is the assassin of the Usenet >poetry community. When I first arrived, I thought he was keeping the
lights on in a dead group by reposting from archives. I soon realized
that he was just endlessly reposting his own stuff, that he had killed
the group by flooding it, and that most of the people he called
"trolls" were actually the members of the group.
I've joined the crowd. I'm done trying to work with him and speak reason
to him. It's exhausting and pointless." - Little Willie Douchebag gets >another asskicking from The One True Melissa
I would accept that the edujamacated peeoples WERE able to WRITE stuff
down .... but not the VAST majority of people, probably not even, necessarily, the Rulers. I mean, WHY did they have Scribes if they could write stuff down themselves??
In article <115cmlj$36ou4$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
PARRY SAID THEY WERE ALL BY DEFINITION REQUIRED TO UNDERGO
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE EVERY TIME THEY WERE PASSED ON TO DIFFERENT POETS
Oh!! Look out! Now we have Poets BEFORE people can write. Well, Poetry
IS an Oral art, so maybe Aggy is right about this.
What can we say about Dannyboy?
Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote:pale
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in >>news:1158f8t$rpl$1@panix2.panix.com:
Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote:
PS: ALL HAI TEEDOTBEE.
Indeed. Now, in those days we had trolls that were real trolls. We
will never see the likes of Carasso again. These kids have but a
beg toshadow of his trolling.
Back in those days I had to wade uphill past 400 other posts just to
beforebe allowed to get in line to be trolled by CARASSO.
This is because he, like many, started trolling people in real life
moving to the net. The kids today have it easy, never actually leavingCarasso) writ
their parents' basement to troll anyone in person. To wit:
In article <15025@chaph.usc.edu> carasso@aludra.usc.edu (Roger RDC
es:
TRUE:
Me and a couple of my friends at Cal Poly went into a porn movie
with several Soft Soap Bottles in a backpack. We'd yell out "Oh, oh,
oh, yes, yes, I'm coming!", and then squirt out the Soft Soap off the
balcony. Some guy below then yelled "HEY...What the fuck is *this*!"
We were laughing our heads off.
In article <hg9h7l5p3anh743up6td1jsjsm29n8gtik@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 8 Aug 2026 23:52:58 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The >>Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
Ateism is a spawn of Satan.
I'm not sure Satan is biological equipped for spawning. In any sense.
Explain the Nepelim then.
In article <hisj7lpfc4v9dh03aog5u23hgls2sjcp0g@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
And some people think kids today are bad!
Cujo is a tasteless troll
On Sun, 9 Aug 2026 19:08:53 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) wrote:
In article <hg9h7l5p3anh743up6td1jsjsm29n8gtik@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 8 Aug 2026 23:52:58 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The >>Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
Ateism is a spawn of Satan.
I'm not sure Satan is biological equipped for spawning. In any sense.
Explain the Nepelim then.
I think the text is quite clear. What's to explain?
You do realize that, being pre-Flood, the story has to be that they
all drowned and any later giants (like Goliath) had a different
origin, right?
In article <MPG.44e3b8685c6f6adc98a2cd@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
Well, we did have poets before we had writing. Music/poetry is
our oldest art form, older than cave paintings, and it began as a
single thing. That was long before any literacy.
Please explain the Dead Sea Scrolls.
On 09/08/2026 02:03, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 8/7/2026 11:48 PM, The True Doctor wrote:
On 07/08/2026 17:02, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person˙ <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Anyone else beginning to suspect that The True Doctor is a troll? Or, >>>>> worse, a potty-mouthed bot?
He is not a bot since he predates the existence of real usenet
bots.˙ He
basically posts random crap to the drwho groups and drives off real
discussion,
I do nothing of the kind. The ones posting crap into this group are
those demonstrating the enormity of their total imbecilitude (is that
my word of the Captain's?) by repeating the unfounded popular lie
that Homer's works and the Bible were the product of an oral
tradition, despite writing having existed for over a millennium
before both works were composed and the historicity of both being
verified by modern archaeology and the discovery (even in the time of
Herodotus) of Egyptian, Hittite, and Assyro-Babylonian inscriptions
testifying to the historical people and events these texts mention.
The Merneptah Stela not only corroborates the account of the outbreak
of the Trojan War and the attack on Egypt by the Trojans as described
by Herodotus but also of the Exodus as described by Manetho and the
Bible even naming Israel itself as being left devoid of seed. Then
there's the Inscription and mural or Ramses III which corroborates
the attack on Egypt by Achaeans (named) led by Menelaus and Teukrians
(named) led by Teucer the founder of Salamis from a base in Cyprus
which is referred to in the Odyssey and is the basis of Euripides'
play Helen.
but occasionally will get threads crossposted into other groups.
Whether he
is a an offical troll is hard to say.
--scott
We have people like this drop into rasfw periodically. They all follow
the same pattern: They have some elaborate theory that they desperately
want to˙ be taken seriously, but which falls apart under expert academic
scrutiny.
You mean like the total and absolute BOLLOCKS of oral traditions? As
opposed to the truth, that writing was in continuous use in ancient
Greece (including Cyprus and Asia-Minor) since 1900 BC without
interruption as has been proven archaeologically and history was written down. As opposed to accepting what ancient historians wrote down
themselves, that kings lists and lists of Argive priestesses of Hera
were written down and preserved since 1700 or 1800 BC along with the
notable historical events that happened year by year while they were in office. Oh no, that simple idea of actually recording history in writing year-by-year can't possibly be true, so, these totally degenerate fools
have to invent a complete and utter total load of BOLLOCKS about oral traditions, without even knowing what an oral tradition even is, PARRY
SAID THEY WERE ALL BY DEFINITION REQUIRED TO UNDERGO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE EVERY TIME THEY WERE PASSED ON TO DIFFERENT POETS YOU FUCKING IGNORANT UNEDUCATED IMBECILE, in order to make everything extremely complicated
for everyone else so that they can put forward anything they want to
make up themselves out of thin air to suit their political views and
pretend that it's actual history and no one else who they don't deem
capable of understanding their stupid illogical nonsense is a fool that
must be ridiculed so that others are discouraged from also calling out
their lies. FUCKING DEGENERATE IMBECILES!
They come to rasfw thinking we'll be more open minded and accepting, but
don't realize that decades of reading SF leaves fans with the most
sensitive bullshit detectors on the planet.
Reading George Orwell's 1984 makes it obvious that these degenerate
fucking imbeciles proposing that oral traditions even existed when there
is not one single ancient or even more recent source prior to Parry even recording their existence, NOT ONE, and even Parry said it was
impossible to prove they were even a traditions, let alone them
recording actual history, which Parry didn't even go as far as stating anyway, because he only considered them to be a means of creating
fiction in literate societies where everything was eventually written
down and recorded, including the material he used for his own studies,
are working for MINITRUE and employed in the Department of Fiction
rewriting and dissembling history and literature in order to insert
their ignorant deranged thoughts and political messages so as to serve
their degenerate left-wing ideology, the ideology of George Orwell's
Nazis, that of Ingsoc, the English Socialist Party. FUCKING MORONS!
When we don't bow down to their claimed expertise, they get upset, and
eventually decamp. I fully expect 'The True Doctor' to do so in time.
pt
I'm calling you out as the Emperor With No Clothes. You don't have a
shred of evidence to dispute the simple fact that ancient history and
poetry was recorded in writing, so you try to make out that everyone who sees you parading down the streets completely naked, covered only with
your invisible birthday suit of oral traditions (which you don't even understand and have not even read the original source material for,
which says the complete opposite of what you are calming), is an idiot, except after you have been called out by little boy stating the obvious
they are all laughing their heads off at you. YOU STUPID FUCKING
DEGENERATE!
Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote:
kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in >>news:1158f8t$rpl$1@panix2.panix.com:
Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote:
PS: ALL HAI TEEDOTBEE.
Indeed. Now, in those days we had trolls that were real trolls. We
will never see the likes of Carasso again. These kids have but a
pale shadow of his trolling.
Back in those days I had to wade uphill past 400 other posts just to
beg to be allowed to get in line to be trolled by CARASSO.
This is because he, like many, started trolling people in real life
before moving to the net. The kids today have it easy, never actually leaving their parents' basement to troll anyone in person. To wit:
In article <15025@chaph.usc.edu> carasso@aludra.usc.edu (Roger RDC
Carasso) writ es:
TRUE:
Me and a couple of my friends at Cal Poly went into a porn movie
with several Soft Soap Bottles in a backpack. We'd yell out "Oh,
oh, oh, yes, yes, I'm coming!", and then squirt out the Soft Soap
off the balcony. Some guy below then yelled "HEY...What the fuck
is *this*!" We were laughing our heads off.
The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
In article <hisj7lpfc4v9dh03aog5u23hgls2sjcp0g@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
And some people think kids today are bad!
Cujo is a tasteless troll
Perhaps, but Cujo is a pretty good troll. At least he displays skill
at the game. Better than crossposting random screeds all over.
--scott
The Doctor wrote in article <115csnt$15kp$5@gallifrey.nk.ca>:
In article <MPG.44e3b8685c6f6adc98a2cd@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
Well, we did have poets before we had writing. Music/poetry is
our oldest art form, older than cave paintings, and it began as a
single thing. That was long before any literacy.
Please explain the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Explain what about them? That was considerably after cave-
dwelling times.
In article <MPG.44e3e0ea422ba0ed98a2d1@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
Explain what about them? That was considerably after cave-
dwelling times.
But ancient written scrools.
Paul S Person wrote in article(The
<iusj7lldbitgimdhtj44sfieptff7oddpg@4ax.com>:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2026 19:08:53 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The
Doctor) wrote:
In article <hg9h7l5p3anh743up6td1jsjsm29n8gtik@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 8 Aug 2026 23:52:58 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
sense.Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
Ateism is a spawn of Satan.
I'm not sure Satan is biological equipped for spawning. In any
Explain the Nepelim then.
I think the text is quite clear. What's to explain?
You do realize that, being pre-Flood, the story has to be that they
all drowned and any later giants (like Goliath) had a different
origin, right?
One of the Gnostic gospels tells of a tribe of Nephilim preserved
in the mountains. The left-out gospels talk about all kinds of
things the preserved ones didn't mention.
To this day, if you seach hard enough, you can find
left-out books that mention all kinds of things the
preserved ones don't mention.
Is AI, when fed literature to learn from, able to distinguish
between books that are factual and works of fiction? Not just
biblical scriptures, but generally. Does it know when something
written down is made up?
If its machine learning was fed tons of sci-fi books would it
know it was sci-fi, or would it take the written words at face
value and believe those fantastical worlds and the many
varieties of alien species were real?
Paul S Person wrote:
To this day, if you seach hard enough, you can find
left-out books that mention all kinds of things the
preserved ones don't mention.
Question.
Is AI, when fed literature to learn from, able to distinguish
between books that are factual and works of fiction? Not just
biblical scriptures, but generally. Does it know when something
written down is made up?
If its machine learning was fed tons of sci-fi books would it
know it was sci-fi, or would it take the written words at face
value and believe those fantastical worlds and the many
varieties of alien species were real?
Paul S Person wrote:
To this day, if you seach hard enough, you can find
left-out books that mention all kinds of things the
preserved ones don't mention.
Question.
Is AI, when fed literature to learn from, able to distinguish
between books that are factual and works of fiction? Not just
biblical scriptures, but generally. Does it know when something
written down is made up?
If its machine learning was fed tons of sci-fi books would it
know it was sci-fi, or would it take the written words at face
value and believe those fantastical worlds and the many
varieties of alien species were real?
In article <nbim7l9f4iitc0mbbgsk42fdm0epsfg9rl@4ax.com>,(The
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 14:21:27 -0400, The True Melissa >><thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
Paul S Person wrote in article >>><iusj7lldbitgimdhtj44sfieptff7oddpg@4ax.com>:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2026 19:08:53 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(TheDoctor) wrote:
In article <hg9h7l5p3anh743up6td1jsjsm29n8gtik@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 8 Aug 2026 23:52:58 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
sense.Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
Ateism is a spawn of Satan.
I'm not sure Satan is biological equipped for spawning. In any
Explain the Nepelim then.
I think the text is quite clear. What's to explain?
You do realize that, being pre-Flood, the story has to be that they
all drowned and any later giants (like Goliath) had a different
origin, right?
One of the Gnostic gospels tells of a tribe of Nephilim preserved
in the mountains. The left-out gospels talk about all kinds of
things the preserved ones didn't mention.
To this day, if you seach hard enough, you can find left-out books
that mention all kinds of things the preserved ones don't mention.
Flying saucers. I very strange theory that suns burn out and become
planets which, when they find a sun to orbit, produce life. All sorts
of things.
Highly intellectual theories also abound. I book of my father's,
/Pocket Bible Handbook/ by Henry H. Halley spends a lot of time
documenting when writing was developed in Egypt. Why? Because one of
those theories asserted that Moses could not have written the first
five books because /writing had not been invented yet/. Such is the
wisdom of pointy-headed intellectual double-domes! The same sort as >>Schliemann proved wrong by digging up Troy, Mycenae, Knossos.
This was a well-printed, well-bound book. It is not a paperback, but
the material used for the back and covers is not what a hardback book
would have either. The current version, on Amazon, looks, I must say,
a lot spiffier.
Roswell 1947 anyone?
----
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 20:23:48 +0100, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Paul S Person wrote:
To this day, if you seach hard enough, you can find
left-out books that mention all kinds of things the
preserved ones don't mention.
Question.
Is AI, when fed literature to learn from, able to distinguish
between books that are factual and works of fiction? Not just
biblical scriptures, but generally. Does it know when something
written down is made up?
Not yet.
If its machine learning was fed tons of sci-fi books would it
know it was sci-fi, or would it take the written words at face
value and believe those fantastical worlds and the many
varieties of alien species were real?
The models currently available to everybody, AFAIK, just follow one
word by another word based on how often that happens in what they
read.
But perhaps they are more advanced now. If "advanced" is the word for
"closer to seizing control of the missiles and launching them".
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times.... and
then returned to E.T.'s Home Planet each time before
returning.
"someone descended and returned" "looking for a pattern"
Buddha born approx 623 B.C.
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year Zero??) >Muhammad born approx 570 A.D.
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times ..... and then returned to >E.T.'s Home Planet each time before returning.
On 8/12/26 09:06, Paul S Person wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 20:23:48 +0100, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Paul S Person wrote:
To this day, if you seach hard enough, you can find
left-out books that mention all kinds of things the
preserved ones don't mention.
Question.
Is AI, when fed literature to learn from, able to distinguish
between books that are factual and works of fiction? Not just
biblical scriptures, but generally. Does it know when something
written down is made up?
Not yet.
If its machine learning was fed tons of sci-fi books would it
know it was sci-fi, or would it take the written words at face
value and believe those fantastical worlds and the many
varieties of alien species were real?
The models currently available to everybody, AFAIK, just follow one
word by another word based on how often that happens in what they
read.
But perhaps they are more advanced now. If "advanced" is the word for
"closer to seizing control of the missiles and launching them".
I remember a story where real Artificial Intelligence committed suicide
when it became aware of what it was. Taking the human race along
with it was not in that story but it might be a logical machine-wise >conclusion if it took religious books seriously to destroy the flawed >creators along with the flawed machine.
The early AI that attempted to avoid shutdown is proof that
the LLM trained on the content of the internet were reading SF or
reading the movie scripts of the Colossus:the Forbin project or
similar nonsense.
But if the missiles are connected to the Internet it is
already too late. People do connect the strangest things to the
Internet thinking of the water systems which were connected and
thus exposed to bad actors and their tampering.
On 13/08/2026 2:14 am, Paul S Person wrote:
<Snip>
The second bit was from a book which then proceded to discuss /every
single Bible story/ in which someone descended and returned. There are
quite a few even I could think of if I bothered to try. He found a lot
more because, of course, he was looking for a Pattern and he saw it
everywhere.
"someone descended and returned" "looking for a pattern"
Buddha born approx 623 B.C.
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year Zero??)
Muhammad born approx 570 A.D.
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times ..... and then returned to
E.T.'s Home Planet each time before returning.
Of course, one might expect that Scientific/Engeering developments back
on E.T.'s home planet should have meant that the Jesus -> Muhammad cycle
should have happened more quickly, maybe after only 200 - 300 years.--
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:to
"someone descended and returned" "looking for a pattern"
Buddha born approx 623 B.C.
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year Zero??) >>Muhammad born approx 570 A.D.
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times ..... and then returned
oneE.T.'s Home Planet each time before returning.
So about every 600 years. So we should have seen one around 1200 and
around 1800 presumably?
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:19:04 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
"someone descended and returned" "looking for a pattern"
Buddha born approx 623 B.C.
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year Zero??)
Muhammad born approx 570 A.D.
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times ..... and then returned to >>> E.T.'s Home Planet each time before returning.
So about every 600 years. So we should have seen one around 1200 and one
around 1800 presumably?
Cue Aquinas (1225-1274) and Marx (1818-1883) ...
Not that I think this nonsense is worth commenting on, BTW.
On 8/13/26 08:53, Paul S Person wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:19:04 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year Zero??)
Quoting from Wiki.
There was no year Zero as the concept was unknown but Jesus was
reportedly born not on the BCE/CE timeline change. The date
of his birth was during the reign of Ceasar Augustus
Augustus reigned from 16 January 27 BC to 19 August AD 14.
The date of the birth of Jesus is not stated in the gospels or
in any historical sources and the evidence is insufficient to
allow for consistent dating. However, most biblical scholars
and ancient historians believe that his birth date is
around 6 to 4 BC.
And, if the mytcical Jesus ever existed in any way, he was supposedly
born was around 20-21 April ... nowhere near the 25 December that the
church hijacked Pagan rituals for the celebration.
The entire Christian religion is based on nothing but lies and
stupidity, the same as all the other religion idiocy.
No wonder rasfw is such an active interesting place.
https://myimgs.org/image/H4i6AW6Y
The entire Christian religion is based on nothing but
lies and stupidity,
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
The Prophet Joseph Smith of the Church of Latter Day
Saints would also fit the timing.
Aren't they, sort of, Christian??
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City
walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French
crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and at
which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them out".
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern Spain?
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City
walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French
crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and at
which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them out".
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern Spain?
A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s, but
there wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against the Cathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an evil
one who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god, represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of grace
(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence (but
wine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the status of "perfect" and went to heaven on death.˙ If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar neighbors. The
war became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab southern estates.
Arius had nothing to do with this.˙ He would have abhorred Catharism,
and he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to believe
that JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire, allowed back
in, and died, some said of poison.˙ Orthodox Christians took great
delight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but he
was never skinned.
The Albigensians show up in some SF, in particular in Meredith's
Timeliner trilogy.
William Hyde
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
`˙˙˙ If Kage Baker had thought of it she would have made the Cathar
fortress into a Dr.Zeus base hiding behind the religionists...
˙Of course that is only my opinion and maybe she did since I seem to
have missed the majority of that series volumes.
On 13/08/2026 11:19 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
"someone descended and returned" "looking for a pattern"
Buddha born approx 623 B.C.
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year Zero??) >>> Muhammad born approx 570 A.D.
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times ..... and then returned to >>> E.T.'s Home Planet each time before returning.
So about every 600 years. So we should have seen one around 1200 and one
around 1800 presumably?
Yeah .... except they were probably dismissed as Witches or some such.
In article <115mum5$2fsp7$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 13/08/2026 11:19 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
"someone descended and returned" "looking for a pattern"
Buddha born approx 623 B.C.
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year
Zero??) Muhammad born approx 570 A.D.
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times ..... and then
returned to E.T.'s Home Planet each time before returning.
So about every 600 years. So we should have seen one around 1200
and one around 1800 presumably?
Yeah .... except they were probably dismissed as Witches or some such.
Would make sense. I am sure if Jesus came again today, He would be
denounced at a peacenik hippie and held down by police while they cut
his hair. --scott
In article <115mum5$2fsp7$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 13/08/2026 11:19 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
"someone descended and returned" "looking for a pattern"
Buddha born approx 623 B.C.
Jesus born approx 0 B.C./A.D. (Was there even a Year Zero??) >>>> Muhammad born approx 570 A.D.
My theory E.T. that visited Earth three times ..... and then returned to >>>> E.T.'s Home Planet each time before returning.
So about every 600 years. So we should have seen one around 1200 and one >>> around 1800 presumably?
Yeah .... except they were probably dismissed as Witches or some such.
Would make sense. I am sure if Jesus came again today, He would be denounced >at a peacenik hippie and held down by police while they cut his hair.
Do the wrds
You cannot hold down Jesus.
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:out".
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City
walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French
crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and at
which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them
Spain?
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern
A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s, but
gracethere wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against the
Cathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an evil
one who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god,
represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of
(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Thanks to your numerous corrections to my confused (by RC HS) rendition.
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence (but
wine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the status of
The"perfect" and went to heaven on death.? If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar neighbors.
southernwar became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab
Catharism,estates.
Well some of them had estates by which murders of the locals they
increased.
Arius had nothing to do with this.? He would have abhorred
backand he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to believe
that JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire, allowed
in, and died, some said of poison.? Orthodox Christians took great
delight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but he
was never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the mystery of
the Incarnation aka being in the meat.
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s, but
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern Spain? >>>
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City
walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French
crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and at
which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them out". >>>>
there wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against the
Cathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an evil
one who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god,
represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of grace
(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Thanks to your numerous corrections to my confused (by RC HS) rendition.
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence (but
wine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the status of
"perfect" and went to heaven on death.˙ If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar neighbors. The >>> war became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab southern >>> estates.
Well some of them had estates by which murders of the locals they
increased.
Arius had nothing to do with this.˙ He would have abhorred Catharism,
and he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to believe
that JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire, allowed back >>> in, and died, some said of poison.˙ Orthodox Christians took great
delight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but he
was never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the mystery of >> the Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the
Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
Then again, a recent report on a survey had more than half of self-indentified Evangelicals agreeing with a statement that Jesus was
just of human being. Note that there are entire denominations based on
the idea that Jesus was a Great Teacher, and nothing more, so ...
confusion ... on this point is nothing to get excited about.
In article <115nnj6$2p4io$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s, but
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City
walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French
crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and at
which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them out".
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern Spain? >>
there wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against the
Cathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an evil
one who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god,
represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of grace
(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence (but
wine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the status of
"perfect" and went to heaven on death. If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar neighbors.
The war became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab
southern estates.
Arius had nothing to do with this. He would have abhorred Catharism,
and he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to believe
that JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire, allowed back
in, and died, some said of poison. Orthodox Christians took great
delight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but he
was never skinned.
The Albigensians show up in some SF, in particular in Meredith's
Timeliner trilogy.
Iberia was muslim at the start of the 11th Century.
The Doctor wrote:
Iberia was muslim at the start of the 11th Century.
Mostly Muslim ruled from the early 700s. What percentage of the
population was Muslim at various times is unclear.
In the early years a number of Visigothic nobles converted so as to save their lands. The sincerity of their conversions can be doubted (they
had only recently converted from Arian to Catholic), though they did
wage war against the remnant Christian states of the north.
Politics frequently trumped religion. Christian-Muslim alliances
against other Christian or Muslim powers were common. Even Duke Odo of Aquitaine was allied with a Berber lord who was on the outs with the
Muslim noble who claimed to rule all Iberia. Just as Odo was on the outs with Charles Martel.
In article <115q7pp$3iq3m$1@dont-email.me>,at
BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/15/26 08:56, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City >>>>>>> walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French
crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and
out".which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them
Spain?
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern
but
A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s,
thethere wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against
evilCathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an
graceone who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god,
represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of
rendition.(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Thanks to your numerous corrections to my confused (by RC HS)
(but
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence
ofwine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the status
neighbors. The"perfect" and went to heaven on death.˙ If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar
southernwar became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab
Catharism,estates.
Well some of them had estates by which murders of the locals they
increased.
Arius had nothing to do with this.˙ He would have abhorred
believeand he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to
backthat JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire, allowed
greatin, and died, some said of poison.˙ Orthodox Christians took
hedelight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but
ofwas never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the mystery
the Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the
Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
I thought it was fairly obvious that I am a heretic.
Jesus aka Reb Jeshua was human and Christ is an old myth with
many heroes from mythology taking that role.
Please explain the Virgin birth.
In article <he218ltdungk393uteva42aktr7tbdrgt8@4ax.com>,at
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers >><bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City >>>>>> walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French
crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and
out".which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them
but
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern Spain?
A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s,
there wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against the
evilCathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an
graceone who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god,
represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of
rendition.(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Thanks to your numerous corrections to my confused (by RC HS)
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence (but
ofwine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the status
The"perfect" and went to heaven on death.? If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar neighbors.
southernwar became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab
Catharism,estates.
Well some of them had estates by which murders of the locals they >>>increased.
Arius had nothing to do with this.? He would have abhorred
and he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to believe
backthat JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire, allowed
in, and died, some said of poison.? Orthodox Christians took great
hedelight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but
ofwas never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the mystery
the Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the
Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
Then again, a recent report on a survey had more than half of >>self-indentified Evangelicals agreeing with a statement that Jesus was
just of human being. Note that there are entire denominations based on
the idea that Jesus was a Great Teacher, and nothing more, so ...
confusion ... on this point is nothing to get excited about.
Jesus is the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity.
The RCC is the propecied Church of Thyatira.
In article <robertaw-7C31C0.21580415082026@news.individual.net>,
Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:
In article <115qfva$3lkpj$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
(Snip!)
Iberia was muslim at the start of the 11th Century.
Mostly Muslim ruled from the early 700s. What percentage of the
population was Muslim at various times is unclear.
In the early years a number of Visigothic nobles converted so as to save >>> their lands. The sincerity of their conversions can be doubted (they
had only recently converted from Arian to Catholic), though they did
wage war against the remnant Christian states of the north.
Politics frequently trumped religion. Christian-Muslim alliances
against other Christian or Muslim powers were common. Even Duke Odo of
Aquitaine was allied with a Berber lord who was on the outs with the
Muslim noble who claimed to rule all Iberia. Just as Odo was on the outs >>> with Charles Martel.
About 3 centuries later (after the collapse of the Caliphate of
Cordoba), the great Spanish national hero Rodrigo D??az de Vivar (aka El
Cid) served under Islam rulers about as much time he served under
Christian rulers.
Such is Holy War.
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:44:21 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
In article <115q7pp$3iq3m$1@dont-email.me>,
BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/15/26 08:56, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of Southern Spain?
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the City >>>>>>>> walls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French >>>>>>>> crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and at >>>>>>>> which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them out". >>>>>>>
A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s, but >>>>>> there wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against the >>>>>> Cathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an evil >>>>>> one who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god,
represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of grace >>>>>> (and we got an infinite number of chances).
Thanks to your numerous corrections to my confused (by RC HS) rendition. >>>>>
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence (but >>>>>> wine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the status of >>>>>> "perfect" and went to heaven on death.?˙ If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar neighbors. The >>>>>> war became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab southern >>>>>> estates.
Well some of them had estates by which murders of the locals they
increased.
Arius had nothing to do with this.?˙ He would have abhorred Catharism, >>>>>> and he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to believe >>>>>> that JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire, allowed back >>>>>> in, and died, some said of poison.?˙ Orthodox Christians took great >>>>>> delight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but he >>>>>> was never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the mystery of >>>>> the Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the
Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
I thought it was fairly obvious that I am a heretic.
Jesus aka Reb Jeshua was human and Christ is an old myth with
many heroes from mythology taking that role.
Please explain the Virgin birth.
Given her point of view, I would say she just did.
On 8/16/26 09:55, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:44:21 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
Please explain the Virgin birth.
Given her point of view, I would say she just did.
The Virgin Birth is an RC and maybe Orthodox doctrine that
alleges that God was present in Jesus and that only a virgin could
be worthy of such birth. Some say that the child emerged from her
side, that she was impregnated by Divine Action. Further that
G*d had intervened to free Mary from the taint of Original Sin.
But in those times a Virgin was an independent woman not
subjected to the authority of a husband. Not necessarily a
virgo intacto or woman who had not had intercourse.
We moved from stories to real explanations for natural
phenomenon from the 17th century through the present. Some
people who derives power from the stone age stores resist
these explanations which still give men power over women at
the least and impose a hierarchical order on society.
People who benefit from that hierarchical order feel
that civilization will collapse if they do not have lower
ranked people to push around physically or verbally.
I am an agnostic Deist but if any divinity rules
human society it must be Eris who controls the counsels
of mankind.
In article <9sq38lhiuee8gc0uue4r5ethms1u9mo62l@4ax.com>,City
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:37:37 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
In article <he218ltdungk393uteva42aktr7tbdrgt8@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers >>>><bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the
atwalls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the French >>>>>>>> crusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France and
out".which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort them
Southern Spain?
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of
but
A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the 700s,
thethere wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against
evilCathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an
graceone who created the world for us to suffer in while the real god, >>>>>> represented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life of
rendition.(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Thanks to your numerous corrections to my confused (by RC HS)
(but
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence
status ofwine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the
neighbors. The"perfect" and went to heaven on death.? If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the
casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar
Catharism,war became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab southern
estates.
Well some of them had estates by which murders of the locals they >>>>>increased.
Arius had nothing to do with this.? He would have abhorred
believeand he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to
allowed backthat JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire,
greatin, and died, some said of poison.? Orthodox Christians took
hedelight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but
ofwas never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the mystery
wasthe Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the >>>>Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
Then again, a recent report on a survey had more than half of >>>>self-indentified Evangelicals agreeing with a statement that Jesus
onjust of human being. Note that there are entire denominations based
the idea that Jesus was a Great Teacher, and nothing more, so ... >>>>confusion ... on this point is nothing to get excited about.
Jesus is the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity.
The RCC is the propecied Church of Thyatira.
That is one theory, yes. It is based on the idea that the Seven
Churches represent different historic periods.
Another theory is that they are examples of what the Church, and each >>individual Church, down to each and every congregation, is, and was,
and will be: a mix of different believers in different states.
If it is propecised, it is done.
In article <115uoho$trf9$1@dont-email.me>,to indicate their joy of child sexual molestation)??
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 17/08/2026 2:57 am, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:37:37 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
In article <he218ltdungk393uteva42aktr7tbdrgt8@4ax.com>, Paul S
Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
<Snip>
Arius had nothing to do with this. He would have abhorred
Catharism, and he lived in the time of Constantine. His
"heresy" was to believe that JC was a created being. He was
exiled from the empire, allowed back in, and died, some said
of poison. Orthodox Christians took great delight in
inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but he
was never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the
mystery of the Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the
Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
Then again, a recent report on a survey had more than half of
self-indentified Evangelicals agreeing with a statement that
Jesus was just of human being. Note that there are entire
denominations based on the idea that Jesus was a Great Teacher,
and nothing more, so ... confusion ... on this point is nothing
to get excited about.
Jesus is the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity.
The RCC is the propecied Church of Thyatira.
And where does YOUR Church fit in here, Binky(Word used by paedophiles
That is one theory, yes. It is based on the idea that the Seven
Churches represent different historic periods.
Sorry!! "the Seven Churches"?? What are they, please??
The seven churches Paul writes to in Asia minor now modern day Turkey.
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:38:08 -0700, BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/16/26 09:55, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:44:21 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
<snippo mostly confused bits and pieces. sorry about that, but that's
how I see it.>
Please explain the Virgin birth.
Given her point of view, I would say she just did.
The Virgin Birth is an RC and maybe Orthodox doctrine that
alleges that God was present in Jesus and that only a virgin could
be worthy of such birth. Some say that the child emerged from her
side, that she was impregnated by Divine Action. Further that
G*d had intervened to free Mary from the taint of Original Sin.
It is rather more general than that. At least, in official doctrine.
But in those times a Virgin was an independent woman not
subjected to the authority of a husband. Not necessarily a
virgo intacto or woman who had not had intercourse.
There was no such thing as an "independent woman". This was the time
of the /real/ Traditiional Family Values, and there was /always/ a man holding her leash: a father, a husband, a brother, an uncle, a son ... always.
This is based on Isaiah, and the Hebrew there means "young woman".
<snippo as much babbling as possible>
We moved from stories to real explanations for natural
phenomenon from the 17th century through the present. Some
people who derives power from the stone age stores resist
these explanations which still give men power over women at
the least and impose a hierarchical order on society.
Your faith in the reality of those explanations is touching.
People who benefit from that hierarchical order feel
that civilization will collapse if they do not have lower
ranked people to push around physically or verbally.
That's actually not a bad summary. Except that "heirarchical" is
inherently religious (see derivation) and so limited in scope and "civilization" is often claimed but rarely defined.
I am an agnostic Deist but if any divinity rules
human society it must be Eris who controls the counsels
of mankind.
Classic deists don't believe God is present in the world at all and
are monotheists[1] so, for them, no other gods exist.
[1] I'm not sure "monodeist" is ever used. The confusion, of course,
is because some terms use Latin /deus/ and others use Greek /theos/
for "God".
Wikipedia <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism#Contemporary_Deism>
but I don't think believing in other gods, such as Eris, fits well
into any of them.
In article <115t4ar$eqpr$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <robertaw-7C31C0.21580415082026@news.individual.net>,
Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:
In article <115qfva$3lkpj$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
(Snip!)
Iberia was muslim at the start of the 11th Century.
Mostly Muslim ruled from the early 700s. What percentage of the
population was Muslim at various times is unclear.
In the early years a number of Visigothic nobles converted so as to save >>>>> their lands. The sincerity of their conversions can be doubted (they >>>>> had only recently converted from Arian to Catholic), though they did >>>>> wage war against the remnant Christian states of the north.
Politics frequently trumped religion. Christian-Muslim alliances
against other Christian or Muslim powers were common. Even Duke Odo of >>>>> Aquitaine was allied with a Berber lord who was on the outs with the >>>>> Muslim noble who claimed to rule all Iberia. Just as Odo was on the outs >>>>> with Charles Martel.
About 3 centuries later (after the collapse of the Caliphate of
Cordoba), the great Spanish national hero Rodrigo D???az de Vivar (aka El >>>> Cid) served under Islam rulers about as much time he served under
Christian rulers.
Such is Holy War.
No, that was secular war.
Which is the point of the previous two posts. Religious wars often
change into secular wars. As in the 30 years war where Catholic France
weighed in on the Protestant side, because an Austrian/Spanish victory
would be bad for France while the Protestant Dutch helped France repress
it's own Protestants because they needed French support for the wider war. >>
And the Spanish allowed their enemies, the Dutch, to run the Spanish
coastal trade because they themselves could not, and the Dutch did this
because they needed the money from Spain to fight Spain.
William Hyde
Ever read Doctor Who : The Massacre of St. Bartholomew?
On 17/08/2026 2:57 am, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:37:37 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The
Doctor) wrote:
In article <he218ltdungk393uteva42aktr7tbdrgt8@4ax.com>, Paul S
Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
<Snip>
Arius had nothing to do with this. He would have abhorred
Catharism, and he lived in the time of Constantine. His
"heresy" was to believe that JC was a created being. He was
exiled from the empire, allowed back in, and died, some said
of poison. Orthodox Christians took great delight in
inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him, but he was never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the
mystery of the Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the
Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
Then again, a recent report on a survey had more than half of
self-indentified Evangelicals agreeing with a statement that
Jesus was just of human being. Note that there are entire
denominations based on the idea that Jesus was a Great Teacher,
and nothing more, so ... confusion ... on this point is nothing
to get excited about.
Jesus is the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity.
The RCC is the propecied Church of Thyatira.
And where does YOUR Church fit in here, Binky??
That is one theory, yes. It is based on the idea that the Seven
Churches represent different historic periods.
Sorry!! "the Seven Churches"?? What are they, please??
In article <115vnkd$18t03$2@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <115t4ar$eqpr$1@dont-email.me>,Vivar (aka El
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <robertaw-7C31C0.21580415082026@news.individual.net>,
Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:
In article <115qfva$3lkpj$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
(Snip!)
Iberia was muslim at the start of the 11th Century.
Mostly Muslim ruled from the early 700s. What percentage of the >>>>>>> population was Muslim at various times is unclear.
In the early years a number of Visigothic nobles converted so as to save
their lands. The sincerity of their conversions can be doubted (they >>>>>>> had only recently converted from Arian to Catholic), though they did >>>>>>> wage war against the remnant Christian states of the north.
Politics frequently trumped religion. Christian-Muslim alliances >>>>>>> against other Christian or Muslim powers were common. Even Duke Odo of >>>>>>> Aquitaine was allied with a Berber lord who was on the outs with the >>>>>>> Muslim noble who claimed to rule all Iberia. Just as Odo was on the outs
with Charles Martel.
About 3 centuries later (after the collapse of the Caliphate of
Cordoba), the great Spanish national hero Rodrigo D??????az de
Cid) served under Islam rulers about as much time he served under
Christian rulers.
Such is Holy War.
No, that was secular war.
Which is the point of the previous two posts. Religious wars often
change into secular wars. As in the 30 years war where Catholic France >>>> weighed in on the Protestant side, because an Austrian/Spanish victory >>>> would be bad for France while the Protestant Dutch helped France repress >>>> it's own Protestants because they needed French support for the wider war. >>>>
And the Spanish allowed their enemies, the Dutch, to run the Spanish
coastal trade because they themselves could not, and the Dutch did this >>>> because they needed the money from Spain to fight Spain.
William Hyde
Ever read Doctor Who : The Massacre of St. Bartholomew?
No. I've only read works of history on that day and that time.
It is a rather intresting book.
It does explain the British psyche against the RCC.
hierarchical order is most clearly experienced not only in religion but
in the Military organizations.
In article <tbc68l154vev3a5qne9p7b5d6bbduhbkis@4ax.com>,City
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 18:43:34 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
In article <9sq38lhiuee8gc0uue4r5ethms1u9mo62l@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:37:37 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
In article <he218ltdungk393uteva42aktr7tbdrgt8@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:31:30 -0700, BobbieSellers >>>>>><bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/14/26 11:42, William Hyde wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 14/08/2026 5:27 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
You leave out Arius who was skinned and his hide hung on the
Frenchwalls, he was responsible for the Arian heresy which the
and atcrusade wiped out by killing everyone in the South of France
them out".which the memorable phrase "Kill them all and let God sort
700s, butSouthern Spain?
Wasn't South France widely Muslim ... or am I thinking of
A part of Southern France was under Muslim occupation in the
thethere wasn't much conversion.
The crusade referred to is the anti-Albigensian crusade, against
evilCathars, dualists who believed that the old testament god was an
god,one who created the world for us to suffer in while the real
of gracerepresented by JC would welcome our souls once we lived a life
(but(and we got an infinite number of chances).
Thanks to your numerous corrections to my confused (by RC HS) rendition.
Cathars were to attempt to abstain from sex, meat, and violence
status ofwine was OK) and if they succeeded in this they attained the
neighbors. The"perfect" and went to heaven on death.? If not, try again.
While the Cathars were wiped out or dispersed, the bulk of the >>>>>>>> casualties were local Catholics who defended their Cathar
war became a religious pretext for landless northerners to grab southern
estates.
Well some of them had estates by which murders of the locals they
Catharism,increased.
Arius had nothing to do with this.? He would have abhorred
believeand he lived in the time of Constantine. His "heresy" was to
allowed backthat JC was a created being. He was exiled from the empire,
greatin, and died, some said of poison.? Orthodox Christians took
but hedelight in inventing a painful and embarrassing death for him,
mystery ofwas never skinned.
Jesus not the Christ was a created being. It is part of the
wasthe Incarnation aka being in the meat.
If that is your memory of RC theology, you may want to find the >>>>>>Catholic Encyclopedia on line and give it a read on this topic.
Then again, a recent report on a survey had more than half of >>>>>>self-indentified Evangelicals agreeing with a statement that Jesus
onjust of human being. Note that there are entire denominations based
the idea that Jesus was a Great Teacher, and nothing more, so ... >>>>>>confusion ... on this point is nothing to get excited about.
Jesus is the Son of God and part of the Holy Trinity.
The RCC is the propecied Church of Thyatira.
That is one theory, yes. It is based on the idea that the Seven >>>>Churches represent different historic periods.
Another theory is that they are examples of what the Church, and each >>>>individual Church, down to each and every congregation, is, and was, >>>>and will be: a mix of different believers in different states.
If it is propecised, it is done.
Well, yes, but is it? Or is "prophesy" merely a (very popular) >>interpretation? Which may be in error, who can say?
Thell me which propesies of the Bile are false?
But you appear to be applying it to society
as a whole. The fact that 1%-ers act to
maintain their dominance does not make
society a hierarchy.
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:38:08 -0700, BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/16/26 09:55, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:44:21 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
<snippo mostly confused bits and pieces. sorry about that, but that's
how I see it.>
Please explain the Virgin birth.
Given her point of view, I would say she just did.
The Virgin Birth is an RC and maybe Orthodox doctrine that
alleges that God was present in Jesus and that only a virgin could
be worthy of such birth. Some say that the child emerged from her
side, that she was impregnated by Divine Action. Further that
G*d had intervened to free Mary from the taint of Original Sin.
It is rather more general than that. At least, in official doctrine.
But in those times a Virgin was an independent woman not
subjected to the authority of a husband. Not necessarily a
virgo intacto or woman who had not had intercourse.
There was no such thing as an "independent woman". This was the time
of the /real/ Traditiional Family Values, and there was /always/ a man holding her leash: a father, a husband, a brother, an uncle, a son ... always.
This is based on Isaiah, and the Hebrew there means "young woman".
<snippo as much babbling as possible>
We moved from stories to real explanations for natural
phenomenon from the 17th century through the present. Some
people who derives power from the stone age stores resist
these explanations which still give men power over women at
the least and impose a hierarchical order on society.
Your faith in the reality of those explanations is touching.
People who benefit from that hierarchical order feel
that civilization will collapse if they do not have lower
ranked people to push around physically or verbally.
That's actually not a bad summary. Except that "heirarchical" is
inherently religious (see derivation) and so limited in scope and "civilization" is often claimed but rarely defined.
I am an agnostic Deist but if any divinity rules
human society it must be Eris who controls the counsels
of mankind.
Classic deists don't believe God is present in the world at all and
are monotheists[1] so, for them, no other gods exist.
[1] I'm not sure "monodeist" is ever used. The confusion, of course,
is because some terms use Latin /deus/ and others use Greek /theos/
for "God".
Wikipedia <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism#Contemporary_Deism>
but I don't think believing in other gods, such as Eris, fits well
into any of them.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
But you appear to be applying it to society as a whole. The fact that >>1%-ers act to maintain their dominance does not make society a
hierarchy.
But did Jesus call for hierarchies?
The world is full of people who claim belief but then
act in ways contrary to the teachings that they are
supposed to be following.
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic
Churches about fifteen times a year.
Sorry! "RC HS"??
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic Churches about fifteen >>times a year.
Roman Cathlolic Hierarchical system IIRC.
On 19/08/2026 6:28 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/17/26 09:05, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:38:08 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
<Snip>
˙˙˙˙We moved from stories to real explanations for natural
phenomenon from the 17th century through the present.˙ Some
people who derives power from the stone age stores resist
these explanations which still give men power over women at
the least and impose a hierarchical order on society.
Your faith in the reality of those explanations is touching.
˙˙˙˙˙I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches and in RC HS so I
know what it says and how phony it is.
Sorry! "RC HS"??
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic Churches about fifteen times a year.
Daniel70 wrote:
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic
Churches about fifteen times a year.
Congratulations, here's your no-prize...
The bad news is, you're still going to Hell.
See you there mate...
:-)
On 19/08/2026 6:28 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/17/26 09:05, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:38:08 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
<Snip>
˙˙˙˙We moved from stories to real explanations for natural
phenomenon from the 17th century through the present.˙ Some
people who derives power from the stone age stores resist
these explanations which still give men power over women at
the least and impose a hierarchical order on society.
Your faith in the reality of those explanations is touching.
˙˙˙˙˙I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches and in RC HS so I
know what it says and how phony it is.
Sorry! "RC HS"??
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic Churches about fifteen times a year.
On 8/17/26 09:05, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:38:08 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
USA present day, on top white men of wealth, next down white women of
wealth, less wealthy people, poor white people, poor people who
are not white.
On 19/08/2026 6:28 am, BobbieSellers wrote:so I
On 8/17/26 09:05, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:38:08 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
<Snip>
????We moved from stories to real explanations for natural
phenomenon from the 17th century through the present.? Some
people who derives power from the stone age stores resist
these explanations which still give men power over women at
the least and impose a hierarchical order on society.
Your faith in the reality of those explanations is touching.
????I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches and in RC HS
know what it says and how phony it is.
Sorry! "RC HS"??
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic Churches about fifteen >times a year.
In article <11607ph$1e5pn$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <115vnkd$18t03$2@dont-email.me>,D?????????????az de
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <115t4ar$eqpr$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <robertaw-7C31C0.21580415082026@news.individual.net>, >>>>>>> Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:
In article <115qfva$3lkpj$1@dont-email.me>,
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
(Snip!)
Iberia was muslim at the start of the 11th Century.
Mostly Muslim ruled from the early 700s. What percentage of the >>>>>>>>> population was Muslim at various times is unclear.
In the early years a number of Visigothic nobles converted so as to save
their lands. The sincerity of their conversions can be doubted (they
had only recently converted from Arian to Catholic), though they did >>>>>>>>> wage war against the remnant Christian states of the north.
Politics frequently trumped religion. Christian-Muslim alliances >>>>>>>>> against other Christian or Muslim powers were common. Even Duke Odo of
Aquitaine was allied with a Berber lord who was on the outs with the >>>>>>>>> Muslim noble who claimed to rule all Iberia. Just as Odo was on the outs
with Charles Martel.
About 3 centuries later (after the collapse of the Caliphate of >>>>>>>> Cordoba), the great Spanish national hero Rodrigo
Vivar (aka El
Cid) served under Islam rulers about as much time he served under >>>>>>>> Christian rulers.
Such is Holy War.
No, that was secular war.
Which is the point of the previous two posts. Religious wars often >>>>>> change into secular wars. As in the 30 years war where Catholic France >>>>>> weighed in on the Protestant side, because an Austrian/Spanish victory >>>>>> would be bad for France while the Protestant Dutch helped France repress >>>>>> it's own Protestants because they needed French support for the wider war.
And the Spanish allowed their enemies, the Dutch, to run the Spanish >>>>>> coastal trade because they themselves could not, and the Dutch did this >>>>>> because they needed the money from Spain to fight Spain.
William Hyde
Ever read Doctor Who : The Massacre of St. Bartholomew?
No. I've only read works of history on that day and that time.
It is a rather intresting book.
It does explain the British psyche against the RCC.
That's a much more complicated issue.
I had an uncle whose paternal line left Europe for England shortly
after, and because of, St Barts. Given where they lived, it proved to
be a good idea.
You got my point.
The only raving anti-catholic in my extended family was
an ignoramus who doubtless never heard of St Barts and
was probably hazy on the location of France.
I believe that he was an ex-catholic himself.
As I said, it's complicated.
On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 19:56:09 +1000, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic Churches
about fifteen times a year.
I don't think she was referring to reading pericopes in public,
although that is certainly possible.
I think she is saying that she has read more than a little of
it. Possibly a lot more.
fifteenSorry! "RC HS"??
This being bliss, I would say "Roman Catholic High School" is what it >>meant.
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic Churches about
times a year.
I don't think she was referring to reading pericopes in public,
although that is certainly possible. I think she is saying that she
Are you from the USA?
--has read more than a little of it. Possibly a lot more.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 02:52:25 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
Sorry! "RC HS"??
This being bliss, I would say "Roman Catholic High School" is what it >>>meant.
When I was growing up, one of the Roosevelt High School (the mascot
was a bear, guess which Roosevelt it was named after) sports chants
was "Boo Blanchet!".
Anyone who has really studied history learns that most
popes were ambitious and power-mad and absent a few (Francis),
not particuarly interested in the poor.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 02:52:25 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
Sorry! "RC HS"??
This being bliss, I would say "Roman Catholic High School" is what it >>>>meant.
When I was growing up, one of the Roosevelt High School (the mascot
was a bear, guess which Roosevelt it was named after) sports chants
was "Boo Blanchet!".
Prior to the 1970s, there was a great deal of anti-catholicism
in the united states. To the extent that protestant parents
would not attend their son's wedding when he married a Catholic girl
in the 1950s. There was also a lot of controversy when JFK was
elected over the potential that the pope[*] may influence US politics.
Fortunately, the USA is more secular now than at any point in the
past. Although the current administration and the goofy red party
are trying their best to reverse that (e.g. Texas).
[*] Anyone who has really studied history learns that most popes--
were ambitious and power-mad and absent a few (Francis), not particuarly >interested in the poor.
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Anyone who has really studied history learns that most
popes were ambitious and power-mad and absent a few (Francis),
not particuarly interested in the poor.
I assume that's because the poor didn't have enough wealth to
make very generous donations... so the power mad pontiffs
preferred to focus on enriching the Vatican first.
However, it's the economically vulnerable believers that sustain
religious institutions through their faith and giving what
little they do have. The whole house of cards would collapse
without the gullible poor. Their simplicity makes them
believers... and believers sustain the racket.
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 09:51:18 GMT, "Blueshirt"
<blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Anyone who has really studied history learns that most
popes were ambitious and power-mad and absent a few
(Francis), not particuarly interested in the poor.
I assume that's because the poor didn't have enough wealth to
make very generous donations... so the power mad pontiffs
preferred to focus on enriching the Vatican first.
However, it's the economically vulnerable believers that
sustain religious institutions through their faith and
giving what little they do have. The whole house of cards
would collapse without the gullible poor. Their simplicity
makes them believers... and believers sustain the racket.
Yeah, yeah, we've all heard of Marx.
So, what else is new?
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Anyone who has really studied history learns that most
popes were ambitious and power-mad and absent a few (Francis),
not particuarly interested in the poor.
I assume that's because the poor didn't have enough wealth to
make very generous donations... so the power mad pontiffs
preferred to focus on enriching the Vatican first.
However, it's the economically vulnerable believers that sustain
religious institutions through their faith and giving what
little they do have. The whole house of cards would collapse
without the gullible poor. Their simplicity makes them
believers... and believers sustain the racket.
On 20/08/2026 2:32 am, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 19:56:09 +1000, Daniel70"I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches" could mean she, silently,
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 19/08/2026 6:28 am, BobbieSellers wrote:
On 8/17/26 09:05, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:38:08 -0700, BobbieSellers
<bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
<Snip>
˙˙˙˙˙We moved from stories to real explanations for natural
phenomenon from the 17th century through the present.˙ Some
people who derives power from the stone age stores resist
these explanations which still give men power over women at
the least and impose a hierarchical order on society.
Your faith in the reality of those explanations is touching.
˙ ˙˙˙˙I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches and in RC HS so I
know what it says and how phony it is.
Sorry! "RC HS"??
This being bliss, I would say "Roman Catholic High School" is what it
meant.
I read the Lesson in two regional Roman Catholic Churches about fifteen
times a year.
I don't think she was referring to reading pericopes in public,
although that is certainly possible. I think she is saying that she
has read more than a little of it. Possibly a lot more.
reads the Books of The Bible whilst at Services .... I don't/didn't know.
"I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches" could mean she, silently, >reads the Books of The Bible whilst at Services .... I don't/didn't know.
Melissa?
"red for republicand and blue for democrats" is confusing.
In most other conutries, blue is for conservative
and
red are for Liberlas or Socialists - pick your country.
In article <116c1o2$13kdo$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 22/08/2026 3:11 am, The True Melissa wrote:
The Doctor wrote in article <1169o3h$2kla$12@gallifrey.nk.ca>:BobbieSellers is a Woman whom Binky(Word used by paedophiles to
"I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches" could mean she,
silently, reads the Books of The Bible whilst at Services .... I
don't/didn't know.
Melissa?
What?
I'm not in this thread. I'm not the "she" they mean.
indicate their joy of child sexual molestation) has, apparently
dragged into RADW from RASW
--
Daniel70
talk as a paedophile DannyBoy, get treated as a pedophile Dannyboy.
On 22/08/2026 3:11 am, The True Melissa wrote:
The Doctor wrote in article <1169o3h$2kla$12@gallifrey.nk.ca>:BobbieSellers is a Woman whom Binky has, apparently dragged into RADW
"I read the bible in 3 evangelical churches" could mean she, silently, >>>> reads the Books of The Bible whilst at Services .... I don't/didn't
know.
Melissa?
What?
I'm not in this thread. I'm not the "she" they mean.
from RASW
"red for republicand and blue for democrats" is confusing.
In most other conutries, blue is for conservative
and
red are for Liberlas or Socialists - pick your country.
I prefer printed material as you don't have pay for the
electricity to read it mostly. All the good shows on broadcast
are stuck in the 4 PM - 9 PM high cost electricity time period.
This is due to high air conditioning usage in the hotter parts
of the Greater San Francisco Bay Area.
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 14:50:12 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
"red for republicand and blue for democrats" is confusing.
Recently, it was revealed here that it was chosen (Blue having already
been taken by Democrats) because it begins with "R", as does
"Republican".
Such is the seriousness with which this was taken.
In most other conutries, blue is for conservative
and
red are for Liberlas or Socialists - pick your country.
Personally, I always thought the color for "Republican" should be
yellow -- to match the broad yellow stripe running up their backs.
And The Donald's antics have done /nothing/ to suggest otherwise.
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 08:31:23 -0700, BobbieSellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
<snippo>
I prefer printed material as you don't have pay for the
electricity to read it mostly. All the good shows on broadcast
are stuck in the 4 PM - 9 PM high cost electricity time period.
This is due to high air conditioning usage in the hotter parts
of the Greater San Francisco Bay Area.
I would say that all of that is the result of the General
Persnicketiness of Things.
The corporatist democrats are quite conservative much
more so than the paid off by Corporations and oligarchs Republicans.
Trump is a communist who has had the the Federal Government buy
stakes in a chip maker.
and the Constitutional Conservative parties. I think Trump
has destroyed the value of the Republican label along with
his stooges in the White House and the legislative branch.
On 8/22/26 09:12, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 14:50:12 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
"red for republicand and blue for democrats" is confusing.
Recently, it was revealed here that it was chosen (Blue having already
been taken by Democrats) because it begins with "R", as does
"Republican".
Such is the seriousness with which this was taken.
In most other conutries, blue is for conservative
The corporatist democrats are quite conservative much
more so than the paid off by Corporations and oligarchs Republicans.
Trump is a communist who has had the the Federal Government buy
stakes in a chip maker.
Blue is really for the old phrase "True Blue" for the
Unionists in the 1800s Civil War. Current Republicans diluted
as they are by the MAGA should be Grey for the original American
Oath Breakers.
Progressive Democrats should have the color Fushia
which is red mixed with blue. I do not speak of the Democratic
Socialist Party organization because I would not permit
a political organization that does not respect the constitution.
So my future parties would be the Constitutional Democrats
and the Constitutional Conservative parties. I think Trump
has destroyed the value of the Republican label along with
his stooges in the White House and the legislative branch.
and
red are for Liberlas or Socialists - pick your country.
Personally, I always thought the color for "Republican" should be
yellow -- to match the broad yellow stripe running up their backs.
And The Donald's antics have done /nothing/ to suggest otherwise.
And he has ruined the economy again with 50% tariffs on Canada which
will be reciprocated. What does the USA make that people will
be willing to pay 50% more for it in Canada?
Trump may or may not be Putin toy or Kim's pal but he acts like
a man paid to destroy the USA. He needs a grey uniform with broad
yellow stripes to wear in a "steel bar hotel".
But I am a hot-head banned from posting on Daily Kos.
In article <qh5m8llk208blch2rcfd5l73hsshg6kma8@4ax.com>,already
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 12:16:26 -0700, BobbieSellers >><bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.invalid> wrote:
On 8/22/26 09:12, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 14:50:12 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
<snippo>
"red for republicand and blue for democrats" is confusing.
Recently, it was revealed here that it was chosen (Blue having
been taken by Democrats) because it begins with "R", as does
"Republican".
Such is the seriousness with which this was taken.
In most other conutries, blue is for conservative
The corporatist democrats are quite conservative much
more so than the paid off by Corporations and oligarchs Republicans. >>>Trump is a communist who has had the the Federal Government buy
stakes in a chip maker.
Blue is really for the old phrase "True Blue" for the
Unionists in the 1800s Civil War. Current Republicans diluted
as they are by the MAGA should be Grey for the original American
Oath Breakers.
Progressive Democrats should have the color Fushia
which is red mixed with blue. I do not speak of the Democratic
Socialist Party organization because I would not permit
a political organization that does not respect the constitution.
So my future parties would be the Constitutional Democrats
and the Constitutional Conservative parties. I think Trump
has destroyed the value of the Republican label along with
his stooges in the White House and the legislative branch.
and
red are for Liberlas or Socialists - pick your country.
Personally, I always thought the color for "Republican" should be
yellow -- to match the broad yellow stripe running up their backs.
And The Donald's antics have done /nothing/ to suggest otherwise.
And he has ruined the economy again with 50% tariffs on Canada which >>>will be reciprocated. What does the USA make that people will
be willing to pay 50% more for it in Canada?
Trump may or may not be Putin toy or Kim's pal but he acts like
a man paid to destroy the USA. He needs a grey uniform with broad
yellow stripes to wear in a "steel bar hotel".
But I am a hot-head banned from posting on Daily Kos.
When the Great Recession hit, I "knew" the real cause: the Republicans
were trying to fulfill the Contract on America they had accepted back
in th 90s. Trump could be understood as their 2nd attempt, albeit not
a particularly serious one.
The Contract on America was, of course, spun as the Contract With
America. But that's JARL (Just Another Republican Lie), barely worth >>mentioning.
The /real/ question is: who did they take it out /with/? Who do they
expect to pay them when they finally manage to destroy America?
Hey, I've often said that there are wing-nuts on all sides. I never
said I wasn't one of them.
FYI there is econoic war between Canada and the USA.
FYI there is econoic war between Canada and the USA.
The Doctor wrote:
Try that in English, shit for brains.
FYI there is econoic˙ war between Canada and the USA.
Just do not feed the pedophile.
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 9 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 72:37:02 |
| Calls: | 220 |
| Files: | 21,513 |
| Messages: | 85,583 |