Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere

Monday, May 22, 2023

Thursday, May 18, 2023

Disagreeing with Ray Comfort on Some Things

Why People HATE Tim Tebow's Faith, but Not Steph Curry's
Living Waters, 25 Dec. 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGAhGhF2wco

2:26 You definitely are not saved from an immediately previous state of sin by meriting it by feeding the poor.

Even when Jesus told St. Eustace "thy alms have pleased me" it wasn't the future saint earning this moment of conversion, it was one of the poor he had fed who prayed for him.

HOWEVER, once you are saved from sin, and constituted in righteousness, you very certainly keep your salvation by works, among these specifically mentioned not just here, but also in Matthew 25: FEEDING. THE. HUNGRY.

Note, I said "the hungry" and not "the poor" partly because Jesus Himself used that wording, and partly because as a poor I know what a hazzle it is to be overfed even if you aren't really hungry. Notably by people who a) think one is better off with food than with money one could spend on alcohol, and b) that they still even so are responsible for you.

3:15 Let's check. Mark 16.

14 At length he appeared to the eleven as they were at table: and he upbraided them with their incredulity and hardness of heart, because they did not believe them who had seen him after he was risen again. 15 And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature

Well, a bishop who refuses to preach to every creature (including salt and water, but forgetting no man) certainly is not obeying this.

The eleven were the first bishops of the Catholic Church.

You speak as if the same applied indistinctly to every priest, deacon, monk and even, as in my own case, layman.

3:26 Why are you making Lazarus a type of lost sinners, when clearly he came to the bosom of Abraham?

Abraham refused to raise him from the dead for the rich man's brothers (who were Pharisees), but Jesus did not refuse to raise him for the faith of his sisters.

And as Abraham had mentioned to the rich man, his brothers didn't convert and believe, but plotted to kill both Jesus and Lazarus too, instead.

3:40 The command that applies to all Christians equally is feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, and so on.

3:50 Charles Spurgeon encouraged a kind of wish for peoples' salvation that amounted to bullying.

What does Jesus say about someone who sins? Check Matthew 18! Not Spurgeon, who's in Hell and can't help you, but the words of Jesus, Who is in Heaven and can help whoever can still be saved.

7:01 I would actually say, St. Paul in Roman's 1 was talking of St. Thomas Aquinas' first way, specially as spelled out in more detail in Contra Gentes, book II (I think) and chapter 13.

God turns the heavens from outside, so the heaven of fix stars is turning around us at a speed of full circle every 23 h 55 min.

There is no way Epicure could be right that the heavens turn themselves around us, simply by a whirlpool effect.

Then this transmits the daily movement inwards, down to Sun and Moon (which lag behind quite a bit, Sun taking 24 h and Moon 24 h 55 min) and even Equatorial Ocean currents and winds of passage.

7:11 Unlike Jews and Christians, Muslims don't have the Decalogue as a text given Moses by God on Sinai.

The Surah's are very preachy, but not concisely conveying a message and also not concisely telling a story.

8:13 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour is n. VIII, arguably.

I just checked the Council of Trent's Catechism on the command - it is also forbidden to bear false witness against oneself.

If I pretended I were alcoholic, as that would be an admission most dear to some who "care" about me, I would be bearing false witness against myself.

10:33 God gave Adam that choice. On behalf of his descendants.

If we can inherit original sin from Adam, we can also benefit from the choice of the Second Adam, Jesus, and be justified.

14:04 Would you mind sending me what it says about Roman Catholicism, ideally in text that can be copied, not in an image of the paper pages?

You can figure out* my email by:
3 initials
@-sign
the thing that in US you might add to a doctor's email.

I'm not a doctor, but both of my parents were, they are retired, and I don't use it to pretend I'm a doctor, just as a nod to them.

You see, I think I have some refutation to do, and if it can't save your soul, since you might not believe what I say, it might save some other soul. That's one reason I publish on the internet, apart from it being fun.

As for second column of the left of the two facing pages, I can answer that here.

It is not a direct disobedience of "the second commandment" ... Here is the Exodus 20 expression of the FIRST commandment:

2 I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3 Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. 5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me: 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands to them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Not adore or bow down refers mainly to "strange gods" in verse 3.

Notice that verse 4, where you pretend to start "second commandment" mentions things, not people, and least of all people who are in some way close to the true God.

Even so, in the OT, it was understood as prohibiting depiction of saints, but this is mainly because one could not back then depict the true God. It's now 2023 years since one can that, and so one can also depict His friends as well without those images overshading Him or His Cross.

14:07 sth - as you mentioned Biblical archaeology, have you integrated my equation Göbekli Tepe as Babel of Genesis 10 and 11, or not?

Miqqedem means FROM the East, not TO the South by East.

* Here on the blog I can give it, under a video, trying to give an email might get the comment deleted. It's hgl@dr.com, and it's my public correspondence email, as further told here:

Correspondence de / of / van Hans Georg Lundahl : If you wish to correspond with me
http://correspondentia-ioannis-georgii.blogspot.com/p/if-you-wish-to-correspond-with-me.html

Yes, Homosexual People Already Had the Right to Marry

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Yes, Homosexual People Already Had the Right to Marry · New blog on the kid: Has Introibo Discredited the Orthodoxy of Fr De Pauw? · Is Trent 24, canon 10 a warrant for arranging someone else's celibacy? · Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl: Will This be Answered?

And I mean marry, not enter into legally "marriage equal" relations with someone of the same sex.

Q: I'm not homophobic, but if we allow gays to marry, wouldn't that mean they would pass the gay gene to their children?
https://www.quora.com/Im-not-homophobic-but-if-we-allow-gays-to-marry-wouldnt-that-mean-they-would-pass-the-gay-gene-to-their-children/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1
Hans-Georg Lundahl: Catholic convert, reading many Catechisms
19.V.2023: Since you say sth about passing on genes, I suppose you mean real marriage, as per Genesis 1:28, as per Mark 10:6. One man, one woman.

Your question is not about whether gay marriage can exist, but whether homosexual people can have access to heterosexual marriage.

First of all, legally, and canonically in the Catholic Church, they already have that right. You formulate it as if it were a proposal about future legislation, it is in fact current legislation. Lots of people act, lawlessly, as if the legislation were otherwise. But according to current legislation, being homosexual is not an obstacle to getting married either in the United States or in the Catholic Church.

Josh Weed didn’t get in trouble for marrying Lolly.

Charles Chaput of Philadelphia reminded homosexuals who were married that they could only have heterosexual sex, inside marriage, and no sex either heterosexual or homosexual, outside, was allowed. He would not have had to make this reminder if there hadn’t been people in the Diocese of Philadelphia who were both homosexual as per predominant spontaneous attraction at first meeting, and heterosexually married with both marriage licence and Church wedding.

Second, I am highly annoyed at people who presume sth is forbidden, because they don’t like it, and ask “if we allow” as if it were a purely theoretical thing to just maybe allow in the future after further debate, and advicing against allowing it.

Third, I am even more annoyed at people who are against the passing on of genes. Eugenics was fortunately abolished in Germany and German occupied Austria in 1945, and a bit later, like the 70’s, in some other places. It was abolished for a reason. It destroyed people’s lives.

Fourth, there is no gay gene. More than one gene can contribute, and none of them can on its own determine, and not even all together can determine, a person becoming homosexual.

Fifth, and foremost: God never forbade it. God even made a point of warning against those who would like to forbid it. 1 Tim 4:3.

Father John Clears King Charles III, I Clear Myself Before Him

IS KING CHARLES THE ANTICHRIST? A CATHOLIC PRIEST PROVIDES HIS ANALYSIS.
A Priest Abroad, 15 May 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InuIIyeNZuY

3:08 3500 BC is perhaps a carbon 14 date?

If so, it coincides with the carbon 14 date for the evacuation of En Geddi - which is also Asason Tamar, which was evacuated by Amorrhaeans in a context probably given in Genesis 14.

But Abraham did not live 3500 BC. According to the Roman martyrology for Christmas Day, he was born 2015 BC.

However, that means, Genesis 14 happened c. 1935 BC, around when Abraham was 80, since after the visit to Egypt which was after the vocation, and since before the birth of Isaac.

And that means, the actual year 1935 BC carbon dates as 3500 BC. This in turn means that what you just dated to "3500 BC" is in actual fact from close on 1935 BC - if the "3500 BC" is obtained by carbon 14, that is.

3:30 3000 BC? Still carbon date?

1778 B. Chr.
0.859766 pmC/100, so dated as 3028 B. Chr.

0.859766 pmC/100 = 85.9766 pmC.

So, this is from my tables, which not only with near certainty presume En Geddi "3500 BC" is Asason Tamar in Genesis 14, but also that Joseph was Imhotep and therefore Joseph's pharao was Imhotep's pharao, namely Djoser, with a raw carbon date of 2800 for a real date of c. 1700 BC, perhaps a decade or two earlier.

If this assumption is true, then the layout mirroring Orion would have been from 1778 BC. 157 years after Genesis 14, but not 500 real years after a real 3500 BC date.

12:20 depending on how fast the earth is spinning

May I remind you, there is at least a tension between today's feast, Ascension, and its implication, and Heliocentrism and it's Deep Space implications.

See my blog "Creation vs Evolution" (where you will also find "New Tables") and the article "Where did Jesus Go?"

13:58 I am not a perennialist in that sense.

If you speak of Pope Leo XIII calling St. Thomas along with Duns Scotus "philosophia perennis" with the implication that this is also true of some pagan philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, yes, I am a perennialist in that sense, which Chesterton and Lewis clearly also extend to Natural law in the Thomistic sense.

15:14 Was there any one who tried to get a gematria of 6-hundred - 6-ty - 6 to his name or title with name?

I have some gematrias of that value on some other guys, but failed to find one on him.

Do you think Elisabeth II was "the lioness" in Daniel?

15:51 Do you believe sacred geometry can be sacred in the sense of pointing to Him?

8 is the number of people on the Ark, and the number of hagiographers of the NT, except for those counting Hebrews as written by someone else than St. Paul.

To draw an octagon, you need to draw a cross ...

16:15 I totally agree on that one.

I am trying to the best of my ability to not keep it secret that octagons are drawn by crosses.

I also try to the best of my ability to not keep it secret that rising levels of carbon 14 can explain, not just in general, but in very minute detail, how a scale of carbon dates that extends beyond Biblical chronology perfectly fits into the real time-scale of the Biblical chronology (for which I am using Roman Martyrology, knowing from Church Historian Borgehammar, a Catholic, it was adopted by the martyrology in Rome (Usuardus being before the Roman Martyrology as per Trentine decree) from the Historia scholastica, which had it from St. Jerome's calculation, and St. Jerome partly basing his one Julius Africanus.

Quite a lot of this is abstruse, like Tolkien's interest in Beowulf and Anglo-Saxon Runes, none of it is esoteric, unlike that liar who pretended Tolkien asked the Illuminati for permission to "reveal occult knowledge" .... but you know, there are people who are so dumbed down in culture, they can't see the difference between abstruse and esoteric. The kind of people who believed John Todd's lie, and probably also ordered him to the false witness, in order to spread a lie that they already believed.

Allie Beth Stuckey Too

EN LENGUA ROMANCE EN ANTIMODERNISM Y DE MIS CAMINACIONES: Urban Camper · New blog on the kid: Candace Lacks Candour, as in Fairness · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Trump's Comeout as a Commie · Who's Abusing? · Other Video Where I Comment on SSPX Getting too Close to Islam Some Places · Allie Beth Stuckey Too · In Answer to Tim Alberta

'Loving the Foreigner' Means Opposing Illegal Immigration | Guest: Barry Latzer | Ep 807
Allie Beth Stuckey, 18.V.2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Sso8dIbQc

I jumped forward to the section "Psychiatric care and crime."

44:32 shutting someone up for "serious mental disorders" and adding medication = life sentence + torture.

Chesterton's novel Manalive features an improvised court case.
Prosecutors claim Innocent Smith needs to be institutionalised.
Defense claims he's a normal and cool person.

On the prosecution side, one Pym mentions the "modern morality" with the compassion that Barry Latzer considers as such.
He's countered (or even interrupted) by a friend of Innocent, who says:
"we know the modern morality - the old morality shut a man up for a year for stealing, the new morality shuts him up for life for cleptomania"

44:58 Way too many are still open, and still providing jobs for too many mental health personnel, and destroying too many lives of patients.

45:14 Probably Mr Neely got something that was far too close to continuing care for his taste, and he chose the way to get out of it ... he made sure to get himself killed.

I saw a mention his father had said he was not taking his medication, this means such a horrible thing was already foisted on him.

45:37 AND he's advocating for hospitalising people on the streets TOO.

A curse on this evil man!

46:06 He's calling absence of the worst form of modern slave hunt, except perhaps the absolutely dirtiest parts of sex traficking, a "dangerous policy" ...

He is a Calvinist who is repeat offending the Muslim case for slave hunting piracy. Trying to verify Calvinist confession, found nothing about his confession, no doubt about his Calvinist culture.

46:42 The beast's head was wounded.

Both East Block Communism and Psychiatry seemed to get the head wound at the same time, and now so many, even otherwise good people, seem to argue for KGB agent Putin or for shrinks. I e for healing the beast's head, and either of them is capable of false miracles.

47:14 He pretends it is a large percentage of the homeless.

Candace Owens pretended 9 / 10 were either mentally ill or drug addicts. I fact checked her.

I found numbers:
"alcohol abuse affects 30% to 40% and drug abuse 10% to 15%"
"30-35% of those experiencing homelessness, and up to 75% of women experiencing homelessness, have mental illnesses."

I forgot to reduce the 30 + 10 to 40 + 15 % by getting how many combine drugs and alcohol abuses.
But I did find the overlap for substance abuse and mental illness.

Largest possible number of people either abusing or mentally ill is, on my calculation:
40 + 15 + 35 - 20 % = 60 %
Smallest possible number of them is:
30 + 10 + 30 - 25 % = 45 %.

This means 40 to 55 % are clean both ways, and as said, rather more, since I forgot to calculate the overlap between alcohol and drugs.

THEN even this is too many dangerous percentages, since both substance abuse and mental illness are overestimated and overdiagnosed by people who want power, and especially so with homeless, by people who want power and have prejudices against the homeless, and even more so among homeless women.

They are victims of:

machism among homeless
anti-homeless prejudice among women
and the overlap between femininity and some of the mental symptoms.

Hear me out - I am not saying femininity is a mental symptom or feminine traits should be considered so, but I am saying that psychiatry has a history of bullying women. I e of making things actually very feminine into things THEY consider as mental symptoms.

47:42 A family "advocating" for someone getting hospitalised is the very reverse of advocating for them

Shane Keough: Considering hospitalization is always about pumping people up on Pharma, I would agree with you. Our allopathic system is a wreck and does not "heal" anyone, only creates more dependent pharma users. But there has to be an option to help people who are being harmed by mentally ill homeless.
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @Shane Keough How about prison or other penalties according to law for those doing the harming?

Most people who are homeless and most people who are (considered as or actually) mentally ill are not harming anyone.

49:49 As you mentioned halfway houses, this brings up the continuity of care policy.

US (most states and cities) have it, and it means:

you first show caregivers (in halfway houses and so on) you are fit
you then get an apartment, tied to some deal of continued contact with caregivers of those types.

Finland instead has housing first policy:

you are (not everyone, but Finnish citizens) given an appartment on fairly generous conditions
you then can apply for mental health care or addiction disintoxication if you feel you need it.
A) Quite a lot have lots harder time to showing themselves "capable" if they are on the street or in halfway houses.
B) Quite a lot who don't apply for care are still lots better off by simply having an apartment.
C) And this obviously without counting the people who actually didn't need care in the first place, contrary to certain ideologues, and would have been worse off for the constraints in applying it
D) And also not counting that halfway houses and other parts of the care system (including obviously closed mental hospitals) are wasting lots of tax money on counterpruductive, tyrannous measures, involving too many fairly paid experts in bullying and too many well paid for medications that are chemical torture.

And please note, I am not saying this as applying for a housing first programme, I am in fact a fairly productive writer, I am trying to get someone to get my work on the internet onto paper. Some young people should be interested, but they are probably blocked by parents or older people in the neighbourhood, or Leftist prejudices plus some fairly wild versions about what I actually stand for and what I actually did.

50:58 No, the horror stories were not exaggerated.

Too many mental health providers basically no more than just lost a job, they should have gone to prison and sometimes death row, in countries where death penalty is a thing.

52:27 Some public are very abusively poking into some homeless people's affairs, in order to "advocate" a "taking care of" ....

I have had trousers stolen, one a Netherlandish 18th C. peasant pant, and one Renaissance breeches, I have had dirty underwear placed in my things, to paint me as the dirty stinko, I had a hood stolen of the type they used in the Late Middle Ages, and with an URL to my YEC blog "Creation vs. Evolution" ...

I have had people come up to me every five minutes to say "hello how are you" who were people who only said that, only to disturb me, and that to test I wasn't an aggressive person, and how many of them painted me as "psychotic" just because of an angry "I don't like that question" or "too many people ask me that" - I don't know. That obviously when I am with my luggage, sleeping, eating, reading, sewing ...

When I am off my luggage, in a cyber or a library, on the internet, I have had people speaking of it when I came back as if I had been on a binge night in bars. Or something.

52:21 Without stepping over needles?
In Paris that problem doesn't exist. Basically.

Do you know why? Bc Paris has free needle exchange. Even a junkie will prefer to get the needle after use to one of those automats where in return they get a fresh needle.

In 14 years in the Paris region, most weeks in Paris some time, and nearly all of the time between First Confinement and recently when I got a library card, in Paris, I have seen extremely few needles lying around. Two or possibly three.

Tuesday, May 16, 2023

Correcting Some Historic Errors

Don Bosco Explains the Orthodox Churches | Ep. 48
Miracles and Prophecies of Saint John Bosco, 12 May 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdnjrUQknCs

4:18 Actually, Photius himself made peace with a Pope (certainly a Greek ethnic, favourable to him, doesn't mean he was no Pope), in 879.

The Photian schism lasted 10 years, he was himself instrumental in setting it aside. Or rather - even less. In 869, the former Patriarch was reestablished, so, he made peace with him.

As Photius didn't die in schism, one may piously hope he made it to heaven.

Now, the real origin of the schism was Caerularius. A prequel, the last 40 years prior to it, the Diptychs hadn't mentioned the Roman Pontiff. The Diptychs are now inserted into the current text of the Missals, like "una cum papa nostro NN, cum episcopo nostro NN" but back then it would have been written out, a separate tablet the celebrant looked on.

Now, Constantinople had ceased to mention the Roman Pontiffs in the Diptychs since 1012, when there was a clear dispute on whether Benedict VIII or Gregory VI was the true Pope.

Caerularius' own contribution went like this:

Normans had rashly committed sacrilege against the Host consecrated in Greek liturgy on Sicily
this was eventually corrected on Sicily
however it was known in Constantinople and the correction was either unknown or overlooked in anger
Caerularius declared unleavened hosts invalid matter
this resulted in a sacrilege against Hosts consecrated by Latin priests in Constantinople
and Caerularius did not impose a penance for the sacrilege
so Pope St. Leo IX sent cardinal Humbert to him, resulting in mutual excommunications.

6:03 In 867, Photius held a council excommunicating the Pope, not for papal claims, but for heresy.

He also opposed Papal claims on the matter of supremacy over Bulgaria.

Catholic theologians have since agreed that:

if a Pope became heretic he would lose the papacy on preaching the heresy (St. Francis of Sales)
if a Pope could become heretic he would lose the papacy on preaching heresy, but he most probably couldn't (St. Robert Bellarmine)
a heretic is ineligible to papacy, so a man otherwise elected to papacy but a heretic would be invalidly elected.

Same year he was deposed, 869 he was condemned, 877 he succeeded Ignatius (who had also held the Photian position on Bulgaria) and 879, he was reconciled to Rome.

Most Catholic theologians would agree 869 was the VIII Ecumenical council, some theologians on the other side have considered 879 so. Either way, Photius died reconciled with Rome, if not on all quarrels, at least free from excommunications.

6:13 No, Eastern Schismatics have NOT denied the Divinity of the Holy Spirit.

They have considered the filioque as implying such denial, wrongly, but just because they have wrongly accused us, doesn't make a symmetrical accusation from us over them right.

I am not saying St. John Bosco was calumniating, but he was repeating historical errors he had heard about them.

The denial of Purgatory is partly correct.

They do practise prayers for the dead, but explain the reason differently.

Greeks tend to say, when you pray for a dead man, you are retroactively praying for his last moments back before dying.

Some may also teach soul sleep, and consider one is praying for the dreams the dead experience before they wake up on Judgement day.

Russians often enough believe in "Airy Tollhouses" - a kind of midway between Purgatory and the Individual judgement prolonged over 40 days of tests (like whether a man will be able to give up his lust in these airy tollhouses or get dragged down to Hell for not doing so, along with the lust).

7:21 You have just given the reason why Russian Orthodoxy holds a more prestigious position than the Greek one, despite the latter having greater canonic dignity.

For centuries, the Greek priests were spiritually either debauched or at least compromised by Turkish domination.

It came up in the case of Ukrainean Church Independence a few years ago.

8:09 While Greeks and Latins were in communion, there may have been differences about not yet definitive doctrines before the schism.

Only at Lyons or at least Florence did an ecumenical council formally define in non-controverted terms the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son.

The text from 381 is not found in the Greek protocol and has been differently transmitted.

Monday, May 15, 2023

"Martyn Iles presents Living in Babylon"

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: "Martyn Iles presents Living in Babylon" · Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Unclarity of the French Language - Or of His Memory?

Most Christians Don’t Know THIS About Babylon
Answers in Genesis, 15 May 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7J_NGncv5s

Here are some very few moments when I think he was not beyond getting added to:

6:27 I think you got it somewhat backwards.

They did spread.

They may have worried about the spread leading to a scattering, only.
Or they may have worried about that and about "the next flood" (as Josephus tells us, they didn't rely on the Genesis 8 promise.)

Babel, when founded was not the sole place of human habitation, or even sole apart from Hebrews. It was the international meeting point - somewhere between what Cuzco was to Peruvians before the Spaniards and what Paris and New York is to us.

Ernest Camps

What are your sources for this?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Ernest Camps For the spread occuring before Genesis 11?

Two.

1) Own research while calibrating C14 dates to Biblical (Septuagint) Chronology puts Babel in Göbekli Tepe (so far) and men had come to Americas after the Flood before that.
2) Postilla in Libros Geneseos, by St. Thomas Aquinas, if it is a youth work of his, actually also states that the people coming to Babel were an élite, and not the whole human population.

So, this situation and the lack of "liquid currency" reminds me very much of how local chieftains in Peru would get people from villages to work for them, and then send them back to the villages with gifts, and they would themselves go up to Cuzco to serve the Inca (it means "Emperor" and not the ethnicity) and get back to their regions with gifts after a few months.

Walking from some regions of Earth to Göbekli Tepe would take c. 3 years, but if the Babel project lasted 40 years, between Noah's death and Peleg's birth (51 years apart) that's not a major problem.

Ernest Camps

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
1) a. So you are picking secular dates to support this? Septuagint only extends the timeline with +650years towards the flood. Not ~ +5000 that seculars impose.

b. Regardless of ages, you were unable to provide Bible verses supporting this location. Göbekli Tepe is at a location, where the verticals reach ~300m, which topographically isnt plains, but hills region.

You may want repeat the other points you made about this. I think one was: ...as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar...
But as I said, sometimes directions arent exactly like that in the Bible. This is so specially when we dont ultimately know the landing site of Ark - it may be "Nuhun Gemisi" spot, or not.

Here is one interesting, but likely non-related location/mountain for you to have thought anyway, I only lately found the name of it: Mount Balkaya ~2500m asl. It is Directly south from Ararat volcano (280km S), and close to ancient Nineveh (130 km NE). It is just that the shape of the mountain is strange; triangle and it is very large by size, ~9km sides.

Notice, that a town named Harran is 40km S from GT. Where the location seems to be agains the following notes:

Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.
-> Ur is also officially located in the vicinity of ~Babel
...to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
-> If the location of Haran is correct, then there seems to be some confusion with the extend of canaan as it is quite far from modern day Israel. But it seems to fit prophetical vision of ~"from river to river".
...that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites,
-> They did not stop at Haran &/ Göbekli Tepe, but went far further.
...But thou shalt go unto my country, and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac.
...and he arose, and went to Mesopotamia(1), unto the city of Nahor.
-> na·hă·ra·yim : This cant be Aram(ea), or theyve migrated quite a few km's over the millenias.
The inbetween rivers Eufrat-Khabur shouldnt be called that. But the inbetween region of Eufrat-Tigris extends well to Ur-Babel-Uruk

c. What is Biblical support for "..men had come to Americas after the Flood before that."

2) Im not familiar with this.

a) But as this happened during the earliest moments after the flood, it is unlikely that people from medieval times had some better knowledge about this. Quite a bunch of those Biblical locations are up to debate still todays.

b) According to MT, Peleg died 2 years before Noah. 51years was inbetween according to the others. But why would that timespan matter? MT: Nimrod was grand-granson of Noah, he possibly was born as early as 20 years after the flood; Selah was born 37 years after. 137 according to others. From those the building may have started as early as around 50 to 150 years after the flood. The late number would be closer to 700, if he lived as long as Selah 433/533.

And the project couldve lasted any amount years up to 500ish.

c) There is this school that says Peleg was about the continents. Lately I found ore more piece supporting this view:
Strongs 6389: "Peleg The same as peleg; earthquake (1) ; Peleg, a son of Shem -- Peleg."
Which (1)had eluded me this long.
So the objection AiG, CMi & c. make about earthquakes and tsunamis, seem to be dismissable with that notion.

Ps. The other epics, like Gilgamesh-Uthnapistim, Väinämöinen-AnteroVipunen, seem to suggest that Noah was alive during Nimrod's time, which could counter non-MT sources. Or just that those epics are too corrupted in this. At least the later is extremely distorted, like that the flood was caused by an axe in a knee...

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Ernest Camps 1) a. I don't think in the category "secular" dates.

I think in the categories:

historical, including Biblical actual dates (Biblical ones infallible, in at least one of the text versions and possible interpretations)
carbon 14 dates, from a certain time back and on backwards more and more inflated dates
other non-historic methods, giving mainly total pseudo-dates, in some cases dates suggesting lots of volcanos and cool water, i e THE date 2957 BC.

My work is in harmonising the carbon 14 dates with the historical especially Biblical ones, by posing a rise of carbon 14 levels in the atmosphere, which makes the amount by which carbon dates are inflated calculable.

b. "Göbekli Tepe is at a location, where the verticals reach ~300m, which topographically isnt plains , but hills region."

It is straight north of a huge square plain called the Harran plain, which includes but is not limited to Harran on the Turkish-Syrian border.

"...as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar..."

Yes, going from the landing place on Mt Judi to Göbekli Tepe is journeying FROM the East.

The Harran plain is a plain INSIDE the Mesopotamian two river border. Down at Woolley's Ur, or Nebuchandnezzar's Babylon, the land of Shinar (between Euphrates and Tigris) is inside the plain. Another criterium where "my" location makes more sense by not inverting the Biblical criterium.

"But as I said, sometimes directions arent exactly like that in the Bible."

Were you the guy who pretended Nebuchadnezzar's swoop on Tyre was proof you could meddle freely with Biblical directions? It was a bad argument then if it was you or if it wasn't, and it is a bad argument now.

"Here is one interesting, but likely non-related location/mountain for you to have thought anyway, I only lately found the name of it: Mount Balkaya ~2500m asl. It is Directly south from Ararat volcano (280km S), and close to ancient Nineveh (130 km NE). It is just that the shape of the mountain is strange; triangle and it is very large by size, ~9km sides."

As said, Mt Judi is my option for the landing place.

"Where the location seems to be agains the following notes:"

Interesting discussion. For the moment I neither agree nor disagree. Need to study that one more.

"The inbetween rivers Eufrat-Khabur shouldnt be called that. But the inbetween region of Eufrat-Tigris extends well to Ur-Babel-Uruk"

Göbekli Tepe is East of Euphrates, but it is also nearly due West of Tigris, since Mt Judi is just East of Tigris, and GT is nearly due West of Mt Judi. That there is also a Khabur between Euphrates and Tigris at this far North West is beside the point. It is still beside THE two rivers.

c. I combine carbon dates, both extended beyond real dates, but coming in the right order, as rising carbon 14 = lower date inflation, with the fact that carbon dates for GT (= Babel) are more recent than those for early people in the Americas.

2) a) i) Medieval people had closer access to parabiblical traditions, including the one in Josephus.

ij) I think you conflate what I have from Historia scholastica with what I have from Postilla in libros Geneseos.

iij) The Church Historians using Josephus and similar have been condensed in the Historia Scholastica, which directly says the project was after Noah died and ended when Peleg was born. A LXX reading without the second Cainan is presumed in the Historia scholastica reference for the date of Christ's birth, with 942 years between Flood and birth of Abraham - but LXX without II Cainan means, Peleg was born 401 years after the Flood, ie 51 years after Noah's death.

iv) Postilla gives me the room needed for using GT, since this archaeologically presumes spread before Babel. Notice, God's command was spread, the two things mentioned in Genesis, both fear of Babelians and act of God, are about scatter. There is a difference between scattering and spreading.

b) I am presuming the description in Historia Scholastica is probable enough, you want to explore other scenarios, do that, see if you come up with better tables for carbon recalibration, better matches archaeology and Bible event than I do between Flood and Genesis 14 (you will arguably agree that Genesis 14 coincides with the end of chalcolithic habitation of En Geddi, I have that from Osgood).

c) In that case, it is possible that Americas were still united to GT over the land bridge that sunk since then called Atlantis.

d (=your PS) I would say, when Nimrod advocated the tower project (though he didn't decide it uniliaterally, but as a stout hunter - of men - he became chief executive) he lied and claimed to have visited Noah, who was already dead. The Gilgamesh epic poses this visit as in a totally different context, but one which was less likely to harrass Nimrod. So, Nimrod gained prestige by a lie, and this prestige lived on way beyond the purpose of the lie, and was repurposed for another theme.

@Ernest Camps "Ur is also officially located in the vicinity of ~Babel"

Did you know "Ur" is Sumerian for "City" - it's more like "urbs" than like a proper name like "Roma"?

Did you know that Edessa, very close to Göbekli Tepe was and is again called Urfa? Now "shanli Urfa" = "venerable Urfa" ...

Ernest Camps

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
1) a. The trouble with those ruins is the same than secular claims about Jericho being the oldest city. The Bible itself tells it was not.
b. 2957 BC? it seems you are missing 50 years, Terah perhaps? AFAIK. the non-MT total missing years is 650.
c. I think there are just too many variables/assumptions going on with c14, to fully pay attention to them. GBY for your work tho.

b1 The Haran area is some 300kms W-SW from the location of that mountain @380m asl. And there is river Tigris just a stonethrow away from there, with plains up to 700m asl. surrounding it to every direction. Those higher , yet flat areas should of been free from the flood earlier.
b2 Why and how did they cross Tigris anyway?

b3 As said Nimrod was born somewhat after the landing, it means they had decades to move around. From ~Ararat volcano: guess which direction the topography is flattest to walk forth? Southeast. If they travelled 600kms that direction within those years, that would fit "ok" within the narrative, then there was only walking to west left.
Israel seemingly travelled even less with their 40 years at Sinai. It seems that their sense of directions were not that accurate to begin with. Yeah, there was something else going on there... It seems there may of been some troubles with directions going on. (1)

b4 From Mt. Judi location, they had to travel nowhere, and they would of had Noah & the oldies with them at all times.
But as stated, we dont even know the real landing site. My pennies go for Ararat volcano surroundings: there seems to be most artifacts thereabouts around. + The size actually matches.

"Another criterium where "my" location makes more sense by not inverting the Biblical criterium."
What do you mean?

"Were you the guy who pretended Nebuchadnezzar's swoop on Tyre was proof you could meddle freely with Biblical directions? It was a bad argument then if it was you or if it wasn't, and it is a bad argument now."
Indeed, and I still stand with statement, I dont recall you debunking that notion at all. = The king came specifically from north, but generally from east. (1) it is not about meddling freely , but seems to be a plausible possibility.

Mt. Balkaya doesnt even have to be a landing site. But it is an interesting local formation regardless.
An another geological thing about this is: AiG, CMi &. do not seem to recognize that plenty of mountains at Ararat region reach 4000-5600m asl., which counters the argument for 1½ mile deep flood. The opposition's view is that some of the mountain forming happened after the flood, during the time of Peleg, duration: 239-339 years.

"It is still beside THE two rivers."
That is true. But If you look at the map, you wont see many a river between those main ones. But Khabur is so, and it seems to set an another watery boundary.

c. "with the fact that carbon dates for GT (= Babel) are more recent than those for early people in the Americas."
That is an error, where you can adjust the times just to fit your narrative. It is just better to ignore those for now, when it contradicts the Book so severely.
+ That alone should hint you that GT was not Babel.

2) a) i) Why would that be. The time gap in between is what matters, not the length. I argue that we might have better access to some of things now, because sciences have advanced quite a bunch.
ij) Wdym? The point is: what was such medieval archeology about Babel that you think they had the upper hand over the modern one?
iij) How exactly did they have better access to Josephus than us? + Josephus is not exactly the Bible, is he?
"which directly says the project was after Noah died and ended when Peleg was born."
The Bible doesnt say that, so you may reconsider that position. There are also numerous historical claims about the tower, but they dont hold water from Bible Pov:
"The 14th-century traveler John Mandeville also included an account of the tower and reported that its height had been 64 furlongs, or 13 km (8 mi), according to the local inhabitants."
iv) That I can see, everything must be fit within worldview. But there would be numerous objections about this.
One would b that; do you realize that the arctics were basically under continental ice quite some after the flood. Those people would of had true dedication, plan, haste, equipment, food supplies, a good map and a compass to reach NA, within the supposed time - before the ice came.
It seems far easier to imagine that they reached the Bering Strait just and just before the ice melted rising the sea levels.
Or possibly they just boated there centuries later.

b) As I said, cant be truly sure about those numbers. They may give some vague approximations, but to resolve Biblical history with such pieces is too far fetched for me.

c) There may of been contact between Americas and "old" continents, up until Peleg did the final divide. It fixes a handful of Imo. faulty assumptions, like how did pumas get to NA, when they are said to be closest relatives to gepards.

d) "10And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel.."
He actually seems to have been a ruler; king, tyrant. Hunting seems to be generally a killing thing in the Bible, so it could of been humans, slaves, or animals like lions, or perhaps even dragons. The latter seems a slightly more plausible, why would of he killed his workers. But to kill a dangerous predator has always been a notable feat.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
WP: "Cuneiform ur is a syllabic for "ur", and an alphabetic for "u", or "r". In the Amarna letters, usage is sumerogrammic for English language "dog","
Quora:
"The name UR (AUR, as a Hebrew, derivative) means LIGHT. You could say, CITY OF LIGHT."

What exactly is your source for otherwise?
Australia ≠ Austria, believe it or not.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Ernest Camps Last things first.

"What exactly is your source for otherwise?"

L'Histoire Hors-série N° 99 - Mésopotamie - Là où tout à commencé - 05/04/2023

It also says that "Uru-ki" means basically "cityish" or "civil" if I recall correctly.

Another thing. I am not your adept. I am not your pupil. Nor an uncritical one of CMI or AiG. Consider me an independent researcher, including independent of you.

I am also not writing under the most comfortable conditions, so I am not in a mood for a long relaxed chat either.

Please don't take a tone (or practical measure) implying (or presupposing) that my discussing with you is some kind of reconsideration of my views. It's a routine defense of them.

Now to the rest.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
1) a. The trouble with your response is that while Jericho is clearly not older than Henoch in Nod, the Bible doesn't tell us whether it's older or younger than Babel. Just that it was not earlier in Nimrod's empire. AND there is no Bible for adding a "clearly not" in parallel to that about Babel = Göbekli Tepe.
b. There are more than one non-MT. I'm using the calculation of St. Jerome, based on Julius Africanus.
c. "I think there are just too many variables/assumptions going on with c14, to fully pay attention to them."

Well, I don't.

"GBY for your work tho."

Js 2:16. If you devalorise my results, and contribute to even more blocking of them, thus keeping me in poverty, what is your "GBY" worth?

b1 I fail to see your point.
b2 & b4 "Why and how did they cross Tigris anyway? From Mt. Judi location, they had to travel nowhere, and they would of had Noah & the oldies with them at all times."

After Noah's death, and especially after recalling the site where people saw Noah naked ... some wanted "change they could believe in" and that meant not feeling even slight shame about Noah, and _also_ not actually obeying his directions.

Hence, removal to a new international meeting place.

b3 "As said Nimrod was born somewhat after the landing, it means they had decades to move around."

Who says everyone moved around all the time?

way·hî bə·nā·sə·‘ām has an imperfect, but it is a wa + yiqtol form telling us what happened next. It would have been a one time decision.

"From ~Ararat volcano: guess which direction the topography is flattest to walk forth? Southeast."

1) No use to bring in Ararat volcano, it used to be called Mount Ağrı. _All_ of historical Armenia is "Ararat"
2) The Bible doesn't say "from the north" or "from the west" but "from the east"

"If they travelled 600kms that direction within those years, that would fit "ok" within the narrative, then there was only walking to west left."

If they went all the way to China and then came back to any place, they would also have been walking to the West when they actually arrived anywhere Babel was. That (or something like it) was the solution in Historia scholastica.

"Israel seemingly travelled even less with their 40 years at Sinai. It seems that their sense of directions were not that accurate to begin with."

Israel didn't follow its sense of direction as making a journey from Egypt proper to Canaan. They were roaming back and forth within the Sinai area.

"What do you mean?"

First criterium: landing place = Mt Judi (or anything east of it) and Babel = GT, means that miqqedem means miqqedem.
Second criterium, as you brought it up, in NW Mesopotamia you have the Harran plain _inside_ Mesopotamia, the presumable meaning of Shinar, in the area of Classical Babylon, you have Shinar, the two rivers, inside the area of a much bigger plain.

"Indeed, and I still stand with statement, I dont recall you debunking that notion at all."

Bad memory on your part.
1) Nothing says Nebuchadnezzar at that occasion came FROM Babylon. He would have been king OF Babylon even if he started the campaign from Assyria.
2) You specifically admitted they arrived from the North, and there is no reason why this arrival should not be the relevant point.

"An another geological thing about this is: AiG, CMi &. do not seem to recognize that plenty of mountains at Ararat region reach 4000-5600m asl., which counters the argument for 1½ mile deep flood."

The general view about very high mountains is, they rose after the Flood.

"But Khabur is so, and it seems to set an another watery boundary."

Which did not stop Greeks and Romans to call Edessa, 7 miles or 12 km from GT, "Edessa in Mesopotamia."

I shouldn't have said "beside the two rivers" but "between the two rivers" but as said my conditions of work are not comfortable.

c. "That is an error, where you can adjust the times just to fit your narrative."

I'm adjusting the carbon dates to fit:

the Biblical narrative
and the idea that one steep rise of carbon 14 levels is more probable physically than two even steeper ones separated by an also even steeper fall.

"It is just better to ignore those for now, when it contradicts the Book so severely."

You have failed to prove any contradiction to the book.

"+ That alone should hint you that GT was not Babel."

Only if you ignore the idea (sic)

[as I said, bad conditions, I jumped back and forth different parts, by distractions, should have said "the idea that spread happened before and 'they' who removed were an élite"]

2) a) i) Sciences may have advanced, but history isn't one.
ij) I think in history, tradition has the upper hand over archaeology. Medieval sources give me a more full spectrum of tradition than the modern debate, so, more to fit against any archaeology we have now.
iij) "How exactly did they have better access to Josephus than us?"

They had Church Historians actually using him, in this context, as opposed to having people mention him mostly only over Testimonium Flavianum.

"+ Josephus is not exactly the Bible, is he?"

No, but a source for Jewish tradition, nearly identic to what it was before Christ.

"The Bible doesnt say that, so you may reconsider that position."

The Bible certainly doesn't deny it. Only a Masoretic / Vulgate chronology would imply such a denial, while the chronology of St. Jerome pretty much confirms or demands the thing I said.

"There are also numerous historical claims about the tower, but they dont hold water from Bible Pov:"

You are forgetting the difference between local claims to fame and historical claims that are the actual source for historical credibility - including for the Bible, which is historically credible even before being recognised as God's word.

iv) "One would b that; do you realize that the arctics were basically under continental ice quite some after the flood. Those people would of had true dedication, plan, haste, equipment, food supplies, a good map and a compass to reach NA, within the supposed time - before the ice came."

We do not know how deep that ice was.

"It seems far easier to imagine that they reached the Bering Strait just and just before the ice melted rising the sea levels."

How about the Spanish theory, they crossed another land bridge, now sunk, the one now below the Atlantic Ocean? Atlantis?

"Or possibly they just boated there centuries later."

Given Babel = GT, carbon dated starting 9600 BC, and given mammoth bones and others in Old Crow Flats with signs of human tools being used carbon date 40 000 to 25 000 BP or 38 000 to 23 000 BC, given also that one steep rise of carbon 14 is more probable than two way steeper ones, with a steep decline between, this arrival in the Americas was before Göbekli Tepe.

b) Feel free to be as sceptical as you like. I've done my work, it can stand up to scrutiny.

http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

c) I agree that Atlantis hypothesis fixes pumas and gepards.

I'd just have the sinking of Atlantis _before_ Babel, as Younger Dryas (a carbon dated geological period!) is before GT.

d) "He actually seems to have been a ruler; king, tyrant. Hunting seems to be generally a killing thing in the Bible, so it could of been humans, slaves, or animals like lions, or perhaps even dragons. The latter seems a slightly more plausible, why would of he killed his workers."

A hunter of men in a building project would imply killing _shirkers_ (while rewarding workers). We have people from the GT period whom I consider as candidates for killed shirkers, refusing to take the mark of Nimrod.

"But to kill a dangerous predator has always been a notable feat."

Or a mammoth. I believe Nimrod did that kind of stuff in the palaeolithic, a few decades before GT (but with carbon levels rising and distorting carbon dates, the decades become millennia, like 40 to 51 years from (slightly in between) 2607 and 2556 BC become the thousand years from 9600 BC to 8600 BC in carbon dates.

Even mammoth hunting would have been communal, dinosaur hunting even more so, and in order to get his teams, he would have already practised manhunt in some form.

16:32 You might tell your audience that St. Augustine of Hippo noted this before you, after the sack of Rome by Alaric, in a work called De Civitate Dei, or in English translation City of God.

Sorry, hadn't noted you were speaking to youngsters, who may be less interested in exact references.

Ernest Camps: What are you on about? That the mysterly Babylon is Rome &/ Vatican?
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @Ernest Camps No.

Not the least. Not even whether the Vatican II Sect qualifies as such.

What Martyn Iles was saying was how Babylon could be so tolerant of all error, and then tended to single out truth for disfavour - this is not a totally new pov, I stated that I had read the same thing in City of God, which St. Augustine wrote after the sack of Rome. He believed POLITICAL Rome was Babylon, and there were still Emperors in Rome after he died.
Ernest Camps: @Hans-Georg Lundahl
This is the point (?):
"He believed POLITICAL Rome was Babylon,"
And you say you agreeing with this?
Hans-Georg Lundahl: @Ernest Camps Yes. The senate in his time still contained practising Pagans, and I think even had Pagan rites ongoing.

Circus games were still ongoing in Rome.

The Popes (Pope Leo, I think) escaped one of these sacks by obeying "get out of her" judging Apocalypse 18 to be referring to this (remnant of) Pagan Rome.

As a Catholic, why wouldn't I agree with this?

30:23 I am reminded of how someone analysed the plot of Lord of the Rings from a comment by Gandalf.

Yes, Tolkien was a Christian, he believed exactly that : evil means will never serve the evil purpose, but only harm it.

41:11 It so happens.

The cult of individual self can never be a complete Paganism.

In Genesis 2, God speaks as an individualist.
In Genesis 3, Satan speaks as a collectivist.

52:23 You would agree with me, when c. 20 years ago, at the outset of a carreere of writing on the internet and poverty, just before the end of my carreere as a student, I wrote an essay called "Antikristna akademiker" (both Swedish words are international, I won't translate), I was not expressing some kind of wild paranoia about what I had seen in my (in all, some not yet then) 5 years and 1 week + a failed quarterterm of academic life?

54:55 An audience of ONE - and of THREE.

St. Thomas says the major ones in the Old Testament - Patriarchs, Kings, Priests, Prophets - knew the Trinity and the as yet upcoming Incarnation, but were not allowed to directly tell.

58:43 I will not deny Daniel could have had sth to do with that.

I will however say, there is a tradition that the Magi had been waiting since Bileam or Balaam (both versions occur in Bibles) had made a prophecy. That's centuries before Daniel.

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere

Pages

Monday, May 22, 2023

Other Video Where I Comment on SSPX Getting too Close to Islam Some Places

Thursday, May 18, 2023

Disagreeing with Ray Comfort on Some Things

Yes, Homosexual People Already Had the Right to Marry

Father John Clears King Charles III, I Clear Myself Before Him

Allie Beth Stuckey Too

Tuesday, May 16, 2023

Correcting Some Historic Errors

Monday, May 15, 2023

"Martyn Iles presents Living in Babylon"

About Me

Fighting Totalitarian Takeovers