Arcadia Discussion Zone

"The Three Days of Darkness," has more obvious immediate relevance to the concerns of this Review. (The editor makes it clear later in the book that he believes the Grand Canyon to have been a sudden occurrence, connected with the earthquakes which, according to the Book of Mormon, accompanied the crucifixion of Christ.) The myth purports to have taken place at Rush Lake, west of Parowan, Utah, and tells of the three days of thick darkness which fell over that area when Un-Nu-Pit, the devil, killed the younger god, Shinob. It was impossible even to kindle fire, and the people were near despair. Fortunately, the voice of Tobats pierced the darkness, and that god finally found a way to disperse the gloom. Later, in revenge, he slew Un-Nu-Pit and thereby brought Shinob back to life.

The editor expressly takes this event, as well as the previous story of the creation of the Grand Canyon, as literally historical. (He points, in this context, to the numerous cinder cones which dot southern Utah.)



Paracas, Peru - a megalithic carved stone split in half. I asked what could have caused so much volcanic and

earthquake activity. The meteor crater was shown as an answer to that question. What could have split this boulder?

I would say that it was split by earthquakes with volcanic lightning at the Crucifixion.

Two Pahute Indian Legends: "Why the Grand Canyon Was Made" and the second myth, "The Three Days of Darkness," has more obvious ... west of Parowan, Utah, and tells of the three days of thick darkness which fell over that area ... taken place in Mesoamerica - or even, if we follow Priddis, in South America.



The 100 ton megaliths of Puma Punku, Peru - broken by earthquake and submerged in a flood of mud. Was this caused by massive volcanic snowmelt with earthquakes? Volcanic eruptions create their own lightning storms.

Volcanic lightning. Are you asking for proof of the existence of God, Jesus Christ, and the power of the prophets?

That is not really a good idea. Are you new here?

Well, TCP...I do no know the answer to that...I proposed DNA tests..others agreed to try that route..

We are all hopeful that it will be progress...but no one knows with certainty until it is tried..

Tim, are you sure those "ears" you are all about are not Dumbo ears? What part of "research" and asking questions do you not understand? Everything you ask has been answered a dozen times by me....you are really quite a bore....and these games of yours are tiring ..
I am not being rude...I simply dont have the time to repeat again and again in a thousand different ways for your personal edification..
Either you understand or you dont, and you obviously don't..or you just enjoy the harassment.. You can read up more about DNA, or you can read about those ancient mummies from whom DNA has been successfully collected and matched with modern living people...or you can actually read the book before asking questions. it may save us both a lot of wasted time...
You have a nice evening now....

OMG I'm going to pass out - great... maybe Sheila is a bit right about the way the U.S. is going.

Entirely wrong. In 1967 Gerard de Sede did not mention that story at all, it was only Baigent who came up with it. That puts it where it belongs to - into the realms of fantasy.



... and the dreams you dreamed of once in a lullaby ...

To elaborate, the Priory Documents claimed that the Merovingians were a royal dynasty descended from a particular tribe of 'Jews'. The claim that the Merovingian dynasty was descended from Jesus was developed around 1980-81, or perhaps a little earlier, by the authors of HBHG. Pierre Plantard, the 'grandmaster' of the Priory of Sion denied the Jesus claim, and continued to insist on the 'Jewish' angle. Unfortunately, the HBHG authors found very little to substantiate the original POS claims upon which they had based their own claims (always keeping in mind that the originator of the claims himself denied the legitimacy of the 'Jesus bloodline' invention). More unfortunately, authors like Laurence Gardner and Hugh Montgomery based their own fabrications on the misrepresentations and inaccuracies of HBHG. Hence the simple reason that the forum members ask for reference and source for the various claims made here by posters.

Almost always, when a poster refuses, over and over again, to supply sources in support of her or his claims, it is because those claims are rooted in the above farrago of nonsense and will be exposed as nonsense when scrutinised.

And I am almost as sure that if a poster came here and posted 'stuff' that was legit and could stand up to scrutiny, it would be thoroughly welcomed by the forum community...

Exactly. Thanks, Spartacus Paraclete. It seems that Shasta did overlook that.

Thanks Eginwolf, I'll be sure to include that minor detail in my next edition......

No, you've answered nothing. All you've done is hedge and wail about being victimized. In reality, you're the victim of your own ambitions. I know you're not ignorant or naive, Sue; you're tenacious and hungry, more so now than you were a few years ago. And you don't take kindly to people who get between you and your target audience, you've got too much invested in your book and your "theories" to constantly fine-tune them.

TCP

That is your opinion Tim....the wording is meant to be hurtful and mean, and you've succeeded..
And you are totally wrong in your assumptions..there is no excuse for how you are wording your comments..
It is pure vile.
WE needn't have any further conversations here....would there be any point to it?
I do enjoy some others here and we will continue...so Don't mind if I put you on ignore with
Spartacus...you still have a solid audience here for your rants..

“We can never judge the lives of others.
It's one thing to feel that you are on the right path, but it's another
to think that yours is the only path.” - Paulo Coehlo

Opinions based on observations over time. I realize it's not a flattering characterization and it wasn't intended to be. You might want to think about it though.



That's fine, Sue, there was never much chance for an honest dialogue anyway, not while you steadfastly refuse to answer honest questions. If other issues come up I'll still comment, but I won't challenge you to back up your statements as - well, as you won't be seeing them, I guess.

TCP

Oh Tim......what has happened to you? I never judged you to be so mean and vile and untruthful...
Shame on you. Shame on you.

I'm sorry that you consider direct challenges "mean and vile and untruthful".

TCP

Your self-labeled "direct challenges" have almost nothing to do with the content and direction of my book...
As I stated so often before...at least read the dam thing before sharing ideas with me..
I even offered to send you a free copy...

Every one of my questions were directed at statements you posted here on this forum. I'm not "sharing ideas" and I don't want to read your book. I'm calling you out on statements you have made right here. Quit hiding behind your book, Sue, and act like the scholar you want everyone to believe you are.

TCP

No TCP...this is a circular argument...

Spare me. And stop PMing me, I'm deleting them unread.

TCP

I shall delete your pm's as well..

This one?



Is there some inscription that identifies this figure as a priestess?



I think what delineates this generation from previous generations is that there is no penalty for questioning or rejecting religious doctrine, at least in the Western world. States are no longer sponsors of national religions and religious organizations are struggling to hang onto what influence they have left over governments. Now, if you've been compelled somehow to believe the lies, or at least to pretend you do, against your will or better judgment, that's one thing. But if you've been handed a nice, neat package identified as "truth" but with the codicil that you're free to explore, question, accept, reject, make other choices, etc., well - that's something I'm quite happy and grateful for myself.

TCP

That mural from the catacombs featured in the second episode of Bettany Hughes' series Divine Women last week, and it the opinion of Ms Hughes was that a seated figure to the right of the standing figure was also a Christian priestess. The argument pursued was that women had almost equal rights in the Church till St Augustine wrote his Confessions.
http://www.bettanyhughes.co.uk/divine-women

Bettany Hughes is an historian for TV documentaries; sensationalism sells with little to no need of evidential support. "Almost equal rights" doesn't equate to "priestesses in the early Church" no matter what the networks are paying for prime-time content.

TCP