It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFOs in Works of Art

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Pic 1 is the satelit thing on the old picture

files.abovetopsecret.com...[1].jpg

pic 2 Sputnik. files.abovetopsecret.com...[1].JPG

im not saying that the thing in pic 1 is Sputnik.

i dont knowe what i realy going wit this..




posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 12:30 PM
link   
lost_shaman,

Sorry. The manner in which you challenged Mr. Cuoghi's agenda read as hostile to me. Again, you have my apologies.

HDD09,

The information on Salimeni's "Glorification of the Eucharist", including the celestial sphere's seeming similarity to Sputnik, is already available in my second post of the first page of this very thread. Please read the threads before posting on them.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Excellent work on the coin!

It wasn't one of the ones I put much stock into originally, so it's nice to see someone putting forth the effort to explain some of these so fully....



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Not sure if this is considered art by some, but here is some objective pics from the saqqaraet (Step) pyramid from Egypt, circu 3,500 B.C. (+/- 300 years).

Link / Source:
www.dudeman.net...









posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by torbjon
Telling me that an image of clouds in the sky with rays of light coming out of them is a ufo is just as crazy as telling me that it is Not a ufo.


Damn right!@ Preach it!! Way above!



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Not sure if this is considered art by some, but here is some objective pics from the saqqaraet (Step) pyramid from Egypt, circu 3,500 B.C. (+/- 300 years).


I planned on dealing with this one in a future post. It's a really bad photograph to begin with, and apparently what some people see as a bug-eyed humanoid is a floral pattern vase. As you would expect it is rendered in the highly geometric stylization of the hieroglyphics.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cicada

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
Not sure if this is considered art by some, but here is some objective pics from the saqqaraet (Step) pyramid from Egypt, circu 3,500 B.C. (+/- 300 years).


I planned on dealing with this one in a future post. It's a really bad photograph to begin with, and apparently what some people see as a bug-eyed humanoid is a floral pattern vase. As you would expect it is rendered in the highly geometric stylization of the hieroglyphics.


I'm obligated to offer some more information concerning some above pictures, and a quote from another thread, from another wise ATS member:


Originally posted by d60944
Regarding your alien, you might want to look at the clearer pictures on here:

www.catchpenny.org...


Good find, and I honestly did not know of these alternate pictures. This is subjective to what individuals see, admitingly. But if these are indeed the same pictures of the same thing, curious how the mix-up occurred. Also, is this after restorations were made to the heiroglyphs? If so, some research into the processes used, and the technical background of those who accomplished restorations must be considered.

Also, I must admit I may have been up to 1,000+ years off the date of it's construction, but numerous dates are still bouncing around, and I'm no archeologists, nor Egyption expert.

Quote from above post to include good picture that may very well be the same picture:




What before looked like a mouth now looks like the neck of a bottle, perhaps, and the . doesn't look like a . at all, but more like a flower or some plant-like thing, sprouting spiny projections. The "eyes" here no longer resemble eyes. What is this thing? Recall that the context in which this relief is found is that of an offering scene. Might this be an offering of some plant, perhaps a flower? Consulting a general reference on ancient Egyptian culture, and looking specifically for flowers, it could be found that the lotus represents Upper Egypt and also is symbolic of rebirth. This seems a reasonable image to be found in a tomb. Further, a casual library researcher would discover that there are two types of lotus, one with "pointed buds and petals." This seems to better describe the mysterious figure than its being in the likeness of an alien from some other planet.






posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I've finally reached a point in researching the historical accounts of UFOs posted by lost_shaman that I can relay some conclusive information about them. As I suspected these legends are next to impossible to attach to a legitimate, first hand witness. As it turns out there is very little dependability in any of their points of origin. What truly amazes me is how when you search for information about these stories from history on the web, you see the same exact timeline, word for word, over and over, in multiple languages, copied and pasted ad naseum, ad delirium. Apparently none of the individuals disseminating this information possess the basic curiosity to wonder about the veracity of the information they're presenting as history. I think we shall be able to see just how much stock we can put in supposed UFO timelines. This post deals with the account of 70 CE, with the other two presented by lost_shaman following shortly.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
70 AD, May 21:
From Josephus' "Jewish War" Book CXI "On the 21st of May a demonic phantom of incredible size...for before sunset there appeared in the air over the whole country chariots and armed troops coursing through the clouds and surrounding the cities."


The event this supposed "sighting" is attached to is one of the most significant events in the history of the world, with historical, political, psychological and symbolic connotations that exist to the present day. The fact that most presenters of these UFO timelines do not emphasize that this involves the Siege of Jerusalem (70) from the First Jewish-Roman War strikes me as rather curious.

Flavius Josephus is a fascinating figure in his own right. He is considered to be an excellent historian, but only when compared to his contemporaries. Unlike most chroniclers of history of the time, Josephus was very knowledgeable about the territory he described, was an experienced army commander, played a major role as a negotiator in the conflict, and actually conducted interviews with representatives from both sides of the war. The results of this were Josephus' first historical chronicle "The Wars of The Jews, The History of the Destruction of Jerusalem" (the link takes you directly to Book VI, Chapter 5, Section 3, the passage in question).

Josephus worked from Imperial Roman archives and had access to the military commanders' campaign logbooks. This allowed for very reliable depictions of events and locations that Josephus didn't personally witness. However, the fact that the "Jewish War" was written under Imperial commission also makes his account unreliable in several areas. Josephus was quite simply a propagandist. He presents the events of the war in a manner that makes the Romans' invasion not only justified but an act expressing the will of God. There are definitely elements within the "Jewish Wars" that are completely fictionalized for dramatic purpose. One example of this is the dying words of the Sicarian Eleaser, leader of the Masada rebellion. Next to no one survived the capture of Masada and there was no one who could give an accurate account of Eleaser's last words.

The Roman bias in the "Jewish War" is obvious, as is a bias for the actions of the noble or upper classes on both sides of the conflict. All blame for the war is placed squarely on the sinful, uneducated common people of Jerusalem. While it is actually quite amazing that Josephus included details of acts of war crimes by the Romans on the Jewish people, all such incidents are described as the actions of over-enthusiastic soldiers against the will of the officers and certainly not at their command (sound familiar?).

Things are even less directly based upon actual events in the section of the "Jewish War" from which the supposed UFO sighting comes from. The details Josephus presents in this section are not events he witnessed first hand, or even moments immediately preceding the fall of Jerusalem and the Temple. The section deals with signs and portents of the impending destruction, not the event itself. It's a compilation of folklore, legends and quite likely Josephus created much of the material for poetic or dramatic effect or as another level of anti-Jerusalem propaganda.

Included in this account of omens were a star resembling a sword hanging over the city, a comet that was visible for an entire year, and a great light shining around the altar of the Temple, as bright as daylight, for a half an hour during a festival. At the same festival a sacrificial heifer was said to have given birth to a lamb in the midst of the Temple. Another supposed sign was when the eastern gate of the inner temple court, a work of bronze so heavy it took twenty men to move it, opened on its own, as if the temple was surrendering itself to its imminent invaders.

Next comes the account that is presented as a UFO sighting, worth presenting in the author's own words (a luxury we will not unfortunately have when dealing with other legendary accounts):


Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the one-and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, (Jyar,) a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner (court of the) temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence."


This is rather interesting. If we are to take is an account of a literal event then it is much more then a UFO sighting, it is an outright invasion of Jerusalem by alien forces. One would expect such an occurrence to have had a far heavier impact on history, especially as it so closely proceeded the fall of Jerusalem to Rome. No mention is made of where the aliens go after they surround the cities. They were beamed back up I suppose.

Obviously this is not meant to be read as a literal event as it is in a passage dealing with signs and portents. It's an account of a "vision", a premonition of events to come, not something witnessed with the actual eyes.

There's an interesting suggestion of why Josephus includes this in his history as an aspect of propaganda. The vision as described followed by voices saying "Let us remove hence", is quite similar to the prophecy of Jesus Christ of His Second Coming, an event preceded by "fearful sights and great signs". He tells the apostles that when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies it was time for the people to flee. This is described in The Gospel of Luke, 21:20,21 (KJV):


And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto


The composition of Luke is likely to have occurred roughly ten years prior to Josephus' "Jewish War", but assuming Luke is based upon an oral tradition of the life and sayings of Christ, it seems as if Josephus was purposefully utilizing the description as a means of presenting the Fall of Jerusalem as a preordained event, the will of God. The apparent contradiction of Christ's prophecy as told in Luke is that if armies surround the city it would seem quite impossible for the people to flee the city. Josephus circumvents this by making the event a vision of troops, a mass precognition, surrounding the city, followed by the supposed voice two weeks later, still leaving plenty of time for the residents of Jerusalem to leave before the Romans arrived. Of course the common people of Jerusalem, as described by Josephus, are too sinful and deserving of God's wrath to heed such signs and warnings. Putting the chariots and soldiers in the air allows for an even more literal depiction of this prophecy, as the soldiers encompass the cities form all sides, including above them.

The comet that appeared for the course of a year was an actual event that occurred four years before the fall of Jerusalem. It was the passing of Halley's Comet in 66 CE. Another interesting element from Josephus' list of omens is the heifer giving birth to the lamb within the Temple of Solomon during a festival. The fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE was a literal apocalypse for the residents of the city, the end of an age. This event is closely coincident with the actual transition between zodiacal ages that occurred around the time of the supposed life of Christ. That shift was from Aries to Pisces but the symbolism described in the "Jewish War" seems a remnant from the previous age transition, from Taurus to Aries. It's possible this portent was derived from sources c. 2,100 years earlier to describe the zodiacal age transition, misunderstood as an omen of age transition in general.

Beyond all this is the character of Flavius Josephus as described in his own words. He apparently saw himself as a prophet in his own right, ranking himself with the likes of Ezekiel, chosen by God to herald important historical events. He claims to have foreseen the fate of the Jewish people. Despite these grandiose claims, Josephus never created new prophecy, but applied the sayings of past canonical prophets to the contemporary situation (a trick utilized by so-called prophets to this very day). If we are to read the "Jewish War" as literal then that means accepting Josephus' position that God acts directly on the course of human history, and that Josephus himself was a key component of God's plan. This to me seems far removed from a believable account of a UFO sighting. Josephus also clearly claims that God was on the side of the Romans, a fact that he felt was apparent because they were superior in arms. You'll find this notion expressed in modern politics and religion today as well.

Regardless of any of the details it must be understood that for the vast bulk of history a belief in the supernatural was common, and the literature will always reflect this. This is why we can not just pluck random accounts from historical sources and present them as documented fact. We must always first understand who the source is and in what manner they present their material. Despite the hackneyed cliche, the truth is not stranger than fiction.

Additional sources and sites of interest:

Flavius Josephus-Wikipedia
Flavius Josephus, Judea and Rome: A Question of Context by David Steinberg



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cicada:
I planned on dealing with this one in a future post. It's a really bad photograph to begin with, and apparently what some people see as a bug-eyed humanoid is a floral pattern vase. As you would expect it is rendered in the highly geometric stylization of the hieroglyphics.

And all this time I thought the ancient Egyptians worshiped Daisy Duck, Goddess of the Wrathful Eyebrow.

Cicada, you're verboserer than me, even, but I love the articles. Now, if I can find the time to finish this opus this weekend...





posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cicada

Apparently none of the individuals disseminating this information possess the basic curiosity to wonder about the veracity of the information they're presenting as history.



Let's look at the Veracity of the information you are presenting as History.


Flavius Josephus by Jona Lendering

It should be stressed that Josephus is, according to ancient criteria, an excellent historian. Authors like Polybius of Megalopolis and Lucian have published treatises on the writing of history, and Josephus lives up to the standards they set. He knows the country he is describing, he has experience as commander of an army, and he understands the issues of the war. Moreover, he interviewed representatives of both sides. This is more than can be said about his younger contemporary Tacitus, who is usually regarded as a greater historian.



Not only was Josephus born in Israel as a Sadducee, he lived there and commanded an Army against the Romans in Galilee. So he was present in the land that he is authoring the History about.

He even takes the trouble to interview people from both sides of the War for His work.

Although, it is regarded that he did write the Speech he attributes to the Rebel leader at Masada, Eleaser.

The Jewish War , was written in Aramaic and presented to Vespasian between 75 and 79 ad. And the Second Edition was written in Greek was dedicated to Titus the New Roman Emperor in 79 ad. The seventh book of the Jewish War is amended to include the Siege at Masada.

The purpose was to help the Romans better understand the Jews. And because he worked for the Romans he presented them in a favorable light understandably. Hardly a work of Propaganda against the Jews.







Next to no one survived the capture of Masada and there was no one who could give an accurate account of Eleaser's last words.


A group of Women and children survived Masada.


Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the one-and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, (Jyar,) a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner (court of the) temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence."



This is rather interesting. If we are to take is an account of a literal event then it is much more then a UFO sighting, it is an outright invasion of Jerusalem by alien forces. One would expect such an occurrence to have had a far heavier impact on history, especially as it so closely proceeded the fall of Jerusalem to Rome. No mention is made of where the aliens go after they surround the cities. They were beamed back up I suppose.


Sounds more like a UFO sighting to me than an Invasion by alien Forces. Chariots and troops in their Armour running amongst the clouds surrounding the cities. Sounds like something was witnessed in the sky and described differently than people of today would describe the events.

Where do you get Alien invasion and assume that Aliens needed to be beamed up?



Obviously this is not meant to be read as a literal event as it is in a passage dealing with signs and portents. It's an account of a "vision", a premonition of events to come, not something witnessed with the actual eyes.


Except the account you posted say's

" I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals;"

Also, note that there are two events being described in the passage you quote.


Besides these, 1. a few days after that feast, on the one-and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, (Jyar,) a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, 2. at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner (court of the) temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence."


So you can see that the event we are considering takes place a few days after the feast. The second event is said to have happened at the feast of the Pentecost.





The vision as described followed by voices saying "Let us remove hence", is quite similar to the prophecy of Jesus Christ of His Second Coming, an event preceded by "fearful sights and great signs".


This is all wrong. Your assuming that this was meant to be a "Vision" that was followed by "Voices".

And yet that is not at all what Josephus wrote. One event describes something related by Priests that happened at the Feast of the Pentecost, and the other event describes what we would consider a UFO sighting. The two events are clearly separate events as written by Josephus.



There's an interesting suggestion of why Josephus includes this in his history as an aspect of propaganda. The vision as described followed by voices saying "Let us remove hence", is quite similar to the prophecy of Jesus Christ of His Second Coming, an event preceded by "fearful sights and great signs". He tells the apostles that when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies it was time for the people to flee. This is described in The Gospel of Luke, 21:20,21 (KJV):


Josephus , as a Jewish Man ,would not have used Early Christian oral traditions as propaganda against the Jews!

Early Christians during this time would have been a very , very small group of people, consisting of Jews and Gentiles. Its likely that Josephus would not have heard any oral traditions of Luke's gospel.

It is thought that Josephus did actually mention Jesus in his work, but most of the writting addressing Jesus in Josephus work is thought to have been enbellished into the work.

www.bede.org.uk...


By your own admission Josephus accurately described Halley's Comet. Notice it is described as "a star resembling a sword stood over the city". Showing that aerial Events are often named as "Swords" , "Chariots". And Josephus would have seen this himself. Obviously Halley's Comet was not a "sword" and did not stand over the City literally.


The account also seems to resemble the type of event portrayed in other Works of art in History like these.

Woodcut by Hans Glasser ,16th Century

Broadsheet by Samuel Coccius , 16th Century



[edit on 7-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

[edit on 7-1-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Let's look at the Veracity of the information you are presenting as History.


Yes, lets.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
Not only was Josephus born in Israel as a Sadducee, he lived there and commanded an Army against the Romans in Galilee. So he was present in the land that he is authoring the History about.


I know. All of this is detailed in the multiple biographies of Flavius Josephus that I linked to. Did you read them? If you did you would see that according to his own account he was captured by the Romans in the town of Jotapata, in the spring of 67 CE. This occurred after Josephus and his men drew lots to see which of them would kill all the others and be the sole prisoner of the Romans. Why any sane group of people under any circumstance would agree to such an activity is beyond me, I'll leave it to your imagination. At any rate, Josephus was taken before Vespasian and his son Titus and almost immediately declared that Vespasian was the fulfillment of the prophecy found in Numbers 24.17-19, a passage most Jews read as foretelling the coming of the Messiah. In 69 CE the Emperor Nero committed suicide and Vitellius established a very tenuous rule after he defeated his chief rival Otho. Vespasian saw an opportunity to fulfill the prophecy of Josephus. His troops defeated those of Vitellius and took Rome by force. Apparently Vespasian truly believed he was the fulfillment of Judaic prophecy. It was at this time that Josephus was released from prison, granted Roman citizenship, renamed Titus Flavius Josephus (nee Joseph son of Matthias), given an Egyptian wife and named the advisor of the crown prince Titus. Titus led the Roman forces in the siege of Rome with Josephus acting as his translator. As described Josephus tried more then once to convince the Jewish leaders to surrender to Rome, but they saw him as a traitor and did not acquiesce.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
He even takes the trouble to interview people from both sides of the War for His work.

Although, it is regarded that he did write the Speech he attributes to the Rebel leader at Masada, Eleaser.

The Jewish War , was written in Aramaic and presented to Vespasian between 75 and 79 ad. And the Second Edition was written in Greek was dedicated to Titus the New Roman Emperor in 79 ad. The seventh book of the Jewish War is amended to include the Siege at Masada.

The purpose was to help the Romans better understand the Jews. And because he worked for the Romans he presented them in a favorable light understandably. Hardly a work of Propaganda against the Jews.


I know this. I've read all my sources. You don't think that a work written to justify the Roman siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple as anti-Jewish propaganda? What do you call it? Accurate history? So the common people of Jerusalem deserved mass slaughter, exile and enslavement? The edifice of highest importance to their religion deserved to be looted and demolished? This was, as Josephus describes it, the will of God expressing his favor for the Roman Emperor by granting him superior strength of arms? Do you believe, as Josephus clearly relates this repeatedly, that Vespasian was the Messiah heralded in the prophecies of the Old Testament? Or are we to pick and choose which fantastic allegations of the "Jewish War" are true and which are false? If you believe the "Jewish War" is an accurate history I can direct you to nearly two thousand years of Jewish, Christian and Muslim peoples who would strongly disagree.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
A group of Women and children survived Masada.


That is what next to no one means. You stated above that Josephus fabricated the dying words of Eleaser so I don't even know why you said this except as a purposeless nit-pick.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
Sounds more like a UFO sighting to me than an Invasion by alien Forces. Chariots and troops in their Armour running amongst the clouds surrounding the cities. Sounds like something was witnessed in the sky and described differently than people of today would describe the events.

Where do you get Alien invasion and assume that Aliens needed to be beamed up?


I guess you read the cities as being in the sky as well. I suppose those are the mother ships and the chariots are little one-man flyers like TIE Fighters? I don't find that to be so clear. Let's say you're right and the cities they surrounded were also in the sky instead of on the ground. It really makes it no less fantastic an event. If this event really occurred as you argue it did then it would have garnered greater mention then one line in a single historical account. Is that the end of the story? Where did the aliens go? They just showed up, staged mock sieges of cities in the sky and then vanished? The story is barely told. This is why I wonder if they just beamed up because one would think that this event, more major and awe-inspiring then even the apocalyptic fall of Jerusalem, the disintegration of the Jewish state and the razing of the Temple, would have merited more then one line in Josephus' very detail oriented presentation of the war. If this one event literally occurred, then why is it merited merely one line in a list clearly presented as omens and predictions of events to come?


Originally posted by lost_shaman
Except the account you posted say's


That's what Josephus said. What would you say if you were a commissioned propagandist (I'm sorry but that is the proper description) trying to cement the public perception that the Emperor of Rome was the fulfillment of Divine Mandate? When a writer states an account is true, and they seem to usually be telling the truth, it's proper to accept their word for it. When the figure is one who makes such obvious, and demonstrated, distortions and fabrications on a regular basis, throughout all of his works, as is the case with Josephus, then his claim of veracity is rather meaningless. The reason he felt the need to attest to this fantastic claim, as opposed to the comet sighting visible to anyone, is because it sounded too unreal to believe even at the time it was written, when holding a belief in superstitious events was commonplace.

If we are to accept this one event as literal from Josephus' account then I suppose we must accept them all. Do you believe a heifer gave birth to a lamb in the Temple? I know, it was some of that alien gene-splicing we hear so much about.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
This is all wrong. Your assuming that this was meant to be a "Vision" that was followed by "Voices".
And yet that is not at all what Josephus wrote. One event describes something related by Priests that happened at the Feast of the Pentecost, and the other event describes what we would consider a UFO sighting. The two events are clearly separate events as written by Josephus.


No you are wrong. There are two sentences, one before the other. The second sentence starts with the word "Moreover". Do you know this word? It means "beyond this" and suggests an attachment to the previous statement. The two events are clearly connected. In fact Josephus interconnects all of the omens as indicators of one thing, the impending fall of Jerusalem. Pending when the omens supposedly occurred, but of course a done deal by the time Josephus wrote the "Jewish War" eight or nine years later, a comfortable vantage point from which to attach significance to any "signs" true or fabricated. Review my linked sources. I'm not alone in this opinion.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
Josephus , as a Jewish Man ,would not have used Early Christian oral traditions as propaganda against the Jews!

Early Christians during this time would have been a very , very small group of people, consisting of Jews and Gentiles. It’s likely that Josephus would not have heard any oral traditions of Luke's gospel.

It is thought that Josephus did actually mention Jesus in his work, but most of the writing addressing Jesus in Josephus work is thought to have been enbellished into the work.


As I clearly stated this interpretation is suggested. It isn't presented as being conclusive. It's an alternate explanation for the passage of text. Unlike you who is apparently satisfied with the most illogical and unverifiable of explanations, me and I'm sure many other people, would like to hear some other opinions before we draw a conclusion, if any. I'm not here just to say if things are true or false, but to explore the most likely and plausible explanations. Try to find it in you to consider more then one hypothesis at a time. It isn't hard.

It's already been clearly demonstrated what Josephus was willing to do to his fellow Jews. Are we to think a man who has no problem participating in their mass-murdering, enslavement and the destruction of their Temple was above maligning them with his written word? Get real.

Your description of the early Christians is inaccurate. Almost immediately following Jesus' supposed death and resurrection the apostles started spreading His Gospel, an activity that was centered in Jerusalem. In those very early years the Christians lived in organized communes and considered themselves a reform movement within Judaism. Missionaries were
sent to all corners of the Roman Empire. It was the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE that caused a wider dissemination of Christianity as the Jews, the Christian Jews among them, fled their Roman persecutors. Josephus lived in Jerusalem, was obviously scholarly, and is certain to have been aware of the fledgling Christian movement within Judaism. Josephus also claimed to have studied as an Essene, the same sect of Judaism as John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. If we are to believe him at his word, which you suggest we do, then it is quite conceivable that he would hold similar interpretations to the Old Testament prophecies as the early Christians, save for the fact that he felt the Messiah was Vespasian rather then Jesus. The stories that were collected in the Gospel of Luke were derived from an oral and written tradition attributed to the preaching of the apostle Luke. They certainly existed in the time of Josephus, his education and social class, his work itself, suggest he would be familiar with such works. We can say what Josephus could have known, was likely to have known, but you cannot say what he didn't know. You have no way to support such a claim.

And then you tell us the parts of Josephus that talk about Jesus are later additions. So we can pick and choose what is and isn't accurate in the works of Josephus, as long as you feel they support your argument. Here's the first paragraph from your own link:


The most important extra-biblical references to Jesus are found in the writings of Josephus. Although some have questioned the authenticity of the passages, modern scholarship has rightly recognized that one of them is completely authentic and the other, though embellished by Christian scribes, provides an authentic core of material confirming much about Jesus. This article thoroughly examines the authenticity of the disputed reference to Jesus, the Testimonium Flavianum referred to hereafter as the "TF".


Gee, that really isn't what you were suggesting at all, is it.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
By your own admission Josephus accurately described Halley's Comet. Notice it is described as "a star resembling a sword stood over the city". Showing that aerial Events are often named as "Swords" , "Chariots". And Josephus would have seen this himself. Obviously Halley's Comet was not a "sword" and did not stand over the City literally.


As clearly demonstrated Josephus included everything he possibly could if it could be worked to support his presentation of the fall of Jerusalem as the Will of God expressed through the Messiah Vespasian's forces. The comet was seen in 66 CE, we know this to be true. As stated much of the events described in the "Jewish War" are true but much of it is false. I'm not sure the star resembling a sword was supposed to be the same as the comet seen for a year. I could be wrong, other people read the two as one as well, but my main clue on this is the word "and" between the two statements. Also, this does not state a literal sword was over the city. Even if the star and comet are the same object, he still refers to them as a star and as a comet. The people of this time were not as naive as you suggest. They knew what they were looking at. You’re right, it obviously wasn't a sword. That's why Josephus uses the word "resembling". How does this compare to the vision of armies and chariots? You're grasping at straws.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
The account also seems to resemble the type of event portrayed in other Works of art in History like these.


As said many times, lets actually research the pictures that we're holding up as evidence before using them to make broad, generalized statements about history as a whole. These images will be researched in time. I wonder what we will learn about them? Is anybody keeping score? I know the UFO/ET tally up to this point is zip.



posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 01:26 AM
link   
Cicada ,

Just look where the text says



Thus also before the Jews' rebellion, and before those commotions which preceded the war, when the people were come in great crowds to the feast of unleavened bread, on the eighth day of the month Xanthicus,





"Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the one and twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Jyar,] a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared: I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the temple,] as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence."


How do you think this is one event?

It says "a few days after that feast", (on the 8th day of the month Xanthicus ).

Then " at that feast which we call Pentecost,".

Clearly two events are taking place one involving Priests and another involving aerial phenomena.

Furthermore , we know Josephus mentions Halley's Comet and the UFO sighting in question would also be an aerial Phenomena worthy of mention.




If this event really occurred as you argue it did then it would have garnered greater mention then one line in a single historical account.



What gives you that impression ? Halley's comet gets only one line as well.

Its also worth mentioning that the Halley's comet reference occurs just preceding the passage in question. This also does not fit well with your assumption this passage is meant as a vision and not to be taken as an "Event" that happened.


Seems that some of the confusion with Luke stems from Eusebius , an Early Christian Father who commented that Josephus connected the destruction of Jerusalem with the death of James. This statement is not found in the texts of Josephus , but Eusebius says that Clement knew about it. Origen also mentions that Josephus' said something similar to this.

www.wheaton.edu...



In 67 A.D., during Nero's persecution, both Peter and Paul were martyred. Peter, as a foreigner, was crucified, but as he went to his death he said he was not worthy to die in the same position as Jesus Christ and asked to be nailed to the cross upside-down. Paul, a Roman citizen, was be.ed with a sword. In Rome there are many pictures of them both, in frescoes, reliefs and mosaics, some dating from as early as the 3rd century A.D.

For about 250 years after the death of Peter and Paul, persecution forced the Christians into hiding and many were martyred in their turn. They could not erect special buildings in which to meet and worship, so they met in private houses,

The defeat of the Jewish state and the destruction of Jerusalem with its temple by the Romans in A.D. 70 had a profound effect upon Jewish Christianity. Early Christian writers claim the Jerusalem community survived by fleeing the city, later returned and reestablished itself, and continued life in Jerusalem, until the city was again destroyed by the Romans, this time under the Emperor Hadrian, A.D. 134. Some modern scholars reject this claim and insist the Jerusalem Church perished in AD 70; consequently there is no connection between later Christianity and the "Mother Church."



Also see ,

from www.wheaton.edu...

Furthermore, if, as I believe, the sources indicate some of these Jewish Christians groups were more closely tied to the national institutions of Judaism, then we should expect the 70 C.E. catastrophe to impact them more severely than others.


Jewish Christians tied to Nationalists Institutions of Judaism ? Sounds exactly like the people Josephus did not like.

To show this I need only to quote your source.


Flavius Josephus by Jona Lendering

The responsibility for all the bloodshed rests squarely on the shoulders of the people that he describes as 'brigands', 'madmen', 'desperado's', or 'bandits': those are the invectives he has in store for violent nationalists like the Zealots, the Sicarians and men like John of Gischala. It is no coincidence that the Jewish War ends with a speech of the leader of the rebels at Masada, the Sicarian Eleaser, who more or less admits that all violence was a result of nationalistic agitation and also admits that God is angry.


In other words Josephus makes up a speech attributed to Eleaser , where Eleaser admits that all violence was a result of nationalistic agitation and also admits that God is angry. ( At Nationalist Zealots, who are forcing the Romans to act against Jerusalem. This would include early Jewish Christians.)



[edit on 8-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

[edit on 8-1-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 12:21 AM
link   
lost_shaman,

You're really going off on tangents here. I'm trying to give people some information so that they can learn something about the history and the cultural expressions of the eras from which these so-called UFO legends are derived. You can pick at the various points of my presentation all you like, but as was the case with the reverse of the jeton, it has no bearing on the most salient points regarding the reliability of this particular account. Flavius Josephus was not a reliable source. He was a liar with a known agenda that can be demonstrated over and over again. He wrote in an era where superstitious beliefs were commonplace and the literature of such eras always reflect this, as is the case with the works of Josephus. While Josephus did have first hand experience of much of the siege, he did not personally witness the supposed phenomena in the sky in question. While he states that a crowd of people witnessed the event he does not identify a single person by name. As demonstrated it is quite possible that he manufactured the sign all together, but even if he didn't, his recording of the event came at least eight years after the fact, more then enough time for any urban legend to develop into a form far removed from its original state. There is no other reference of any kind of this supposed event beyond the single line in the "Jewish War", despite the fact that it is connected to one of the most major events in world history. You ignore these facts and quibble over trivialities, choosing not to address the contradictions of accepting only the portions of Josephus' account that suit your argument. Beyond this it does not sound like any UFO sighting I've ever seen or heard about. Why are the armies in the air? What are we supposed to imagine is taking place here? Is it just that a supernatural event is being described as being in the sky? Is that the only criteria necessary to declare a passage of antiquated text as proof of a UFO sighting?

As for the lesser details of your last post, obviously I am not saying the vision and the later voice are a singular event. I'm saying the language suggests the two events are connected. The words of Christ from the Gospel of Luke also describe two separate, but connected events, the realization that the city is compassed by soldiers, and the decision to get out of there. The parallel is not related to the business about James you're going on about, merely the fact that the later writing of Josephus closely emulates the earlier account of Luke. Get it? Add to this the fact that the words of Christ are part of a prophecy relating the fall of Jerusalem to the Second Coming, and that Josephus' main objective in writing the "Jewish War" was to present Vespasian, Titus and their forces as fulfilling the will of God. I think it all makes perfect sense. It is certainly sounder then believing this describes a literal UFO sighting.

The biggest difference between Halley's Comet and the armies in the sky is that the passing of Halley's Comet in 66 CE is documented and corroborated by other sources, and we can calculate that it would have been visible at this time based upon observation of its natural revolution around the sun. It is also positively identified as a comet. Neither Josephus nor the people of Jerusalem who witnessed the comet mistake it for an angel or other supernatural entity. They see it as a sign or portent, but do not misconstrue it into something it wasn't. As an omen of the impending fall of the city the comet does merit only one line in the list of supernatural indicators. The point I'm making is that if the people in the major city of Jerusalem all saw the sky filled with cities, chariots and soldiers fighting, this would have been an occurrence of monumental proportions, greater then any lights in the sky filmed in the modern era. The fact that it receives no greater treatment then the comet means it is quite likely that this account is based upon very little or nothing at all.

The passage of Jona Lendering's article that you quote is talking about the fact that Josephus was a Jewish aristocrat placing the blame for the Roman siege of Jerusalem not on the Romans (the Nazi's utilized similar methods of passing responsibility for their actions onto their victims), or on the Jewish noble class to which he belonged, but onto the poor, common class of Jews. I'm not sure even what your point is on this. That Josephus wouldn't have utilized Christian prophecy because he disliked poor people? He utilized every factor of information at his disposal to present his employer as the Son of God. The Christian Jews differed from the rest of Judea in their belief that the Messiah had already come, had died and would be coming again. Of course the personal advisor to the crown prince of the Roman Empire was aware of the Christian movement, and this is exactly the type of preexistent prophecy he would utilize to make his case. He does so repeatedly throughout his work.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:30 AM
link   
I don't know what your aversion to UFO sightings is, but they do happen.

Can you not imagine people seeing something strange like UFOs in the sky without being overly dramatic and caricaturing the events until they are absolutely ludicrous?

And to tell me what should have happened or how it should have been recorded is a baseless argument.

At the end of the day the " UFO sighting" ,if I may call it that, appears right with the Halley's Comet reference. We only know it is a Halley's Comet reference , because we know the orbit and can say it would have appeared in c. 66.

You can't say that because we can not ID or confirm this UFO sighting that it is fictitious. The same is also true for Modern Times people see UFOs and we ( Myself included ) report them and talk about them.

You argue that calling a UFO a " Chariot" or a " Shield" or "Armoured Troops" is ridiculous, but didn't Josephus say Halley's Comet resembled a "Sword"? (Not in another text , but in the same passage as the "UFO sighting".)

Maybe you think that Modern Day people would have better descriptions ... like " Flying Saucer".

I'll still stick by my Josephus and my Thomas and Paul Sandby references to the Historic equivalents of UFO sightings.

If you need a modern reference , please see ... www.abovetopsecret.com...




As many as twenty UFOs were seen and tracked by ground radar and at least six airplanes during the night of May 19, 1986 over several states in southeastern Brazil. Unidentified radar returns were tracked by airports in São Paulo and the Integrated Air Defense & Air Traffic Control Center (CINDACTA) in Brasilia. Two F-5E and three Mirage jet fighters were scrambled from Santa Cruz AFB in Sao Paulo State, and Anápolis AFB in Goias State.


Brazil has acknowledged this event.

It would be the modern day equivalent to " Chariots and armoured Troops running amongst the Clouds and surrounding Cities."

Or maybe you are more familiar with D.C. '52.



What is your view of UFO sightings anyway? Are they "Alien Invaders" or " Darth Vader in TIE Fighters"? Do you think UFOs are strictly confined to the Post-Kenneth Arnold era?

Don't put words in my mouth either , I never said any people were stupid . I said people saw things and described them differently than we would today.

My World view , and subsequent view that People see UFOs and talk about them or report them , does not require me to re-write History either. And you'll notice I don't need to paint Josephus as a propagandists second only to Joseph Goebbels.

Nor do I need to associate Josephus ( A wealthy Aristocrat Jewish man and self proclaimed Pharisee who latter became the prodigy of the then Emperor of Rome ) with the likely non-present work of Luke.

Of course this is a time of strife and factionalism between the Jewish Community , all the more reason to report strange signs or activity in the sky, or to recall strange things.

It should also be noted that the Jewish Calender was centered and based around the activity of the sky's, as were many other cultures of the ancient world. These signs or sightings of events in the sky were also considered major events in the lives of people in these and other times in History. (Just as they are today.)



Edit: One more thing, you said that this is mentioned no where else.




Tacitus (A.D. 115) - Roman historian

"13. Prodigies had occurred, but their expiation by the offering of victims or solemn vows is held to be unlawful by a nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs. In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure. Few people placed a sinister interpretation upon this. The majority were convinced that the ancient scriptures of their priests alluded to the present as the very time when the Orient would triumph and from Judaea would go forth men destined to rule the world." (Histories, Book 5, v. 13). Comp. Tacitus, Annals, xiv, 12, 22; xv, 22, 47; xvi, 13


Note that Halley's Comet is not mentioned here.


[edit on 9-1-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 12:56 PM
link   
lost_shaman,

Now you're just asking me to repeat myself. If there is any question or point that you posed in your last post that I do not address in this post it is because I have already done so. Review my previous statements.


originally posted by lost_shaman
And to tell me what should have happened or how it should have been recorded is a baseless argument.


It is not. It's at best a legend recorded well after the fact. It's hearsay. There is no way you can extrapolate this into evidence of anything. This is why UFOlogy doesn't get the consideration you think it deserves. Placing surety on evidence of this nature discredits the field in general. It's like declaring certainty in the existence of giant sea serpents because an old map says "Here there be monsters".

Again you assume because I have not come to the same conclusion as you on this particular case it means I have some biased view against the possibilities of UFOs. This account does not hold up under scrutiny. I expect most accounts will not hold up under scrutiny. But I have stated repeatedly that we should be looking at each item of information individually rather than making broad judgements. I will say that from what I have seen the account of the Sandby brothers does seem to be a true UFO sighting, but I have not yet had time to research the matter and I can not say anything else about it at this time. If all that you want is for me to say is that the possibility of historical UFO sightings exist, then I already have done so. This particular case seems not to fall into that category.

The work of Flavius Josephus in 78 CE regarding an occurrence that took place prior to 70 CE in no way relates to any modern era sighting of UFOs involving radar and a nation's air force response. I can say that without looking into the case you present and it should be obvious to anybody that these are not the same things. The purpose of this thread is not the larger debate over UFOs but whether or not the examples of them presented in particular works of art are accurately drawn conclusions. I've expanded the criteria to discuss the supposed historical accounts because the natures of the misconceptions involved are not that dissimilar.

I'll let people make their own decision regarding the character of Flavius Josephus. Apparently you think he was quite a journalist. Since you hold him in such high regard as an accurate portrayer of events then I'm assuming (since you won't directly answer any of my questions) that you believe it was the will of God that the Messiah Vespasian's son slaughtered, exiled and enslaved the people of Jerusalem in 70 CE and that a heifer gave birth to a lamb in the midst of the Temple.

Check your history. The work of Luke was present. The dating of the composition of Luke is controversial with assessments ranging from 60-150 CE, but the oral tradition Luke was based upon was certainly existent. Again this has no effect one way or the other on the validity of the account of Josephus. If you want to maintain your fancies and whims based on evidence as unsubstantial as this that is your business.

Tacitus wrote his "Histories" nearly thirty years after Flavius Josephus wrote the "Jewish War". A repetition of information from a history made closer to the event being described is not a second source of the account. Very interesting in the material from Tacitus that you linked to is the very next line after the section you quoted:


This mysterious prophecy really referred to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, true to the selfish ambitions of mankind, thought that this mighty destiny was reserved for them, and not even their calamities opened their eyes to the truth.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 04:19 PM
link   

It's at best a legend recorded well after the fact. It's hearsay.


Who is speaking about certainties and surety of evidence ?

You could also use this argument to invalidate any thing recorded through History.

The fact that the Halley's Comet reference occurs with the "event" in the text is a validating factor.




There is no way you can extrapolate this into evidence of anything.


I offered it originally as evidence that accounts we would consider UFO sightings are present in History.




This is why UFOlogy doesn't get the consideration you think it deserves. Placing surety on evidence of this nature discredits the field in general. It's like declaring certainty in the existence of giant sea serpents because an old map says "Here there be monsters".


Again you are caricaturing. I have not said anything was certain other than people see and report things they can not explain. ( We today would say UFO sighting.)

Even today 80 - 95 % of all UFO sightings are explainable in the terms of the prosaic, often as Stars , Planets, Comets, Meteors.

What percentage of UFO sightings have astronomical explanations?

What would have changed or be different in History from Modern times ?

Just because Airplanes and Weather balloons were not present in History does not mean UFO sightings are not present in History.




Again you assume because I have not come to the same conclusion as you on this particular case it means I have some biased view against the possibilities of UFOs.


If your idea of an unbiased view is to misrepresent the event and pepper your thoughts with Star Wars references and talk about beaming up aliens and floating cites, it is hard for me to think that you are unbiased.

I offered the modern sighting in Brazil to show how modern day people also thought their cities were surrounded since you don't seem to understand how this could happen.



Tacitus wrote his "Histories" nearly thirty years after Flavius Josephus wrote the "Jewish War". A repetition of information from a history made closer to the event being described is not a second source of the account. Very interesting in the material from Tacitus that you linked to is the very next line after the section you quoted:

quote: This mysterious prophecy really referred to Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, true to the selfish ambitions of mankind, thought that this mighty destiny was reserved for them, and not even their calamities opened their eyes to the truth.


And what does that have to do with anything? The author is only stating the obvious. We already know that Josephus was writing the work for Vespasian and Titus.

"This mysterious prophecy" ( Messianic Prophesy of the Jews ) "really referred to Vespasian and Titus" (according to Josephus and Roman Historians of the First Century) " but the common people, true to the selfish ambitions of mankind, thought that this mighty destiny was reserved for them, and not even their calamities opened their eyes to the truth. "




The point is that Josephus used events that happened to make his work plausible. ( Halley's Comet )

Do I think Josephus used literary license when he talked about the light shining on the Alter and the Priests hearing loud Voices, of course I do. However, this could have been the very things that the Rebels in Jerusalem themselves believed.

Vespasian, Titus, and Josephus were all present in the Land at the time and I think that people likely saw something strange and like Halley's Comet, Josephus used it to make his work seem that much more plausible when read by Vespasian and Titus, or the Jewish People themselves.

The Jewish people were at the time convinced the Messiah was to come and save them. Halley's Comet and any other strange aerial phenomena would have been and certainly was considered by them to have been signs of this salvation.

Obviously Josephus uses these "signs" to refer to Vespasian and Titus.

Either way we clearly disagree on this one.



[edit on 9-1-2006 by lost_shaman]



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 06:36 PM
link   
*laughs*

Whereas Cicada is well written and well read I sense an urgent need to quantify a quality.

A piece of artwork has a finite meaning.

Or does it?

“A picture is worth a thousand words” or so they say… Cicadas discourse is indeed lengthy, (and lofty) but still falls far short of that mark. There’s more going on.

Cut the picture in half… now you have two thousand words… cut it again and again, each element, each brush stroke, each subtle shade, each and every molecule of pigment is, in it’s own right, worthy of a thousand words.

A work of art contains more words than have ever been uttered by every human being that has ever lived.

Even a work of art that is composed entirely of words, a work of fiction or poetry perhaps, contains more than the sum of its parts.

Some people read War and Peace and walk away thinking it’s a good book. Other people read the ingredients off of a pack of chewing gum and walk away with a deep understanding of the universe…

Sure, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar… (or a shield is just a shield)

Sometimes.

But not always.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 10:01 PM
link   
torbjon,

I'd appreciate it if you would refrain from making snide comments about my urges, thanks. All that quasi-abstract, faux-poetic description of the infinite nature of art is nice and all, but no matter how many word games you play with a trite cliché like "a picture has a thousand words" you're not going to invalidate art history. If you think the truth is only in the eye of the beholder (as clichés seem to be the preferred mode of expression...) then you're just one short step away from solipsism. Why bother having this conversation at all? You very well just might be having it only with yourself.


originally posted by lost_shaman
You could also use this argument to invalidate any thing recorded through History.


Not really. There is a recognized methodology for assessing the validity of works of history. It is called the Historical Method. I'm not saying that I'm a perfect historian, but we cannot just choose a pet notion and insist an account in history supports it with out examaning the criteria. You can pout, call me names, say I'm too mean, whatever. It isn't going to change the level of verifiability of this passage of text.


originally posted by lost_shaman
The fact that the Halley's Comet reference occurs with the "event" in the text is a validating factor.


No it isn't. If it were then it would also validate the account of the heifer giving birth to a lamb. Like the soldiers in the sky, Josephus presents this impossible birth as a well-observed, literal occurrence.


originally posted by lost_shaman
I offered it originally as evidence that accounts we would consider UFO sightings are present in History.


And it fails to do so.


originally posted by lost_shaman
I have not said anything was certain other than people see and report things they can not explain.


And I have agreed with you on that concept in theory and in general. Your contention that this particular account describes such a scenario isn't completely impossible, but there is not enough evidence available to make the case. There are other more logical and more likely explanations. You still think I'm making a general argument despite the fact that I've said I'm only discussing specific cases over and over again.


originally posted by lost_shaman
What percentage of UFO sightings have astronomical explanations?

What would have changed or be different in History from Modern times ?

Just because Airplanes and Weather balloons were not present in History does not mean UFO sightings are not present in History.


I have no contention here. It's safe and easy to make arguments when you keep them on a general level. Let's talk specifics.


originally posted by lost_shaman
If your idea of an unbiased view is to misrepresent the event and pepper your thoughts with Star Wars references and talk about beaming up aliens and floating cites, it is hard for me to think that you are unbiased.


I'm not misrepresenting the event. I refuse to accept it cut away from the larger text that it is derived from, because understanding context is key to comprehension. I think it's okay to have a sense of humor about this topic. I'm sorry if you think every time I make a joke that it's a personal attack on you. I'm not always a nice person and have never claimed to be so. When someone starts picking at my work without addressing the salient points, when they tell me I'm wrong multiple times when I'm not, with nothing substantial to support their contention, when the information they do present actually supports what I'm saying rather then what they are saying but they continuously slide around that point, then I tend to get somewhat irritated. I react by being sarcastic. I'll try to tone it down, but if you're really so offended, no one's forcing you to read my posts.


originally posted by lost_shaman
I offered the modern sighting in Brazil to show how modern day people also thought their cities were surrounded since you don't seem to understand how this could happen.


What I don't understand is what phenomena looks like armies of men to everyone who sees it besides armies of men. Stars don't look like men, comets don't look like men, the majority if not all recorded UFOs, fake or otherwise, do not look like men. What phenomena do you imagine was taking place above Jerusalem that caused the population to share this mass miscomprehension? What you're presenting is minutely possible, but not very likely. I'm sorry, but no one who tells you otherwise is doing you any favors.



originally posted by lost_shaman
And what does that have to do with anything? The author is only stating the obvious. We already know that Josephus was writing the work for Vespasian and Titus.


I quoted it because you conveniently cut off the paragraph right before that sentence. As far as I could tell you were presenting it as a second testimony to the sighting, but this line shows that Tacitus recognized that the purpose of citing the omen was to add credence to the presentation of the sacking of Jerusalem by Rome as an act of divine mandate, and he repeats it for the same purpose.

We disagree. Others can decide for themselves. Heads up. We're going to Japan next.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Your whole argument is based on supposition.

Josephus is talking about the signs and portents that incited the Zealots and Nationalists. There is no reason to think this is pure fabrication after the fact.

Does that mean that Priests had DNA technology ? No! Have you ever heard of Magic tricks? Don't you think at a time a factionalism that a few well placed Miracles would come in handy?

Just because Josephus thinks that the Messianic prophesy related to Vespasian means nothing.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Your whole argument is based on supposition.


No, your whole argument is based on supposition, and wild supposition at that. The portions of my presentation that offer an alternative explanation of this passage of text are speculative, and labeled as such.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
Josephus is talking about the signs and portents that incited the Zealots and Nationalists. There is no reason to think this is pure fabrication after the fact.


No matter what you want to make of the work of Josephus, there is no way that an eight+ year old account of an, at best, urban legend represents proof of a UFO sighting. It's really that simple. We can ping-pong these points back and forth forever, but nothing is going to change that fact.


Originally posted by lost_shaman
Does that mean that Priests had DNA technology ? No! Have you ever heard of Magic tricks? Don't you think at a time a factionalism that a few well placed Miracles would come in handy?


Maybe that is the case. Such a thing cannot be determined from the material available. You sure seem willing to explore alternative explanations for the supernatural descriptions that don't conform to your theory. Which I suppose is anything that doesn't happen in the sky. Why is it you are willing to assume chicanery on the part of the Temple priests but not on Flavius Josephus with his known and heavily apparent agenda?


Originally posted by lost_shaman
Just because Josephus thinks that the Messianic prophesy related to Vespasian means nothing.


Actually it is quite critical to understanding why he employed the passage. Why do the supposed UFO timelines never present the context of this account? Do you not agree that it is necessary to first understand the nature of the material being discussed before drawing conclusions about it? Does not your own avatar suggest that we deny ignorance?


[edit on 10-1-2006 by Cicada]



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join