Arcadia Discussion Zone

Me too. I totally agree.

I want to express my displeasure with the unprofessional tone of discussion on this thread and would expect - no demand - more appropriate conversation from such a mature group.

Thank you.

yes. i agree.

Someone on the forum is pushing it way too far....what does it take Andy?

Its these theater of the absurd, sci-fi spin twists into the RLC enigma I go out of my way to mirror, just like Philip K Dick used his fertile imagination to imagine what life would be like further on down the road.

What Philip K Dick had to spread out over a 300 page novel to get in his scenario, posters here manage to accomplish that feat within the space of a few posts. Now this extreme tangentiality spin aspect is something I have brought up in dozens of threads hoping to re-connect the dis-connects.

The answer to what Sauniere found sho' as hell ain't ole bubba's humor mojo, y'awl. That would be a supreme feather in my cap if a document surfaces, perhaps like a Nostradamus quatrain, to the effect, ... when the dithering klown plince son of a bush loses his marbles in a mid-east sandbox and the agents of darkness select one of their own to replace him will arise a seer with outrageous humor, it will rain down frogs.

Has anybody found that missing quatrain yet?, if I'm gonna go down for posterity's sake, I want it made into a Hollyweird script as the final sequel to the prolonged denouement of the not as yet finished cult of the dead episode, when all of the spirits of Coronation Street gets bulldozed to make way for a rapid transit link.

If we're gonna speculate, like counting angels squatting on a needle tip why not put a lil' pizazz into the final script. Sauniere followed his script, no?

You are obviously not going to get banned Jake, 'cos you're one of God's chosen people and you all stick together no?

Returning to the topic of the thread, I quote from Philip Coppens on this site's 17 questions:-

That the kings of Aragon possessed a tremendous secret, an artefact even, which was very, very important. The Perillos family was their right hand man, and they helped them to safeguard this, once the Aragon kings realised they were not up to the task. The Perillos family just "buried" it and then desperately tried not to be linked with it, and even move abroad. Soon afterwards, desperate struggles to find it began. And, no, it's not the Ark of the Covenant... though it comes close.

So, a question for Roger - I assume you would be talking about the same "Object" here? Philip Coppens, therefore, sheds some more light on the path the object has followed over the years, it's custodians etc and then ends on a rather enigmatic note!

I take it that if you are talking about the same thing, there is, in reality a sufficient number of people with this knowledge to make it's eventual unveiling fairly inevitable? In the meantime, we can all have some fun following the trail of clues and making our own unique speculations!

Actually Richard, i had wondered if it was the Ark, because of some descriptions given by Eusebius.

I dont think for one minute it is the Ark, and obviously, Coppins thinks it isnt. But to say it comes close ....?????

It must obviously be something connected to the Jewish Temple treasure in some way ..... i have my reasons for this ..... but it is still hard to try and work out what it is referring to, even though it is supposed to be glaringly obvious.

I can accept an archaeological artifact, hidden and protected, that is ALMOST certain ...... but i dont see how it relates to the tomb of an important burial in RLB.

Either these are two separate strands of information/legend/traditions ... or somehow they are related.

de Cherisey saying the 'treasure' belongs to Sion, would probably be this artifact ... He is There Dead ... would probably refer to a burial ......

And while we are it .... is the Hautpoul family implicated because the village was created by, Ataulphe I, king of the Visigoths in 413?

Surely what Bérenger Saunière found was what his brother Alfred had stolen & hidden No?

Interesting, I have perosnally been looking at Constantine in all of this, who it is suggested may have held the object under the guise of the "chi rho labarum". It is interesting that Roger seems to identify the object as something not necessarily "christian" but which has been "christianised". We would therefore be looking at something older, not necessarily derrivative of Christ. I am guessing that in some way Constantine and then the Merovingians were able to use the object to give credence to their own rule and specifically, in Constantine's case, fusing the old Roman religions with christianised symbololism.

The "shame" in all this, I am taking to be the use of something thoroughly "pagan" within a Christian context. Shame, of course, being an entirely subjective thing.

It is curious to me that in this sense, the identity of an object much used throughout history by various parties, however enveloped in symobolism is not more well known.

It could well be something from the Temple given Coppen's comments.

Two additional points of interest:-

Constantine's mother, Helena, led an expedition to Jeruslaem where she reportedly recovered pieces of the true cross and the nails used in the crucifixation. However, this was in 325 well after the battle of Milvean Bridge and the appearance of the labarum in 312 - so there doesn't seem to be any direct link here and may well be all pure "legend" anyway.

Secondly, it was Constantine who had Abdon and Sennen moved and re-buried - was this linked to the ritual lineage of the "death cults" being discussed on this forum or a more innocent attempt to pay homeage to early Saints? In other words, is it the practices of Abdon and Sennen themselves we are supposed to be looking at or what was done to them post-mortem that is important?

Posted: 15 Jan 2009 9:26 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anybody interested in the word "Temple " here.....go on...give it a go...which temple?

Anybody read Joseph of Arimathea's blog yet?

Who stole what?

Maybe Sheila, except that wouldn't bring me too much closer to knowing what the object was - only who the custodians had been.

Do you mean that Berenger received paperwork from Alfred revealing the location of the object.........or the object itself?

You've been hinting across the forum of a persoanl knowledge of some kind, but perhaps not quite what Roger has in mind. Are you in agreement that there is a tangible and corporeal object involved here or more a body of "Knowledge"?

Hi Richard,

I had to smile.

I had already been thinking about his Constantines mother. Ok, she and Constantine were very close, and she did go and hunt round Jerusalem for artifacts. But i dont think this involvement with the 'True Cross' is particularly relevant. Did she find something else, or nothing? Her lineage is not particularly Roman .... i dont think ... or what i mean, is high ranking .....

Because it is something older than this. I agree that the reason why the Merovingians were able to legitimise themselves would be this alleged 'relic'

But how can a 'relic' purportedly allow a race of early kings to be sanctioned by the Church. The Church wasnt as strong as it became later .... and they did seem to rely on its survival for these strong Kings who went to war. Getting them to convert to Christianity to be able to rule well seems very well represented in the sources.

It all seems to related to that Germanic early history, and the 'fall' of the Roman Empire. The peoples who gained power when the fall of Rome created a power vaccum.
The date of the fall of the Roman Empire is dated to the day when Alaric marched on Rome.
I assume it is all related to this.

As to the labarum, or the standard....of Constantine. It must obviously be symbolic (although i think he did have a standard) - but this cant be the relic right? Maybe the standard represents something bigger ...

So how did Constaintine get it? And if it is related to the Jerusalem treasure and other stuff ..... i assume we look to the Romans themselves?????

I am Joseph of Arimathæa, who begged from Pilate the body of the Lord Jesus for burial, and who for this cause was kept close in prison by the murderous and God-fighting Jews, who also, keeping to the law, have by Moses himself become partakers in tribulation and having provoked their Lawgiver to anger, and not knowing that He was God, crucified Him and made Him manifest to those that knew God. In those days in which they condemned the Son of God to be crucified, seven days before Christ suffered, two condemned robbers were sent from Jericho to the procurator Pilate; and their case was as follows:—



The first, his name Gestas, put travellers to death, murdering them with the sword, and others he exposed naked. And he hung up women by the heels, head down, and cut off their breasts, and drank the blood of infants limbs, never having known God, not obeying the laws, being violent from the beginning, and doing such deeds.



And the case of the other was as follows: He was called Demas, and was by birth a Galilæan, and kept an inn. He made attacks upon the rich, but was good to the poor—a thief like Tobit, for he buried the bodies of the poor. Tobit 1:17-18 And he set his hand to robbing the multitude of the Jews, and stole the law itself in Jerusalem, and stripped naked the daughter of Caiaphas, who was priestess of the sanctuary, and took away from its place the mysterious deposit itself placed there by Solomon. Such were his doings.



And Jesus also was taken on the third day before the passover, in the evening. And to Caiaphas and the multitude of the Jews it was not a passover, but it was a great mourning to them, on account of the plundering of the sanctuary by the robber. And they summoned Judas Iscariot, and spoke to him, for he was son of the brother of Caiaphas the priest. He was not a disciple before the face of Jesus; but all the multitude of the Jews craftily supported him, that he might follow Jesus, not that he might be obedient to the miracles done by Him, nor that he might confess Him, but that he might betray Him to them, wishing to catch up some lying word of Him, giving him gifts for such brave, honest conduct to the amount of a half shekel of gold each day. And he did this for two years with Jesus, as says one of His disciples called John.



And on the third day, before Jesus was laid hold of, Judas says to the Jews: Come, let us hold a council; for perhaps it was not the robber that stole the law, but Jesus himself, and I accuse him. And when these words had been spoken, Nicodemus, who kept the keys of the sanctuary, came in to us, and said to all: Do not do such a deed. For Nicodemus was true, more than all the multitude of the Jews. And the daughter of Caiaphas, Sarah by name, cried out, and said: He himself said before all against this holy place, I am able to destroy this temple, and in three days to raise it. The Jews say to her: You have credit with all of us. For they regarded her as a prophetess. And assuredly, after the council had been held, Jesus was laid hold of.

After you read what this woman witnessed, you have the answers to many of these quandaries.

http://www.jesus-passion.com/DOLOROUS_P ... CHRIST.htm

No answers here whatsoever.

For all i know - she was on drugs ....

welcome richard
what you write, reminds me of the movie 'revelation' (romulus films)...the nails and what they were used for...
but that is a film of fiction...

all of me,
paula

Hello Paula,

I haven't seen that particular film but having done a quick Google search, it looks good! One for my ever-growing list perhaps.

Of course, there's a point in here somewhere that guards us against slipping too much into viewing this whole story through the prism of Hollywood!

of course. this film...touched me deeply and tweeked my mind regarding DNA issues.

it was suggested to me, by an interesting individual...is all.

all of me,
paula

Never heard that version about Katharina Emmerich.

bergeredearcadie, would you tell what kind of drugs and the source, please ?

???

It was a joke.

English humour .....

I dont believe these 'visions' of Katharina Emmerich, and i prefer historical documentation and this kind of thing regarding religious history ....

Not interested in people who have dreams, visions and those that think this kind of stuff is more acceptable than 'real' history.

And before you ask, real history to me is archaeology, documentation, eyewitness accounts etc etc

perhaps you need to study the psychology of "eyewitness accounts" Sandy.

All of Me,
Paula

Eyewitness accounts of what?

I know all about the idea that people can look at the same event, and report it in different ways. Thats not what i am talking about, if thats what you mean....
And i also know that memory and recall can be faulty, when repeating an eyewitness account, but again, that isnt what i am talking about ...
We should use archaeology, documentation, and eyewitness account for the event known as the Crucifixion.
As it is we dont have hardly any of this evidence which is acceptable for historians.
So i am not going to take the word of a 'mystic' .....

People demand this level of 'evidence' for RLC research, so why not the Crucifixion?

i asked a valid question based upon your statement of what you were searching for...

please do not advance such energy upon me.
you used the words "eye witness accounts"...and i , as a student of psychology (sorry) ask you to do your research here. you are all over the place and you need to focus.

i did defend you. now...
i shall let your words speak for themselves.

all of me,
Paula