Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: March 2024

Saturday, March 30, 2024

Some Responses to Candida Moss (Beginning of Video)

POPPÆA SABINA:
By: Kaufmann Kohler, Eduard Neumann
https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12274-poppaea-sabina

Mistress and, after 62 C.E., second wife of the emperor Nero; died 65. She had a certain predilection for Judaism, and is characterized by Josephus ("Ant." xx. 8, § 11; "Vita," § 3) as θεοσεβής ("religious"). Some Jews, such as the actor Alityros, were well received at court, and Poppæa was always ready to second Jewish petitions before the emperor. In 64 Josephus went to Rome to obtain the liberation of some priests related to him who had been taken captive to that city for some minor offense. With the help of Alityros, Josephus succeeded in gaining the intercession of the empress, and returned home with his friends, bearing rich gifts with him.

a) Jews were already unpopular
b) Christians were unpopular among Jews
c) Poppaea persuades Nero to target Christians rather than Jews.

The word of Tacitus shows they were targetted.

11:08 Reference in legal texts is desired.

[for the claim that ...]

11:42 "It would have been Jews"

Except for Poppaea.

PhiladelphiYAHH&Smyrna Yeshiba
@philadelphiyahhsmyrna0: What is that supposed to prove?
Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl: @philadelphiyahhsmyrna0 Candida Moss speculated that Christians wouldn't have been targetted, Jews would have been so.

Poppaea was what would now be called a Noahide, so, she made sure Nero didn't persecute Jews proper. More open to having him persecute a Jewish sect which Jews had persecuted.
PhiladelphiYAHH&Smyrna Yeshiba: @hglundahl You're reaching. Noahide appears to be a modern concept that ancient Jews, especially rabbis, would not practice within 2nd temple judaism and the near after.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @philadelphiyahhsmyrna0 Back then it was called "god fearing" ...

11:58 The correspondence in Pliny's correspondence with Trajan shows Christians already being persecuted.

It does not mark a decision to persecute Christians.

The Romans were perfectly capable of persecuting Christians under a legal text which to them applied to "sth similar" namely Senatus Consultum de Bacchanalibus.

Sei quis velitod bacchanal habuisse ...

Romans were perfectly capable of classing Jews, Christians, Hindus and Buddhists as Bacchus worshippers.

They were also (with a little help from Poppaea) able to distinguish between different groups that they would tend to view as Bacchus worshippers.

John Cooper
@user-tf6rf5ch9i: Pliny would have been three when the Fire and persecutions happened.. If the persecution was limited to Rome as seems to be the case then his relative lack of knowledge is explainable. At the end of the day there are at least two sources that say Nero persecuted Christians.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @user-tf6rf5ch9i Thank you!

Tacitus and ...?

12:27 The reasons why Pliny and Trajan would still be having that conversation would be:

if the persecutions under Nero and Domitian had been intermittent, and ceased already
and their mediatisation had been inferior among Romans than among Christians
and on top of that had used legal clauses not originally meant for Christians.

henri
@Bluesruse: Pliny and Tacitus were buddies. Pliny's dad (the Elder) was considered a hero, and a contemporary to Nero.

It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest Tacitus wrote anything about any 'Christians' without Pliny knowing. Tacitus would have asked Pliny, or used his dad as a source, and Pliny would have known those sources by heart as well.

Tacitus wrote some dirt on Nero, because he didn't like him. Christians saw an opportunity to bullshit their way into history, just like they did with their so called 'Christ'. Case closed.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @Bluesruse Let's take a look at Pliny the Elder:

"At the earliest time that Pliny could have left the service, Nero, the last of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, had been emperor for two years. He did not leave office until AD 68, when Pliny was 45 years old. During that time, Pliny did not hold any high office or work in the service of the state. In the subsequent Flavian dynasty, his services were in such demand that he had to give up his law practice, which suggests that he had been trying not to attract the attention of Nero, who was a dangerous acquaintance."

This means, his son could have been aware of Nero's persecution without being sure whether this should count as legal precedent.
henri: @hglundahl When you lift a direct quote from somewhere, you should really say where it's from. In this case, Google lead me to Wikipedia, and the quote in question to be completely sourceless. The opinion of a random person online can therefore be left on its own.

But just to comment what's wrong there: Any Emperor could have of course been a potentially 'dangerous acquaintance', but on its own this is like saying 'you didn't eat a Snickers bar yesterday, so you must be allergic to nuts'.

A more accurate and honest description of Nero is pretty far from the popular image people know that the Christians fabricated. You could say that Nero suffered the greatest character assassinations in history.

Also, Pliny the Yonger in his letters to Tacitus pretty clearly describes his father as a 'good Roman'. Something Nero arguably was not in the way the term was understood and meant to be understood by Tacitus. Shortest way to describe the situation is: Nero was "gay".

And the Elder being an army man and a friend to the general who ultimately takes the crown after a civil war (Vespasian, whom with the Elder had served together with in German legions), there's quite a bit wrong with saying the Elder didn't hold office in Nero's court, because Nero was a 'dangerous acquaintance'. He didn't hold office, because there was a) no reason to b) because he didn't want to. Vespasian changed both.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @Bluesruse Thanks for noting it's from wikipedia.

Still more credible than your own totally unsourced claims.

Nero was a man who forced Seneca and Burrus to commit suicide and who was thought responsible for the murder of his mother.

This is in Annals book VI, not in wikipedia (at least the passage about his mother's death) which means that this was the view Tacitus had of him. This being so, it was probably the view Pliny the Elder had of him, on your information. This being so, it is once again very likely that Pliny the Younger could have been aware of Nero persecuting Christians and even so being unsure if this was supposed to be legal precedent.
henri: @hglundahl "This means, his son could have been aware of Nero's persecution without being sure whether this should count as legal precedent."

Oh, and this is just some apologist non sequitur nonsense. It's not what the quote you refer to means even if we would take it seriously, which we shouldn't.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @Bluesruse I have no reason to take you seriously.

And "this means" in English is not uniquely used of exegesis of direct meaning, it is also used of implication.
henri: @hglundahl Still more credible than your own totally unsourced claims.

Umm, actually no? It's still at most just as unsourced as anything else. Although, I think I've been pretty straightforward about where my information comes from (letters between Pliny and Tacitus, and Trajan). What claim do you think you need a source for, specifically? What claim is in dispute?

Funny you should bring up Nero's mother, Agrippina, who by the accounts of Tacitus, Dio Cassius, Suetonius, and Juvenal, was a serial killer who would sleep with her own brother (Caligula, the real sicko) as well as probably trying to sleep with her own son too (yuck), and who manipulated her son to the throne for her own power hungry gains; who thought she could control him, and who tried to have him replaced (read: killed) multiple times when that didn't work anymore: When Nero would "put his foot down" so to speak.

Seneca was also involved in the conspiracy to have Nero killed (Dio Cassius), with no other than himself (rumored by Tacitus). Although, whether Seneca was involved in the conspiracy directly himself is disputed. Nero did sentence Seneca to death in the aftermath, but not Burrus. Burrus' death also being in dispute.

Regardless, having usurpers killed is not the reason Pliny would say Nero to not be a "good Roman" like his father. Augustus was the Son of God who had tons of his rivals killed in the most brutal of ways, yet he was "the best" of the Romans.

This being so, it is once again very likely that Pliny the Younger could have been aware of Nero persecuting Christians and even so being unsure if this was supposed to be legal precedent.

It's not likely at all. Nothing you have said connects anything to 'Christian' persecution still. You are simply spewing a non sequitur, for reasons we can only guess (you are probably Christian yourself). There is still zero evidence Pliny knowing of any 'Christian' persecutions by Nero. But there is evidence against it (Pliny's correspondences with Tacitus and Trajan).

@hglundahl I have no reason to take you seriously.

Of course you don't. That would require you to listen to reason (pun intended). Something Christians have great troubles with sometimes.

And "this means" in English is not uniquely used of exegesis of direct meaning, it is also used of implication.

Nothing you said implicates that, either. Still a non sequitur of an argument.

Faurisson thought he could achieve some good for the Palestinians by a much better motivated questioning of the Shoah as usually described than "henri" (Bluesruse) is providing motives for questioning the persecution under Nero.

I wonder whom "henri" thinks he is favouring.

Perhaps his goal is simply to ruin Christianity. Some people, and that would include some Jews and Noahides, have that goal.

The Messiah is Among Us! -Rabbi Tovia Singer
Tovia Singer | 22 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiHqrMNSxAw

6:47 Jeremias 30:7 ...

Ver. 7. Great, and terrible for this city, the outer walls of which shall be demolished, (Beros.; Calmet) and all its glory perish. (Haydock) --- Of it. Cyrus liberated the Jews, 1 Esdras i.

Paula Wallace
@paulawallace8784: Christianity is the Last Beast, Enemy of Gd and His Chosen.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @paulawallace8784 Pagan Rome was the last beast, and Christianity is the stone that toppled the statue.

If you believe the suffering servant in Isaias 53 is Judaism, then you disbelieve Deuteronomy 28.

Fuller dealing with that video in a separate post.

Anyway, "henri" seems to have similarily dim views of Christianity. He wants to deny Christians existed under Nero to persecute, since that would create some distance between documented Christians (for the time of Pliny he doesn't deny them) and the "alleged" life, death and resurrection of Jesus, and "alleged" creation of His Church starting with people who had known him for up to three and a half years, and who were able to testify to both death on the Cross and seeing Him alive after that.

In order to do so, apart from doing his Antichristian Superiority Complex, trying to discourage me, and trying to paint me as "not listening to reason", he gives as argument that Pliny's correspondence with Tacitus showed that Tacitus couldn't really have known of the Christians persecuted under Nero, since if so, Pliny's letters to Trajan would be "inexplicable." For the argument given in the video and then refuted. He claims to have a much more credible source than my citations from the wikipedia, namely the correspondence of Pliny and Tacitus.

This consists of 11 Letters in Epistulae, 2 each from book 1, 7 and 9, 1 each from books 4 and 8, and a whopping 3 from book 6.

I could theoretically ask "henri" which of the only 11 letters would have been worded differently if the common sense assumptions about history being true history are true. Given his anti-Christian provocation, I refrain from doing it today, Holy Thursday, and the following days, it will be published on Easter Sunday, so people do not think I am compllicit with him.

Meanwhile, he hasn't shown that Pliny couldn't have doubted the legitimacy of Nero's persecution as legal precedent, even if it happened, as documented.

Pliny the Younger : Letters https://www.attalus.org/info/pliny.html

Pliny the Younger : Letters - BOOK 1 https://www.attalus.org/old/pliny1.html 6 Cornelius Tacitus 20 Cornelius Tacitus Pliny the Younger : Letters - BOOK 4 https://www.attalus.org/old/pliny4.html 13 Cornelius Tacitus Pliny the Younger : Letters - BOOK 6 https://www.attalus.org/old/pliny6.html 9 Tacitus 16 Tacitus 20 Tacitus		Pliny the Younger : Letters - BOOK 7 https://www.attalus.org/old/pliny7.html 20 Tacitus 33 Tacitus Pliny the Younger : Letters - BOOK 8 https://www.attalus.org/old/pliny8.html 7 Tacitus Pliny the Younger : Letters - BOOK 9 https://www.attalus.org/old/pliny9.html 10 Tacitus 14 Tacitus

Update 9.IV.2024, I answered "henri" thus:

@Bluesruse It so hapens, I decided to not ruin my week of Easter, or yesterday, which was the Feast of Annunciation (since March 25 fell in Holy Week) by talking to you online.

It is possible, and if so not to your credit, if you have made a point of talking to me where I have my luggage, so as to make my acts stand in apparent contrast to that word.

Because I actually published it, and made this remark about you. Since the morning of Easter Day, this is on my blog:

Faurisson thought he could achieve some good for the Palestinians by a much better motivated questioning of the Shoah as usually described than "henri" (Bluesruse) is providing motives for questioning the persecution under Nero.

I wonder whom "henri" thinks he is favouring.

Perhaps his goal is simply to ruin Christianity. Some people, and that would include some Jews and Noahides, have that goal.

[omitting here the full reference to other debate]

Fuller dealing with that video in a separate post.

Anyway, "henri" seems to have similarily dim views of Christianity. He wants to deny Christians existed under Nero to persecute, since that would create some distance between documented Christians (for the time of Pliny he doesn't deny them) and the "alleged" life, death and resurrection of Jesus, and "alleged" creation of His Church starting with people who had known him for up to three and a half years, and who were able to testify to both death on the Cross and seeing Him alive after that.

In order to do so, apart from doing his Antichristian Superiority Complex, trying to discourage me, and trying to paint me as "not listening to reason", he gives as argument that Pliny's correspondence with Tacitus showed that Tacitus couldn't really have known of the Christians persecuted under Nero, since if so, Pliny's letters to Trajan would be "inexplicable." For the argument given in the video and then refuted. He claims to have a much more credible source than my citations from the wikipedia, namely the correspondence of Pliny and Tacitus.

This consists of 11 Letters in Epistulae, 2 each from book 1, 7 and 9, 1 each from books 4 and 8, and a whopping 3 from book 6.

I could theoretically ask "henri" which of the only 11 letters would have been worded differently if the common sense assumptions about history being true history are true. Given his anti-Christian provocation, I refrain from doing it today, Holy Thursday, and the following days, it will be published on Easter Sunday, so people do not think I am compllicit with him.

Meanwhile, he hasn't shown that Pliny couldn't have doubted the legitimacy of Nero's persecution as legal precedent, even if it happened, as documented.

As Easter is over and Annunciation is over, we can resume the debate if you wish.

Sharing : Isabel Brown

Friday, March 29, 2024

Colin (Not a Pastor) on Fight For Truth Had a Better Take

Whaddo You Meme ?? Tried to Give His POV on Christ is King

lilly
@greatballsoffire02: There is a lot of medieval Jewish scholarship that supported Christian monotheism. The official ruling was for a non Jew it's fine to worship in addition outside the traditional non visible non tangible Eternal.

The issue with Christianity was mostly the persecution, ghettos, forced conversions, etc.

For religious Jews a monotheistic religion that promotes order and loving kindness is always better. Atheist Jews probably prefer other atheists.
Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl: @greatballsoffire02 1) I don't know what you mean by "the official ruling";

2) It seems they are able to support human sacrificing Pagans over Christians in cases where that's the so far established religion (Azteks vs Conquistadors; Baltic Pagans over Christian Missionaries and Crusaders);

3) You kind of presuppose all Jews who converted to Christianity were simply forced and would have preferred not to;

4) You said "for non-Jews" — does the same "official ruling" prescribe any kind of penalty for Jews who become Christians?

5:44 After seeing some Nick Fuentes, I get the impression he's just one shade less ironic than Mel Brooks.

You recall:

"Don't be stupid, be a smarty
"Come and join the Nazi party."

Which, as a Jew, I am fairly sure Mel Brooks did not actually want.

6:49 So, you want to pretend not supporting Netanyahu's basically genocidal actions against Jews of Muslim and Christian confessions is somehow suspect?

Al Jazeera + had this to say, interviewing a Lutheran Pastor from Bethlehem:

"10:12 It becomes easier to oppress the "bad ones," 10:15 "because they deserve it, because they brought it upon themselves. 10:18 We can build the wall and lock them on the other side 10:21 because they are the ones who are enemies of democracy and freedom."

Rev. Dr. Munther Isaac.

How Evangelicals Betray Christians In The Holy Land [Pt. 2]
AJ+ | 12 Dec. 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHT-SjIM0tA

lilly
@greatballsoffire02: That's interesting because even Muslims in Bethlehem have been supportive to Israel, and helping out the people who had become refugees in Israel due to Hamas bombings.
Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl: @greatballsoffire02 By now that could be a thing of the past.

Have you heard the Christmas sermon by Munther Isaac? Search "Christ in the rubble" ...

Obviously, Hamas have done lots of overkill in the past, and therefore there have been things to distance themselves from, even in supporting Israel. Over the years.

Is this still the case?

7:11 Why? Well, ... (broke off, did some fact checking, came back ...)

7:11 I fact checked when Andrew Tate came in relation to Candace Owens.

It seems Andrew Tate did his tweet "4 days ago" and Candace Owens was being slammed already "4 days ago", meaning it's pretty safe to assume Andrew Tate and perhaps Sneako too have been doing this in support of Candace Owens.

Candace Owens is friends with Kanye West, and it's probable Kanye West is not unknown to Andrew Tate and Sneako.

7:54 So you say they had never done so before or sth?

It is a fact, that Muslims believe "Isa Al Massih" to be at least in one context a king, namely the warrior king that kills of Al-Masih ad-Dajjal.

Here is the description from a video:

In traditional Islamic eschatology, it is claimed that Isa PBUH will return in the Second Coming with Imam Mahdi to kill the Al-Masih ad-Dajjal ('The False Messiah')

The title is:: Islamic Animation : Isa Al-masih , The True Savior/Messiah
The channel is:: Kang Sewot Animation

And, very interestingly, the date is not just before the recent controversy about Candace Owens, but also before even October 7.

Also, interestingly, this part of Muslim eschatology actually agrees with Christianity. One point:

But he shall judge the poor with justice, and shall reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked.
[Isaias (Isaiah) 11:4]

And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him,
[2 Thessalonians 2:8]
Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders
[2 Thessalonians 2:9]

The parallel suggests two more things:

some things are not yet fulfilled about Isaias 11, but will be fulfilled at the second coming (though a first just after the first coming was St. Peter, vicar of Christ, killing Ananias and Sapphira)
the Antichrist will not be a defender of the meek or the poor, so, not a Classical Commie as they like to appear. (Well, if you look at Tambov and Kronstadt, Lenin was hardly a defender of the poor either, but Commies tend to forget that).

7:54 bis. Is there a connexion between Jewish Messianism and Muslim Antijudaism? I think so.

There are Jews who are really offended by "Christ is King" for a few other reasons than its supposed status as antisemitic dog whistle:

it reminds them of Christian kingdoms (in which abortion and pornography were forbidden, and Jews second class citizens, usually)
it reminds them, they have no right to set up a king against Christ, in the Holy Land.

8:44 "or for their political gain, then it's sinful"

Are you dissing: Constantine? Clovis? Francisco Franco? Éamonn DeValera?

Are you dissing Pope Pius XI who instituted the feast of Christ the King (last Lord's Day of October) to protest against political secularism?

Are you dissing Traditional Catholics, who have spoken up about this feast?

Because, it's Good Friday. Jesus died as martyr for more than one thing.

He had criticised the Pharisees in unaccomodating ways.
He had confirmed His claim of Divinity to Caiaphas.
He had also confirmed His Kingship to Pilate and to Herod.

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

Christ is King of the Jews

Licoricia of Winchester, Interest, Blood Libel · Look at This · Palestinian Origins · Christ is King of the Jews · Whaddo You Meme ?? Tried to Give His POV on Christ is King · Colin (Not a Pastor) on Fight For Truth Had a Better Take · Sharing : Isabel Brown · Some Responses to Candida Moss (Beginning of Video) · Christ is King of the Jews, even if Tovia Refuses to See That · Tovia tried to counter ... · When the True God Revealed Himself (sharing) · Tovia Singer Fails to Discredit the Gospels · Sharing on the Trinity in the OT

Is Saying "Christ is King" Antisemitic?
The Counsel of Trent | 27 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vErF9WttOU

2:23 The pre-Islamic Christians in Arabia would have been Ethiopian Church Yemenites.

Are you sure ancient Yemenite used the word "Allah"?

I am aware that after the spread of Islam and Islamically promoted Arabic, the word has come to use in that sense among Christians who use that or derived versions of it as their daily language.

For instance, Maltese is originally a dialect of Arabic, and "Mother of God" is "Omm Alla" (Latin alphabet).

2:58 Indeed Palestinians say this now, but the fact is, prior to the Countercrusade, they spoke Aramaic rather than Arabic, among themselves.

Muslim Palestinians adopted Arabic a bit quicker, I think by 800~900 they had switched from Aramaic to Arabic.

2:58 Speaking of Archbishop Sebastia Theodosios, this shows a further truth that Ben Shapiro might not like:

Christ is King of the Jews.

Palestinians are Jews, Samarians and Galilaeans from 2000 years ago who, unlike Mitsrahi Jews and other Jews did not side with the Sanhedrin both against Jesus and against Mohammed.

3:35 How do you define "the sin of Antisemitism"?

Shapiro will probably consider it "Antisemitic" of Candace Owen to have reminded him that he is in rebellion against his King.

3:52 Yes, I definitely do not hate either Lenin or Freud because of their genetics, but rather because of their evil deeds.

Some will however count this as Antisemitism on my behalf.

4:22 Today there is also a dehumanisation of Fascists, whether Antisemitic or not, and of Antisemites, real or supposed.

That's a reason to not inflate charges of Antisemitism, right?

Now, I think you are using "Antisemite" as Jew-hater. Some people also or rather use it as Critical of the Jewish community.

In Swedish and German for instance, "Jew-hater" is a very current word, or rather cognates of it, so "Antisemit" tends to be more ideological, less emotional.

I once told my sister (of Jewish Liberal persuasion) I had become "ein Antisemit" ... I simply meant I had become so critical of the Jewish community that I endorsed positions I, like she, had been taught to regard as "Antisemitic" ... like it was unfair of Jews to be harsh loan sharks and taking interest is in and of itself evil. Or like it is probable that Jews were behind some of the killings of children. St. William of Norwich has in iconography a long nose and curly hair. It's not just the Gothic way of drawing heads, it's clearly a question of personal traits ... sometimes associated with Jewish genes. My bet is, 1) St. William of Norwich was executed for being Christian, while of Jewish ancestry, 2) Theobald blamed a far off cabale in Narbonne in order to stop investigations against Jews closer to home (Theobald converted after the death of William).

I had been taught that every allegation that a child had been killed by people of Jewish origin of any type (Chesterton thought it was Jewish Satanists, and I thought so too back then), was the same as maligning the usual ritual of the Seder. Which I would certainly not do. That it was only done by the most vile people with the most irrational hatred for Jews, probably sparked by their envy. A view of the Christian Middle Ages I could no longer have and cannot recover.

It's as stupid as claiming "spices were popular because meat was rotten" or "every sickness flourished because Medievals had no hygiene" (I've been in a debate with a man who claimed there was cholera in the European Middle Ages, when the first time it spread to Christian countries as far West as Russia was in 1817, an epidemic starting in Bombay).

It's equally stupid to claim they had no justice.

6:05 I do not hold Gaudium et Spes to be a real council text, and I do not consider every kind of discrimination as contrary to God's intent.

More than one Church Father, it would seem, has mentioned that "ho katekhon" in II Thessalonians is the Roman Emperor.

Albert II of the HRE / Albert V of Austria fulfilled this in a somewhat harsh, possibly unfair way against Jews of Vienna, when he suspected them of financing the terror of the Hussites.

But if he had not been allowed to use any discrimination against Jews at all, he would not have fulfilled his duty as "ho katekhon" it's just possible he overdid it this time.

This is by the way one reason why the Catholic Church cannot take over after 1918 as "ho katekhon" ...

9:23 This is where I think this breaks down.

Catholic teaching has a real sense of fairness, which is lacking to the Talmud.

Please note, the Supreme court of Roe v Wade, of unhappy memory, the operative source of evil would have been Protestantism:

Presbyterian, Catholic (?), Episcopalian, Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Presbyterian (omitting the two who dissented).

However, check the dissent in Everson v. Board of Education, Felix Frankfurter did actually want to discriminate against school transports to Catholic schools, and he was Jewish.

In the US, people like he are marginal. In France, less so.

9:57 I am very careful to note I really appreciate Jewish musicians and linguists.

But some of them don't seem eager to requit it, if I have any reservations against Jewish shrinks or bankers.

10:38 There are at least two exilations of Jews that we, as Catholics, do have to defend.

That of St. Lewis IX. That of St. Pius V.

It may be noted that St. Lewis only expelled money-lenders, which he also did to Lombardian ones.

It may be noted that St. Pius V allowed the ghettos of Rome and Ancona to stay.

It may be noted that if St. Pius V was not a pathological liar or totally deluded about what was happening, and therefore an incompetent ruler, Jews had really behaved very badly in the Papal states.

I have been stamped as Antisemite, and therefore more or less "self hating Jew" and so on, simply because I refused to condemn exilations of Jews, in principle, and to condemn these two.

10:54 The Church Fathers were not individually infallible, but where they agree, they do amount to infallibility.

Now, beyond attacks on St. John Chrysostom, some will ask us to forego the Gospel of St. John too.

When a canonised Saint has done something, it is not an appalling injustice. Unless he repented of it.

Btw, as I had written to Ratzinger back before leaving Sweden, I do consider Wojtyla, "John Paul II" as very probably involved in injustices against me. He's also incanonisable for other reasons.

11:22 I think St. Thomas was on this account simply reflecting canon law.

Now, canon law, of the actual Catholic Church, cannot be unjust. There can be situations not foreseen by the law (how do you elect a Pope if all cardinals endorse an Antipope?), but the law itself, insofar as it is binding on all Catholics, cannot be unjust.

11:42 In 1916, Chesterton was yet an Anglican.

He may have made the remark in reaction to Pro-Prussian Jews, prior to the Balfour declaration, which suddenly rallied Jews to England.

He may have sincerely believed the guilt of Dreyfus at this point, even if later he would say that of the two trials, the first could very well occur in England, but the victim would not be a Jew, and the second (basically whoever was the victim) is what could not occur in England.

12:27 St. Simon of Trent was found with his throat slit like the slaughtering ritual of a Jewish butcher.

The Jews in town were very few and could have been very extreme.

He could, like St. William of Norwich, have been of Jewish descent.

12:36 Keeping people in unsanitary places is murder in and of itself.

There are reasons to highly doubt whether the gas chambers were used as murder weapons. In saying so, I am actually not accusing Jews of lying, I am accusing Hitler's men of being efficient bogey-men, as they certainly were to the 50, probably to all 650, involved directly or indirectly in Jo Wajsblat's visit to a gas chamber.

But the parents of Dita Kraus dying, one by typhoid in the camp and another by too much exhaustion, is still murder.

12:46 I abhor the Paedagogic terror against young Jews by Adolf Hitler.

14:50 If he thinks Hitler stood for Christian leadership, he is probably not so much Antisemitic as ill informed (so are some Anticatholics!) about Germany 1933 to 1945.

It's over the top to take a distance from Fuentes for that, even if he's mistaken.

I've been accused of Antisemitism because I simply defend German bishops during this time, or the War effort against the Red Army.

onvogmasaj
@onvogmasaj: actually he admits to not knowing all there is to know about him and shits on actual hiterfanbois all the time.
Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl: @onvogmasaj good to know

16:13 I had my dose of Hitler's coolness during the most Pro-Semitic and indeed Pro-Zionist era of my life. Also before my Baptism.

It's a real social thing, but if we can admire cool guys, and are Catholics, how about admiring Franco instead?

He did defend the Church. He did not go after the Jews, even just for occasions that killed them in the typhoid.

17:46 I think that Deutsche Christen predated the Nazi régime, even if part of the leadership then endorsed it.

"Positive Christianity" is a bit like ... "you just need to be sure that you are saved" + the "muscular Christianity" of Matthew Arnold.

I'm not sure if they ever tried to attract Catholics, but it was a very Protestant thing.

SS members (I think prior to international volunteers) would be c. 50 % Protestant, 25 % Catholic, 25 % "Gottesgläubige" = Neo-Pagan. Theistic Evolutionists.

18:15 Did Heschel find any Catholics involved there?

Perhaps a few priests, but hardly bishops.

19:42 In John Jesus is using the word "Jews" in a different manner from the narrator.

The narrator is very aware that in the meantime, the predecessors and ancestors of for instance Sebastia Theodosios were no longer considered as "Jews" by the majority of the nation.

John 4:22 doesn't mean salvation is from unbelieving Jews.

Why Don't I Share Lutheran Admiration for Luther?

One could argue, even if Luther had been right, back in 1517, in fact he wasn't, there is still no use in trying to uphold his 95 theses, since NOBODY does.

The Catholics follow a Pope who condemned 41 theses (not all of them from the 1517 document, some from earlier works).

The Lutherans, at best, follow his later lines (though that would involve huge amounts of Antisemitism, once again underlining what Chesterton said about Luther being a precursor to Hitler), and at worst a totally made up pseudo-history of his life, which would be inspired by what non-Lutherans wrote much later. I cannot pinpoint Merle d'Aubigné in this case, which I know to be a fact about the founders of 7 Day Adventism, but I can say what this Lutheran pretends is total bogus:

Why Did The Catholic Martin Luther Leave The Church?
CTKLM | 2 Nov. 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4rLV6kUofI

0:51 "the belief that a believer could buy an indulgence"

Can you document that as being a belief which was around for Luther to criticise?

Indulgences were given for good works, and then and there certain types of alms were among these, does not mean anyone said indulgences could be bought.

1:02 I just checked wikisource.

In the 95 thesis, there is no contestation against Purgatory existing, and there is no pretense that the Purgatory is not mentioned in Scripture.

One part of contestation was this passage, theses 16 through 20:

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.
17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.
18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.
19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.
20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.
21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;
22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

As you can see, Luther presumes 1) there are souls in Purgatory, 2) as they can still continue sanctification, they should not want to get time off from it, 3) a contestation of what the Church can or cannot remit by an Indulgence.

1:17 What was Luther saying in 1517, on works?

41. Apostolic[70] pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.
42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.
43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;
44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

1:50 In 1517, Luther was not the least pretending Purgatory, Good Works or even Indulgences were leading people to Hell.

2:33 to 2:37 ... Why did you leave out Ephesians 2:10?

So, not by works (already done before justification), but certainly into works (those that God has prepared for us).

I think a better translation would be "of" or "from", so I give the full quote from Ephesians 2 in Latin Vulgate and English Douay Rheims:

8 Gratia enim estis salvati per fidem, et hoc non ex vobis : Dei enim donum est : 9 non ex operibus, ut ne quis glorietur. 10 Ipsius enim sumus factura, creati in Christo Jesu in operibus bonis, quae praeparavit Deus ut in illis ambulemus.

8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; 9 Not of works, that no man may glory. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them.

2:55 "the Church had put a bounty on his head, that if anyone killed him"

Can you document that?

Or are you informing yourself on Luther by Merle d'Aubigné, who should have been a novelist rather than a pastor?

brandenburg2388
@brandenburg2388: Are you a direct descendant of Grigori Rasputin?
Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl: @brandenburg2388 Are you part of "Christ the King Lutheran Ministries"?

If not, why are they not answering, but leaving a kind of ad hominem to "people" (if that's even the word) like you?
brandenburg2388: @hglundahl I'm just curious because you look so much like Rasputin from your hairstyle and beard.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @brandenburg2388 Hairstyle and beard are very non-genetic things.

OK, women don't have beards, and some people are genetically bald, but otherwise ...
Jude Enweremadu
@judeenweremadu609: These guys love to spread falsehood against the Holy Roman Catholic church
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @judeenweremadu609 Indeed!

Joe Heschmeyer Gives an Excellent Case for the Church Needing Infallibility (We are Both Papists, so Think the Infallibility Resides in some capacity in the Pope)

For Some Who Believe "Francis" is Pope · Joe Heschmeyer Gives an Excellent Case for the Church Needing Infallibility (We are Both Papists, so Think the Infallibility Resides in some capacity in the Pope)

Here is his case, then a comment I made, with the thread under it, then a transition to another and shorter thread:

The Biblical Case for Infallibility
Shameless Popery Podcast | 21 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2djx9lESGgA

Now give the Biblical case for whether Infallibility resides in "Francis" or in Michael II ...

Master Chief
@masterchief8179: Infallibility resides in the Church through the Successor of Peter and bishops gathered in Ecumenical Councils in communion with him, when issuing to teach the universal church and other specific circumstances.

Or you can buy a cheaper seat to watch Pastor Bob preach in a garage with his interpretation of the Bible that fell from the sky, saying you - and everybody - should stick with this guy’ interpretation:

“Whoever teaches differently from what I have taught, or whoever condemns me therein, he condemns God and must remain a child of hell” (LUTHER, Martin. German answer of Martin Luther to the Book of King Henry of England, 1522 Deutsche Antwort Luthers auf König Heinrichs von England Buch). In: Dr. Martin Luther's Sämtliche Werke, Polemische Deutsche Schriften, Johann Konrad Irmischer, Erlangen, 1833, vol. 28, p. 347).
Hans-Georg Lundahl
@hglundahl: @masterchief8179 The question is not about Pastor Bob.

It's about whether "Francis" or Michael II is successor of St. Peter.
Susan D
@susand3668: Dear @hglundahl , you are kidding, right? Pope Francis is accepted as pope not only by his followers, but by the UN and every nation and so on and so on.

Who is Michael II?
Master Chief: @hglundahl You can’t be serious.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @masterchief8179 I am at least not going to be A-rious instead of C-rious. A-rious was a heretic!
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @susand3668 "not only by his followers,"

Which is also the case with Pope Michael II. Even with Peter III, whom I don't count as Pope.

"but by the UN and every nation and so on and so on."

So? From their pov it means "head of the Vatican state" (usually) and that was founded in 1929, between Pius XI and Mussolini.

"Who is Michael II?"

Pope Michael II Passion Sunday 2024
vatican in exile | 19 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kso2_JY3QM
Shameless Popery Podcast
@shamelesspopery: I know more about Antipope Michael I (David Bawden, Rogelio Martinez's predecessor) because he's from here in Kansas. He was "elected" by his family and some friends in his family's thrift store in 1990 when he was 30. None of his alleged electors were Cardinals of the Catholic Church (obviously). In no way, shape, or form is such an "election" valid, regardless of what you think about the real pope. I mean "Michael I" wasn't even an ordained priest (by his own admission!) during the time he was claiming to be the real Bishop of Rome.

Let's say that you decide that the 2024 presidential election is stolen, and so you and your family and friends declare you the president of the United States. That absurdity would actually be MORE valid than Michael I or Michael II's claims to be popes, since (unlike in a papal election) your family and friends can presumably vote in a secular election.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @shamelesspopery Thank you for your input, Sir, let's break this down:

"None of his alleged electors were Cardinals of the Catholic Church (obviously)."

Cardinals electing is of human positive Church law, not divine law, since otherwise the Popes elected before the Cardinals would have been invalid.

One of the friends was Theresa S. Benns, who later left him.

She has so far NOT used the idea that his invitations to conservative (sede+) bishops and (perhaps) conservative cardinals were bogus.

In other words we have an important witness to misproceedings, if there were such, who hasn't spoken up about them.

In other words, until the opposite is proven, we do not have the wherewithals to present the election as finally held, with 6 laymen, as being what he had planned all along (among these laymen he was the star theologian, along with ineligible Theresa).

I think we should therefore presume he had hoped that clergy would come and he would not be elected.

"I mean "Michael I" wasn't even an ordained priest (by his own admission!) during the time he was claiming to be the real Bishop of Rome."

During the 21 first years of the time. He did get ordination and consecration on the Gaudete Weekend of 2011. I congratulated him on the occasion, without yet accepting him as Pope. I had known him online since the early 2000's.

A bishop can be elected before he is ordained, before he is consecrated. Otherwise, the election of the Catechumen St. Ambrose would have been invalid.

"Let's say that you decide that the 2024 presidential election is stolen, and so you and your family and friends declare you the president of the United States."

Usurpation without tyranny is not necessarily a cue for legitimate insurrection. Especially if the usurper would be deposed if not reelected four years from hence.

"since (unlike in a papal election) your family and friends can presumably vote in a secular election."

Again, you are judging the case of laymen voting from positive Church laws of the second millennium. The exclusion of laymen from episcopal elections, including that of Rome, was first of all never put into place in the East, and second, a kind of security measure against powerful laymen rigging elections for their friends.

Given the six laymen were presumably nobodies, the risk of them being so manipulated is negligible.

@shamelesspopery Think about my answer to your first objection:

Cardinals electing is of human positive Church law, not divine law, since otherwise the Popes elected before the Cardinals would have been invalid.

I was somewhat incomplete, I left out the idea that in a case of emergency, you can never set divine law aside, but positive human law (like disciplinary Church law) can be set aside.

But, as you wrote a book about the first 200 years of the Church, you would normally be aware of lay participation in episcopal elections including in Rome.

Where did I get this about his book from? Here, other thread under the youtube:

Skarlet
@Skarlet-ju8sr: You should write a book about the history of the early Church, first 400 years. The title would be this perfect catchphrase in common use back then:

"Rome Has Spoken."
Patrick Steil
@PatrickSteil: I think he did. It’s called the Early Church is the Catholic Church. Great book and he shows this taking only the first 200 years before any Protestant claims of the corruption of the church.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @PatrickSteil If that's the case he should be aware of laymen electing bishops, including of Rome, meaning his case against Pope Michael I is not just wrong but also less than perfectly candid, perhaps even dishonest
Patrick Steil: @hglundahl Can you elaborate, I am not following?
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @PatrickSteil His view on the election in Kansas in 1990 involves it being invalid because all the participants were non-cardinals.

The fact is, "By decree of a synod of 769, only a cardinal was eligible to become Bishop of Rome." -- and papal elections being between cardinals only is even later, seems to be 1059 or sth, i e, the law he is referring to was not applied in the early Church, and can therefore be set aside in a case of dire necessity, as David Bawden, when calling the election, judged the situation in the Church.

As he has studied the early Church, he should be aware of this.

Other thing:

Tom Tyrone Beiron
@TyroneBeiron: It may be necessary in these times to consider the Orthodox Churches not in communion with the Catholic Church to be ‘Protestant’ as well, mainly because of the various new emerging narratives from their commentators, apologists, synods and canons which very much hold seriously anti-Catholic and anti-Papal statements which they have never removed or corrected in spite of the dialogues, joint-statements etc. In a similar way, these autocephalous churches vary in teaching and biblical interpretation, sometimes even holding commentary by their own saints to be held as magisterial authority. Catholics nowadays are hardly vehement towards these others - I am old enough to remember when priests and bishops did not mince their words towards schismatics and Protestants; not anymore today. 🤔
Hans-Georg Lundahl: "sometimes even holding commentary by their own saints to be held as magisterial authority."

That's actually Catholic, except for post-schism ones being on the wrong side of 1054.

The principle is also there in Trent Session IV.

In fact, Trent Session IV sets a kind of safety rule, what you must take as magisterial is all of the CCFF agreeing, but even so.

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Palestinian Origins

Q

If the "Palestinians" supposed to be indigenous to the region, why they're still speaking an Arabic dialect/variant instead of reviving/revitalizing an extinct/a moribund Hebrew dialect/Canaanite language (e.g. Samaritan Hebrew)?
https://www.quora.com/If-the-Palestinians-supposed-to-be-indigenous-to-the-region-why-theyre-still-speaking-an-Arabic-dialect-variant-instead-of-reviving-revitalizing-an-extinct-a-moribund-Hebrew-dialect-Canaanite-language-e-g-Samaritan/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-2

Hans-Georg Lundahl

amateur linguist

26.III.2024

2000 years ago, both Jews and Christians (or back in AD 24 more like future Christians, still Jews), spoke mainly Aramaic, though they knew Hebrew for the liturgic uses.

After 600 and before 700, Omar conquered the region and forced part of them to become Muslims.

The Muslims adopted Arabic from the Peninsula, language of a minority of conquerors, by 900 AD.

The Christians were still speaking Aramaic in the time of the Crusades, they were pushed to adopt Arabic in the time of the Countercrusade (Muslim rulers like Baybars). So, the reason is a bit why Irish, descending mainly from Gaels, mainly do not speak Irish Gaelic, but English.

I

Jeric Ilagan

26.III.2024

Tuesday of Holy week

Oh yes, the classic case of Ireland (and Scotland).

Hans-Georg Lundahl

29.III.2024

Good Friday

They are not really comparable, you know.

I specified Ireland, even more specifically Irish Gaels, because I think it’s parallel to the Palestinians in language change.

Jeric Ilagan

30.III.2024

Holy Saturday

I stand corrected.

II

Zhun-Yong Ong

28.III.2024

Maundy Thursday

There were Arabic speakers in Israel long before the Islamic conquest. You can find the ruins of Nabataean settlements such as Avdat in southern Israel.

https://en.parks.org.il/reserve-park/avdat-national-park/

The Qedarites were attested in the Levant by the 9th century BC.

Qedarites - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qedarites

Hans-Georg Lundahl

29.III.2024

Good Friday

As I read the map, there were more Qedarites on the Peninsula than in Avdat.

I’ll quote a part of the wiki:

Attested from the 9th century BC, the Qedarites formed a powerful polity which expanded its territory over the course of the 9th to 7th centuries BC to cover a large area in northern Arabia stretching from Transjordan in the west to the western borders of Babylonia in the east, before later moving westwards during the 6th to 5th centuries BC to consolidate into a kingdom stretching from the eastern limits of the Nile Delta in the west till Transjordan in the east and covering much of southern Judea,[dubious – discuss] the Negev and the Sinai Peninsula.

So, the idea that they were in Southern Judaea is dubious.

Going to the link in Israel parks site, it seems Avdat is indeed in modern Israel, but it’s still the Negev.

Would you mind explaining how Avdat was identified as Qedarite rather than Jewish?

Zhun-Yong Ong

30.III.2024

Holy Saturday

So, the idea that they were in Southern Judaea is dubious.

Even so, Southern Judea is only a small part of modern Israel and an even smaller part of the Levant. The Qedarites were found in the Negev and also across the Jordan river.

Going to the link in Israel parks site, it seems Avdat is indeed in modern Israel, but it’s still the Negev.

Would you mind explaining how Avdat was identified as Qedarite rather than Jewish?

I did not say that Avdat was Qedarite.

Avdat was a Nabataean settlement.

From https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/avdat :

The little we know about the Nabateans comes from Roman historians and geographers. They were nomadic tribes from northern Arabia who wandered and traded, then established permanent settlements and finally created an independent kingdom with Petra, in the mountains of Edom, as their capital. At the climax of their power, from the first century BCE to the first century CE, the Nabatean kings ruled regions that today belong to Jordan, Syria, and Israel. Their contact with the Hellenistic world had great influence on their material culture, uniquely manifest in their architecture.

The Nabateans accumulated great wealth from their trade in costly perfumes and spices from East Africa and Arabia which they transported by camel caravans to the southern Mediterranean coast, with Gaza serving as the main depot and port. The Negev was the direct overland link to the Mediterranean coast, and the Nabatean way stations at the main crossroads in the Negev, developed into cities. In this inhospitable desert region, the Nabateans developed an agriculture based on terraces built on the hillsides. To capture flood waters, they constructed dams in the valleys; to collect rain water, they cut cisterns in the rock. These measures, initiated by the Nabatean central administration, established their control over the Negev and guaranteed the caravans’ safe passage.

The Nabataeans were Arabs. You can visit Nabataean ruins in Jordan and Israel.

Nabataeans - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabataeans

Hans-Georg Lundahl

30.III.2024

Holy Saturday

Ah, Avdat was Nabataean and in the Negev.

It’s South of Judaea in the historic sense, South of West Bank, South of Gaza strip.

Like Southern Jordan, it’s in historic Edom.

I do not deny that Palestinians may have partly Nabataean ancestry as well, but pointing at them as the main ancestry would be idiotic, given that Christian Palestinians spoke Aramaic up to after the Countercrusade.

And given that a large origin of Muslim Palestinians are descended from:

Christian Palestinians
Jews,

it won’t fly to consider them either as mainly Nabataeans.

A comment of mine was censored:

As it happens a few other comments were hanging on that one. There was no spam about the comment, I was simply contradicting someone who agreed with Quora moderators.

Monday, March 25, 2024

Putin Lied to Tucker Carlson?

Douglas Macgregor: SURRENDERED This Morning!
World_Info | 24 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzYGiGlk4VU

0:56 Lviv region?

That's the second westernmost oblast (if the Ukrainians use the word) in all of Ukraine!

And Putin had claimed to Tucker Carlson that he was only interested in the Eastern part.

What a liar ...

Since the face of Douglas Macgregor could be a deepfake

Kyiv and Ukraine's Lviv region report 'massive' Russian attack • FRANCE 24 English
FRANCE 24 English | 24 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzQfQJBdWnI

It seems the news that Lviv was targetted is NOT fake./HGL

Does This Writer Read?

New blog on the kid: Traditional Publishing Does Not Mean Already Existing Publishing Houses · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Does This Writer Read?

Yes, this essayist reads essays.

I could add, I used to read lots more novels before I got this stress level. Some people think my being a Meldahón equals my being impotent, and if they could only stress me out a bit more, I'd be a Meldahón no more. They have stressed me out of being a regular novel reader and out of writing chapters on my fan fic novel. They have not stressed me out of reading essays and of writing essays.

You're Not Really a Writer Unless You Do THIS
Alyssa Matesic | 24 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VybKKdyQy30

1:21 I think this is OK criticism, about novelist.

I don't read much novels, ergo, I am not a novelist.

It's not OK criticism about essayists.

I read lots of essays, reply to lots of them in mine and write others not in such replies.

The fact that I read the essays mainly online and that essay writing is a much shorter format than novel writing, doesn't basically change this. Though obviously it changes the perception of people who consider "being on the internet" is mutually exclusive with reading. People who wonder why I don't have thick books and they see me spend hours on them.

Look at This

Sunday, March 24, 2024

For Some Who Believe "Francis" is Pope

there was a mandate in Vatican City all workers all 6:42 employees had mandated to receive the [vaccine] 6:48 jab in their arm the other option is they had to have 6:53 a neg they had to have a negative test for the virus but it got so ser 7:00 ious that three Swiss guards Swiss guards are the security team of the Pope 7:06 and of the Vatican three CIS guards were fired because they refused to get the 7:13 [vaccine] there were also several 7:19 Bishops I already mentioned Cardinal Burke Cardinal Burke got very sick he got covid he almost died you remember we 7:25 were praying for him every day praying for him praying for him there there was one day in particular I heard that this 7:33 might be burk's last day I remember couldn't sleep that night I was praying for Cardinal Burke Cardinal 7:41 Burke not only is it questionable medicine according to Cardinal Burke but 7:48 because this so-called medicine is derived from aborted fetal tissue 7:55 Cardinal Burke says there's an a moral a proper moral objection to receiving this 8:02 so-called medication or as Francis calls it the 8:08 antidote you'll remember there was Cardinal puetts there was Bishop athanasia 8:14 Schneider he spoke out against it Bishop Strickland spoke out against it of course Bishop Strickland got cancelled I 8:20 think part of his cancellation was not only speaking against certain things in the United States Conference of Bishops 8:27 not only resisting what happened at the LA Dodger Stadium last 8:32 year but also his very vocal objections to receiving the [vac 8:40 cine] so there's Cardinal Burke there was Cardinal puetts there was Bishop 8:45 Strickland Bishop athanasia Schneider and also I believe Archbishop langa who 8:52 used to be in Kazakhstan I believe with

Pope Francis Condemns Cardinal Burke and the Anti-Vaxxers
Dr Taylor Marshall | 21 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAZXMeqFmv4

Blessed Holy Week to Burke, Strickland, Puett ?, Schneider, and three former Swiss Guards!

Not to mention Taylor Marshall ... thanks for the story!/HGL

Oceanic Deep Water Waves in Whole Gale : Whitecaps on a Lake, But Bigger

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: He did some answering, though, to others ... · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Oceanic Deep Water Waves in Whole Gale : Whitecaps on a Lake, But Bigger

Q

If a whole gale (60mph) occurs on the Pacific Ocean, far from land, what do the waves look like?
https://www.quora.com/If-a-whole-gale-60mph-occurs-on-the-Pacific-Ocean-far-from-land-what-do-the-waves-look-like/answer/Nathan-Smith-2494

Nathan Smith

Thu, 21.III.2024

“If a whole gale (60mph) occurs on the Pacific Ocean, far from land, what do the waves look like?”

That depends on how long the wind blows and how large an area it's blowing over. It also makes a difference how large the ground swells are, and which direction(s) they're from. The new waves generated by the gale will become bigger and more chaotic as they interfere with existing swells.

After a 60 knot gale has blown a day or two there will be what's called a fully developed sea. It's as rough as that amount of wind can get it. A fully developed sea in a 60 knot wind will have waves of many sizes. The largest waves will be over 40 feet or 12 meters high. The crests of some waves will be breaking. The wind strips water off wave crests, so foam and spray will be flying in the air and blowing in streaks on the water surface. The air is full of spray. Sometimes one wave will be extra large, like 60 or 70 feet high due to constructive interference.

The waves look about the same as whitecaps on a lake, but the scale is different. Imagine a pile of water the size of a 4 story building breaking over you. These keep coming every 10 to 15 seconds for something like 30 hours.

[moving image, gif]

Fri, 22.III.2024

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Thank you … what is the distance of the crests or troughs from each other, you only mentioned height, not wavelength.

The picture shows a ship heading into the crest, not how it would look if the motors were off and the ship were facing the crests sideways.

Nathan Smith

The wavelength varies due to the mixture of new waves forming over existing ones. As the sea matures toward full development, the period will be about 10 to 15 seconds or more. The dominant wavelength between crests would be on the order of 300 meters or more. If the wind direction has changed during the gale, or if large swells are passing through the area from elsewhere, the wave heights, and wavelengths, will be very irregular. As the waves propagate away from the storm, they sort themselves out into more regularly spaced swells. The longer swells move faster. Save pass right through each other if they come from different directions or have different lengths. The largest waves in a gale can have 10 seconds periods and lengths of 600 meters or more.

Sat, 23.III.2024

Hans-Georg Lundahl

“The dominant wavelength between crests would be on the order of 300 meters or more.”

“The largest waves in a gale can have 10 seconds periods and lengths of 600 meters or more.”

Thank you very much!

What I had expected, but better. What I didn’t expect directly, but which is not suspect either is:

“The wavelength varies due to the mixture of new waves forming over existing ones.”

Does it vary SO much that it can resemble the turbulence of coastal waves?

Tue 26.III.2024

Nathan Smith

The sea is very confused and chaotic while the storm wind is blowing and building new waves. It looks like this. The sailboat is Gypsy Moth lV off Cape Horn. Sir Francis Chichester was sailing it alone around the world.

Waves start forming as ripples about an inch or a few centimeters in size. From there they keep getting bigger, oscillating on the water surface of the larger waves already present. Waves of every size can coexist together. Smooth, regular swells are only seen a few days later after the storm waves have propagated away from the gale a few hundred miles, or a few thousand, to an area of calmer wind.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

All of these far from land?

“The sailboat is Gypsy Moth lV off Cape Horn.”

The fact is, I am trying to figure out what waves around the Ark would have been like over a global ocean — is it sufficiently far from land to be deep and comparable?
At least all of the three seem to involve no very steep waves, like the turbulence near a coast?

Nathan Smith

All the photos are of conditions in deep water, many miles from shore.

If waves get steep they break. Waves on a beach break as it gets shallow near shore. That's “surf”. In deep water, as the wind is building up waves, they get steep and break. Those are “whitecaps”. They can be any size. They are steep up near the crest. Rogue waves can be very steep and dangerous even if the water is 3 miles deep in the middle of an ocean.

I suggest looking on you tube. There are videos made by people on ships in storms.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Thank you.

What I have seen so far from videos, they are typically taken with ships heading into the waves, which makes for more turbulence. The Ark had no motor, as far as we know, and no sails.

Rogue waves are certainly likely to rock any vessel on the deep, but they are also relatively isolated, right?

Nathan Smith

They are infrequent, but in storms they do happen. Some happen in normal weather when big swells from different directions meet a current.

The helmsmen on those ships in the videos are heading into the storm waves to save their lives. If they get broadside to waves like that, it's possible to get rolled over. Losing power or rudder control out there presents a dangerous problem. A drifting ship tends to lay in the troughs ( crosswise to the waves ). So the ship rolls badly. That can end tragically whenever an extra steep and extra high wave happens to break against the side of the ship.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

“A drifting ship tends to lay in the troughs (crosswise to the waves ). So the ship rolls badly.”

The rolling period of the Ark was about 12 seconds.

I have the impression all of these ships are smaller than it?

“whenever an extra steep and extra high wave happens to break against the side of the ship.”

That’s sth which God’s providence would have avoided, obviously.

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere

Pages

Saturday, March 30, 2024

Some Responses to Candida Moss (Beginning of Video)

Sharing : Isabel Brown

Friday, March 29, 2024

Colin (Not a Pastor) on Fight For Truth Had a Better Take

Whaddo You Meme ?? Tried to Give His POV on Christ is King

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

Christ is King of the Jews

Why Don't I Share Lutheran Admiration for Luther?

Joe Heschmeyer Gives an Excellent Case for the Church Needing Infallibility (We are Both Papists, so Think the Infallibility Resides in some capacity in the Pope)

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Palestinian Origins

Monday, March 25, 2024

Putin Lied to Tucker Carlson?

Does This Writer Read?

Look at This

Sunday, March 24, 2024

For Some Who Believe "Francis" is Pope

Oceanic Deep Water Waves in Whole Gale : Whitecaps on a Lake, But Bigger

About Me

Fighting Totalitarian Takeovers