It is currently Fri Oct 19, 2018 12:49 pm

All times are [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:17 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 844
Rook Hawkins, also known as Tom Verenna, continues his campaign against Acharya at
Code:
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/james-mcgrath-is-right-why-creationists-and-zeitgeist-mythicists-are-comparable/


I sent the following comment to respond to this blog, but Rook chose not to publish it. His decision illustrates the old apologist adage that censoring debate is a key to toady propaganda campaigns.


"Tom, I hope you don’t mind me continuing to gnaw this bone of your reaction to mythicism.

When I first heard the mythicist theory several years ago I was frankly shocked by it and found it entirely laughable. How could Jesus Christ, the most quoted individual in the Oxford Book of Quotations, be an invention? I had grown up with the assumption that the gospels were basically historical, minus the impossible miracles, and provided a basis for the moral compass. As I looked into this debate, especially via the work of Earl Doherty, the arguments that were decisive for me were that Philo never mentions Christ in his abundant writings despite his strong contemporary interest in messianic movements in Palestine, and that the supposed Josephus mention is not used by apologists for centuries until Eusebius, the father of so-called ‘pious fraud’.

Forensically assessed, we can see that the writers of the Bible had opportunity, motive and method to fabricate the story of Jesus. This claim is so emotionally shocking for true believers that they block their eyes and ears to prevent the heresy from contaminating their faith. The result in the universities is that theology has become an enclave, a group who accept dubious philosophical assumptions as an entry card to the club. The result is that theologians are politely ignored with derision and condescension by empirical scholars, and churches are in steady decline, seen as hypocritical and irrelevant.

Now, the Egypt alien question that you find so repugnant is illustrative of this same type of emotional reaction. I am agnostic about how the pyramids were built as I do not know. You however, view my attitude as startling evidence of insanity, seemingly holding that it is so obvious that the alien story is impossible that anyone who gives it credence is a lunatic and crank. This despite the issues of design, motive, scale and precision etc that have not been satisfactorily explained.

Similar agnosticism about the existence of Christ, recognizing that fabrication is plausible, is derided with emotionally charged terms such as creationism. True believers react with fury to alternative visions of history. They have constructed a beautiful academic edifice on foundations of sand. The whole house will collapse if its historical literal foundation is undermined, but that looks to be the inevitable logical conclusion of following what Christ supposedly said to Pilate – ‘I came into the world to bear witness to the truth’.

If you really want to make comparisons to creationism you should criticize believers in absurd doctrines such as the virgin birth and the physical resurrection. These are symbols of real spiritual ideas. It makes far more sense, recognizing that the miraculous is allegory for deeper wisdom, to also say that the whole story of Christ is primarily an allegory for a cosmic myth of redemption, with continuity with earlier narratives."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rookwatch
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 8:42 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Yeah, Rook is a prick. I'm not seeing any reason for him not to post your comments though. You're always polite, calm and well mannered. I used to be but, I've come across to many sociopaths like Rook and just don't have the patience for pathological liars like Rook anymore.

Quote:
Rook "First, you should know Robert comes to us from ******* Murdock’s forum (and fan base–the fan base which is surprisingly cult-like and neopaganish–you will soon see what I mean when I am attacked in the comments section of this blog post mere minutes after I hit the ‘publish’ button. I swear it’s like a swarm of locusts that consume all sanity in its path)."

LOL, You were the only one I know even posting over there at all Robert so, you, all by yourself, were like a "swarm of locusts," Robert? Or is it more likely that Rook just couldn't handle any challenges or criticism whatsoever?

I also couldn't help but notice how the blog by Rook/Tom you were posting in titled 'Ancient Aliens in Egypt?' made no mention of Acharya or Zeitgeist part 1 whatsoever but, it was convenient for Rook to apply the 'guilt by association' and strawman fallacy in his newer blog 'James McGrath is Right: Why Creationists and ‘Zeitgeist Mythicists’ are Comparable,' demonstrating once again just how juvenile he still is. Rook mentioned Acharya several times in what looks like an obvious attempt to smear her yet again, and all mythicists and anyone who enjoyed Zeitgeist part 1, with ridicule over some vague alien thing that has nothing to do with Acharya or Zeitgeist at all:

Quote:
Rook "(which is why ‘Zeitgeist mythicists’ buy into this sort of horse crap–it’s not that different than what ******* Murdock proposes in her books)"

The problem with that is, Rook hasn't read her work. Ask him to substantiate that claim and he will fail - proving that he is a lying sack of shit. So, he's obviously trying to paint us all with one broad brush and he's being blatantly dishonest about it. Take notice on how at his blog he posts every negative, trashy link he can find but, he NEVER provides Acharya's responses to them proving them wrong. Rook could not be any more intellectually dishonest - he wins a gold star on that front.

In fact, something close was brought up the other day and I added it to the FAQ's:

Does Acharya subscribe to the ancient astronaut theory?

Quote:
Rook "I don’t even call myself a scholar or expert"

LMAO!!! I still remember not long ago when Rook Hawkins loved to proclaim that he was a "Historian, bible and ancient text expert" with just a mere high school education. He will never be a scholar without a real scholar standing with him holding his hand. I have yet to discover why any scholar would give him the time of day.

Rook "In fact, when Richard Carrier ... (He's my hero.)"

LMAO!

It gets even better when Rook cites Dr Kenneth Feder at the bottom. Little does he know that he was one of Acharya's professors and that he has written a positive review for Christ in Egypt here.

Here's McGrath's blog titled: Zeitgeist Mythicists
Code:
http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2010/11/zeitgeist-mythicists.html

I have an old thread on Rook and the RRS here -

The Jesus Mythicist Campaign - Rational Responders

You will get a sense from my very first post that I thought we were on the same team as the RRS. I was originally in support of the RRS and Rook. In my thread linked just above, you will see the nastiness by Rook and his minions over at the RRS spread a constant stream of lies and smears towards Acharya while they knew next to nothing about her work. Eventually, Rook banned me and a couple others here from the RRS for proving him to be a liar when it comes to Acharya and her work. He hasn't changed a bit, has he Robert?

Rook/ Tom Vern is a rotten, intellectually dishonest piece of shit - who lies and smears Acharya at every opportunity he gets. He's constantly trying to advertise what he thinks is her real name by posting it everywhere when he has no idea - ask Rook for his evidence for that. I hate that SOB for all his lies. He's a lying creep who is so obviously jealous of Acharya. It all leads back to Richard Carrier too - that's his "hero!" Carrier is responsible for influencing Rook to toss those hateful smears and defamation at Acharya in the first place. Carrier needs to put a leash on his rabid dog. Richard Carrier on Zeitgeist part 1

This blog is funny - Rook Hawkins' review of Acharya S

Rook Hawkins/Tom Vern is a scholar wannabe, who's really an embarrassment to all freethinkers and mythicists everywhere.

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rookwatch
PostPosted: Sat Nov 27, 2010 8:59 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
So, Rook is spreading more smears HERE. I'm just gonna go ahead and re-post it here.

---

This has been sent to me. It's a blog posted November 13, 2010 by Rook Hawkins/Thomas Verenna endorsing a blog by 'muertos,' Edward Winston's buddy from the Conspiracy Science (con-sci) website that has been exposed throughout this very thread. Yes, the same one mentioned by our friend, 'Voice of Reason' just above.

So, Rook/Tom has officially joined with the ATHEIST PATHOLOGICAL LIARS at con-sci spreading more SMEARS about Acharya S and her work. Acharya S, still to this very day has never done a damn thing to any of those punks. Search her website at Stellar Housepublishing.com or Truthbeknown.com and she makes no mention of him anywhere. And some people still wonder why we are appalled at these malicious smears? Others in academia, however, are catching-on by seeing what Rook is really about. He is ruining his own credibility. :lol:

Quote:
A Great Blog Post Debunking Zeitgeist and ‘Zeitgeist Mythicism’
Code:
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/2010/11/13/a-great-blog-post-debunking-zeitgeist-and-zeitgeist-mythicism/

Rook says: "I found this blog post to be exceptionally well-written and had to share it with my readers. Since I have been on what is becoming more and more like a campaign against such rubbish, I have had the pleasure of some excellent conversations with colleagues on the subject of pseudoscience and its continued success in the social world of our contemporary age. The biggest drawback to real science/history is that conspiracy theories propose faux ideas about Academia and this blog article not only shreds such perceptions, it tears into...Murdock’s books and credibility. Here is an excerpt from Part 1 (aptly named ‘How Academia Really Works’):....."

Here's a blog that shows Rook for what he really is:

"Thomas Verenna is a lying idiot"
http://thomasverenna.blogspot.com

I guess we need to compile all the smears about Acharya S and her work by Rook Hawkins/Thomas Verenna at Rookwatch

Rook Hawkins/Thomas Verenna has ruined his own credibility with all the smears he has spread about Acharya S and her work - even though he's never read it. He is constantly advertising what he thinks is her real name, which has been addressed in the FAQ's: Why does Acharya S use a pen name?. Rook either doesn't realize that she has serious security issues or he just doesn't care. Either way, it's extremely irresponsible and dangerous and he WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

Rook is now well known as another pathological liar who is an embarrassment to all atheists and freethinkers everywhere.

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rookwatch
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:39 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2301
Location: Everywhere
Richard Carrier looks and sounds a lot like Andy Dick. Who knows, maybe it's just some comedy act the whole way through. :lol: Richard and Rook are both so dam stupid at times that I find it difficult to take any of their assertions seriously anymore.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 6:47 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 844
Tom Verenna has posted a blog asking why if an eight year old can be published in peer review journals, Christ mythicism cannot.

I sent him the following comment which he has not published.

The reason is the deeply entrenched intellectual bigotry and prejudice within academia. To assert that Jesus never existed shocks people’s faith more than atheism. Past suppression of the debate is then used to justify current censorship. Theologians are the gatekeepers in this field, and they have vested interests in concealing the deception at the origin of Christianity.
Code:
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/journal-publishes-8-year-olds-but-not-acharya-s/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:07 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:32 am
Posts: 1987
Location: U.S.A.
Very true, Robert. Without censoring and alike, they'd be only professors in the Mythology dept of universities, if even that.

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:43 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2301
Location: Everywhere
Mriana wrote:
Very true, Robert. Without censoring and alike, they'd be only professors in the Mythology dept of universities, if even that.


True.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 10:07 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 844
Tat Tvam Asi wrote:
Mriana wrote:
Very true, Robert. Without censoring and alike, they'd be only professors in the Mythology dept of universities, if even that.


True.


When theology breaks apart through the observation that its claims are much older than they say, then mythology will gain higher public status.

For example, if the story of Lazarus is shown to be an old Egyptian story borrowed by Christianity, the meaning of the story is mythic rather than historic, and the literal edifice of church tradition cannot stand on grounds of false historic claims. When Jesus says he speaks in parables, he is talking about far more than is conventionally understood, up to the point that his own existence is a parable.

Tom Verenna asks why mythicism is excluded from academic discourse. This is actually a very good question, although I suspect that Tom may struggle to understand the answer. Mythic thought confronts deeply embedded cultural trends and is regarded as too emotionally painful to discuss, so is simply suppressed as taboo. This tangled barrier of prejudice has to be understood and analysed before dialogue on myth will be allowed. Stellar imagery is one good path into understanding the ancient seers, but the cultural barriers to discussing cosmic myth are formidable.

Doris Lessing analyses this psychological problem in her Sufi science fiction series Canopus in Argos, where the ignorant masses are depicted as being trained only ever to look at the ground and never the sky.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 10:30 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Earl Doherty does a fine job of expressing "why mythicism is excluded from academic discourse" here.

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:43 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 844
Hear the apologists talk to each other, with Tom's latest smears against Acharya, with him supporting the comment of one of his cultists implying that Acharya is anti semitic.

I should note, this material about precession of the equinox is entirely irrelevant to tropical astrology, which is based on the solstices and equinoxes not on some occult stellar emanation. Just watch out though, if you say that to a witch burner such as some of Tom Verenna's friends they will start trying to see if you weigh more than a duck.

Quote:
Wobbly Earth Means Your Horoscope is Wrong
Posted on January 14, 2011 by Tom Verenna
Code:
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/wobbly-earth-means-your-horoscope-is-wrong/#comment-1306

Well, for all of you who are following the stars and looking to constellations to determine your fates, you are probably unaware that you’re doing it wrong…
If you look to your horoscope for a preview of your day, look again: You’re probably following somebody else’s supposed fate.
Thanks to Earth’s wobble, astrological signs are, well, bunk. (Or even more bunk than you might expect.) Astrological signs are determined by the position of the sun relative to certain constellations on a person’s day of birth. The problem is, the positions were determined more than 2,000 years ago. Nowadays, the stars have shifted in the night sky so much that horoscope signs are nearly a month off. [Read: Why Your Horoscope for 2011 Is All Wrong ]
“Astrology tells us that the sun is in one position, whereas astronomy tells us it’s in another position,” said Joe Rao, SPACE.com’s skywatching columnist and a lecturer at New York’s Hayden Planetarium.
The shift is caused by precession, the wobble in the Earth’s axis caused by the gravitational attraction of the moon to the Earth’s equator. Precession popped into the spotlight this week after Minnesota Planetarium Society board member Parke Kunkle told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune about the gap between the astrological and the astronomical view. The story spread around the Internet quickly, but it’s actually old news, Rao said.
Very old news.
“The earliest known astronomer to recognize and assess the movement of precession was Aristarchus of Samos, who lived around 280 B.C.,” Rao told LiveScience.
via Wobbly Earth means your horoscope is wrong – Technology & science – Science – LiveScience – msnbc.com.
Just saying….

Tom Verenna, on January 14, 2011 at 8:17 am said:
What will D.M. Murdock do now? That is the question…
Ari, on January 14, 2011 at 8:43 am said:
Haha. My first guess is she’d call everyone stupid, claim they have never read her work and then send a group of her rabid followers, including a guy who actually had a website called Jew Watch to send you the most vile emails you have ever seen.
Tom Verenna, on January 14, 2011 at 8:45 am said:
So… business as usual, then?
Ari, on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 am said:
Yep! Glad I am not the only one that recognises that pattern.
Tom Verenna, on January 14, 2011 at 8:54 am said:
Ari, spend some time reading some of the posts I have here on mythicism (the ones that rail on Zeitgeist) and you’ll see they repeat that pattern everywhere… this blog, your blog, everyone’s blog. Say something critical about Zeitgeist and you’ll find out the patterns pretty quick.
Code:
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/?s=zeitgeist


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 10:41 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2301
Location: Everywhere
WTF does the accuracy of horoscope readings have to do with Acharya or astrotheological studies? Are these two totally dense or what?

Let's see, she writes about how ancient peoples studied the heavens and personified heavenly bodies with elaborate myths. They knew about precession since way back - sphinx, Nabta Playa, etc. They had elaborate concepts about the Great Year. So if the horoscope readings are off then some how Acharya is wrong for stating what these ancient people believed?

Do these two idiots think that Acharya is giving out daily horoscope readings or something? I can't even imagine how they've tried to link this to her aside from the fact that she uses words like astrological, astromythological, and astrotheological when describing religious beliefs passed down from ancient cultures.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:53 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:32 am
Posts: 1987
Location: U.S.A.
I don't see how it will affect anything Acharya has said. They have supposedly added a 13th character to the zodiac, which Acharya allowed for in her books when she mentioned that some zodiacs have 13 and when Xianity came along they dropped one. It is still the same thing and I don't see it changing anything that she has stated.

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:54 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
That's right Tat and Mriana, the issue with the 13th zodiac sign has no affect on Acharya's work. Rook wouldn't know that because he knows almost nothing about her work except that he doesn't like it. The main reason he doesn't like it is because his hero Richard Carrier doesn't like it, who has never read a single book of hers. There's pattern for ya.

Speaking of "patterns," how about Rooks pattern? Lets examine Rooks pattern - he writes those crappy blogs on topics or issues he doesn't like then tries to imply that it's somehow related to Acharya (a fallacy called 'guilt by association') just to try to bludgeon her with derogatory comments when nothing could be further from the truth.

Then, when someone who's actually read her work and knows he's full of it comes along to call him out on his bullshit, he repeats his mantra of name-calling everyone "fanboys" and claims something similar to what Ari said:

"My first guess is she’d call everyone stupid, claim they have never read her work and then send a group of her rabid followers, including a guy who actually had a website called Jew Watch to send you the most vile emails you have ever seen."

Keep in mind that we're dealing with juveniles here. People who make utterly false claims about another authors work they've never read are intellectually DIS-honest to say the least. Apparently, Rook/Tom has a problem when his own intellectually dishonesty is exposed as well as his followers at his blog or at least Ari. Trying to paint Acharya as anti-Semite is laughable and shows that these guys really don't know anything about her work.

So, Rook/Tom makes it categorically clear to anyone who can take a hint by reading his blogs that he is blatantly jealous of Acharya S and he's a misogynist. She has never done a damn thing to Rook/Tom but he insists on making derogatory comments about her, her work and anyone who's actually read her work. It's almost like Rook has started his own cult of hate. Like Islam, in the sense in that, he tries to ridicule them into submission and censorship. It's just more discrimination, biases, bigotry, prejudice, abuse, harassment and misogyny by Rook/Tom.

Then, Rook/Tom gets upset when he is held accountable and responsible to the lies and malicious smears he constantly throws at Acharya S at every opportunity he gets. Yet, after years of this juvenile and unprofessional treatment, he still can't understand why people who've actually read her work and know better would be pissed and just want to set the record straight. Rook/Tom wants to make an endless stream of 'guilt by association' lies and smears and he doesn't ever want anyone to point out that he is embarrassingly wrong. The idea that Rook/Tom deserves a severe bollocking never occurred to him. Perhaps he was raised as spoiled brat who got away with everything and simply isn't familiar with being held accountable or responsible for his words and deeds in any way whatsoever. Rook/Tom is an embarrassment to freethinkers.

Here's a little reminder of who Ari is:

Ari is another troll who was editing Acharya's Wikipedia page trying to ruin it as well as post lies and smears across many blogs etc.

Anyway, trying to debunk the motif of the 12 based on a modern development such as the addition of Ophiucus into the mainstream zodiac is yet another sign of ignorance of ancient mythology and religion not to mention disingenuous. Regardless of how long the 13th sign has been known about, it was not factored into mainstream mythology dating back thousands of years. The motif is and has been the TWELVE, as is evidenced in numerous artifacts and writings from hundreds to thousands of years ago.

For example, we have artifacts of gods surrounded by the twelve signs - or even 11, but not 13 - centuries before and into the common era. These include Dionysus, Mithra and Serapis, as specifically concerns the signs.

The zodiac at Denderah has multiple constellations, but to my knowledge there are only TWELVE in the central panel. Ra, Osiris and Horus are associated with TWELVE followers, who are most significantly the hours of the day and night - there are not 13 hours of day and night.

When Josephus and Philo discuss the TWELVE tribes of Israel, they compare them to the TWELVE signs of the zodiac.

Into the common era, we find artwork in the Christian world with the sun/Jesus in the center surrounded by the TWELVE apostles who are sometimes put in place of the TWELVE signs of the zodiac and who are at other times surrounded by the TWELVE signs of the zodiac.

There are TWELVE Olympian and Roman gods, as well as TWELVE labors of Hercules, which are clearly representative of the signs of the zodiac.

It is obvious that there is no common ancient tradition of a god or hero with 13 - the motif is about TWELVE.

For more information, see the massive list of the TWELVE motif compiled in the New "ZEITGEIST Part 1 Sourcebook".
Quote:
"The use of 12 in the Bible itself is so ubiquitous that it is logical to presume these groupings reflect not an actual count, but, rather, a common formulaic theme, based on the prevalence of this sacred number in the Pagan world as well.

Biblical examples:

The 12 Princes of Ishmael (Gen 17:20)
The 12 Sons of Jacob (Gen 35:22)
The 12 Tribes of Israel (Gen 49:28)
The 12 Prophets and Kings of Israel
The 12 Wells of Water (Exd 15:27)
The 12 Pillars of the Lord (Exd 24:4)
The 12 Stones of the Breastplate (Exd 39:14)
The 12 Cakes of the Tabernacle (Lev 24:5)
The 12 Princes of Israel (Num 1:44)
The 12 Oxen of the Tabernacle (Num 7:3)
The 12 Chargers of Silver, Bowls of Silver and Spoons of Gold (Num 7:84)
The 12 Bullocks, Rams, Lambs and Kids of the Offering (Num 7:87)
The 12 Rods of the Princes of Israel (Num 17:6)
The 12 Stones of Joshua (Jos 4:8)
The 12 Cities (Jos 18:24, 19:25, 21:7, 21:40)
The 12 Judges of Israel (Jdg 3, 4, 6, 10, 12, 13)
The 12 Pieces of the Concubine (Jdg 19:29)
The 12 Servants of David (2 Sa 2:15)
The 12 Officers of Solomon (1 Ki 4:7)
The 12 Lions of Solomon (1 Ki 10:20)
The 12 Pieces of Jeroboam‘s Garment (1 Ki 11:30)
The 12 Stones of Elijah (1 Ki 18:31)
The 12 Bronze Bulls of Solomon (Jer 52:20)
The 12 Disciples/Apostles of Jesus (Mt 10:1-2)
The 12 Baskets of Bread (Mt 14:20)
The 12 Thrones in Heaven (Mt 19:28)
The 12 Legions of Angels (Mt 26:53)
The 12 Patriarchs of Israel (Acts 7:8)
The 12 Stars of the Woman‘s Crown (Rev 12:1)
The 12 Gates, Angels and Pearls of Holy Jerusalem (Rev 21:12, 21)
The 12 Fruits of the Tree of Life (Rev 22:2)

Pagan examples:

The 12 Ahhazu or Demons of the Sumerians238
The 12 Tablets/Adventures of Gilgamesh239
The 12 Gods of Egypt240
The 12 Divisions of the Tuat241
The 12 Companions of Horus/Osiris
The 12 Olympian Gods
The 12 Tasks of Hercules
The 12 Daughters of Priam242
The 12 Children of Amphion and Niobe243
The 12 Daughters of Boeotia and Metope244
The 12 Gods of the Romans and Etruscans
The 12 Sons of the Etruscan Mother Goddess245
The 12 Shields of Mars246
The 12 Altars of Janus247
The 12 Aeons of the Gnostics
The 12 Devas of India248
The 12 Names of the Indian Sun God Surya
The 12 Terrifying Aspects of Shiva249
The 12 Adityas of the Indian Mother of Worlds250
The 12 Labors of the Virgin-Born Arjuna251
The 12 Generals of Ahura-Mazda252
The 12 Aesir of the Norse253
The 12 Berserkers of the Norse254
The 12 Mountains of Ebhlenn255
The 12 Horse-Children of Boreas256
The 12 White Horses of the Polish Sun God257
The 12 Stones of Cenn Cruiach258
The 12 Rivers of the Elivagar259
The 12 Horses and Hounds of Gwydion260
The 12 Moons of China261
The 12 Generals of the Japanese Divine Physician262
The 12 Yiyantsinni of the Navaho, Pueblo, Iroquois263
The 12 First People of the Navajo264

Ignoring all of this evidence in order to prove some point out of spite is a sign of intellectual dishonesty and puerility. It also reveals that someone who pretends to be an expert is not and that he is not subscribing to any kind of scientific methodology but is acting out of hostility and other emotions.

Image

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 1:28 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:32 am
Posts: 1987
Location: U.S.A.
Well, I also have a sneaky suspicion that Rookie still has a Fundie mindset too. He might not be Xian, but he probably grew up in that environment and hasn't let go of all those views. He seems to want to see the Bile as being historical, which it is not. Anyway, that is what I gather from going around with him on Irrational Response Squad.

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:31 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Posts: 2301
Location: Everywhere
This argument is ridiculous through and through. It just goes to show what lengths he'll go to try and find something, anything, that could appear to discredit Acharya at first glance. And he's shown his ass.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Truth Be Known | Stellar House Publishing
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Live Support