Archaeologists uncover pre-Christian temple in Norway

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Malcher
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Apparently you do not like this, but you are going to have to get used to this. We are not sheep at the trough.

Where exactly are the extraordinary claims? The archaeological process shows that the site was hidden or sealed. You can tell by comparing the matrix covering the site with that around it.
Then the lead investigator says that from his experience as a scientist, this site is a temple site. OK, we can trust him on that, right?
Then he states that elements are missing from the sealed site, and that it was the habit of the Norse to take those elements with them to use in new temple sites. History shows that there was an influx of pagan Norse in Iceland about this time. Why would they hide the site as they left? Christians destroyed the old temple sites...but the land was still sacred to the pagans.

Again, what's all the hub-bub, Bub?

Are you trying to say that it is bashing Christianity to refer to coercive conversion? Wrong argument.

You'll note I have already questioned the initial link...something smells about the process. But the archaeologist provides the relevant opinions on what he has there, and he has spent a lot of time in his studies acquiring the knowledge to make such a determination. We haven't seen the site reports, so his opinion is the best material available at this time...but it is an educated opinion. Again, I really don't see what has your knickers in a knot unless you take offence at the inference that Christians destroyed the liturgical elements of those who came before. Tough. They did.

Hi Johnny,

How can we believe you when you say you are an archeoligist?
Can you post the definition of one and show how it hub bubs off your post above.
Thanks ljb

Asking someone for proof of claims with no evidence does seem to rub a few people in this thread the wrong way. I wonder why that is. That is just too bad. Are we supposed to be docile and diminutive while people cash in?

Then i ask the question why? Why should we not question folk tales or what someone wants to be true merely on finding a few beads and developing a whole story around it.

I mean we are still asking for proof and all we are getting is an editorial equal to the check out line tabloids.

If the tale is true fine just have the proof because like i said earlier people are just tired of being lied to. But this is a form of indoctrination. I run away from that kicking and screaming yet i am painted in a negative light by Dan and Johnny for the simple crime of asking questions...asking for some proof.

Some minds are truly malleable. This is fine but to break out the pitch forks for asking questions makes me feel manipulated and used like a dirty wash rag.

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by Danbones

what an odd statement

well since I am decendant from a people who had it done to them maybe I have an interest

the sites moto is deny ingnorance not perpetrate it

what an odd reply.

What are you talking about

a) we don't know if this WAS the reason, it is simply a suggestion from someone in 2012

b) As it happened over a thousand years ago (if it indeed happened for the reason the person making the assertion suggests) I'd lose the victim shroud

Deny ignorance indeed

your point?
christ is from 2000 years ago has never even proven to exist
and there many posters wearing the vistim shroud here

to you too

Originally posted by Malcher

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Malcher
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Apparently you do not like this, but you are going to have to get used to this. We are not sheep at the trough.

Where exactly are the extraordinary claims? The archaeological process shows that the site was hidden or sealed. You can tell by comparing the matrix covering the site with that around it.
Then the lead investigator says that from his experience as a scientist, this site is a temple site. OK, we can trust him on that, right?
Then he states that elements are missing from the sealed site, and that it was the habit of the Norse to take those elements with them to use in new temple sites. History shows that there was an influx of pagan Norse in Iceland about this time. Why would they hide the site as they left? Christians destroyed the old temple sites...but the land was still sacred to the pagans.

Again, what's all the hub-bub, Bub?

Are you trying to say that it is bashing Christianity to refer to coercive conversion? Wrong argument.

You'll note I have already questioned the initial link...something smells about the process. But the archaeologist provides the relevant opinions on what he has there, and he has spent a lot of time in his studies acquiring the knowledge to make such a determination. We haven't seen the site reports, so his opinion is the best material available at this time...but it is an educated opinion. Again, I really don't see what has your knickers in a knot unless you take offence at the inference that Christians destroyed the liturgical elements of those who came before. Tough. They did.

Hi Johnny,

How can we believe you when you say you are an archeoligist?
Can you post the definition of one and show how it hub bubs off your post above.
Thanks ljb

Asking someone to for proof of claims with no evidence does seem to rub a few people in this thread the wrong way. That is just too bad. Are we supposed to be docile and diminutive while people cash in?

Then i ask the question why? Why should we not question folk tales or what someone wants to be true merely on finding a few beads and developing a whole story around it.

I mean we are still asking for proof and all we are getting is an editorial equal to the check out line tabloids.

If the tale is true fine just have the proof because like i said earlier people are just tired of being lied to. But this is a form of indoctrination. I run away from that kicking and screaming yet i am painted in a negative light by Dan and Johnny for the simple crime of asking questions...asking for some proof.

Some minds are truly malleable.

you have been asked to stand and deliver yourself
have you
no
hypocrit fail
prove there ever was a real jesus christ
smarty pants

I can see why the norse might have been wary of the christians if you are any fair representation of one
like the christians in the movie "the kingdom of heaven" I'll wager

Originally posted by Danbones

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Malcher
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Apparently you do not like this, but you are going to have to get used to this. We are not sheep at the trough.

Where exactly are the extraordinary claims? The archaeological process shows that the site was hidden or sealed. You can tell by comparing the matrix covering the site with that around it.
Then the lead investigator says that from his experience as a scientist, this site is a temple site. OK, we can trust him on that, right?
Then he states that elements are missing from the sealed site, and that it was the habit of the Norse to take those elements with them to use in new temple sites. History shows that there was an influx of pagan Norse in Iceland about this time. Why would they hide the site as they left? Christians destroyed the old temple sites...but the land was still sacred to the pagans.

Again, what's all the hub-bub, Bub?

Are you trying to say that it is bashing Christianity to refer to coercive conversion? Wrong argument.

You'll note I have already questioned the initial link...something smells about the process. But the archaeologist provides the relevant opinions on what he has there, and he has spent a lot of time in his studies acquiring the knowledge to make such a determination. We haven't seen the site reports, so his opinion is the best material available at this time...but it is an educated opinion. Again, I really don't see what has your knickers in a knot unless you take offence at the inference that Christians destroyed the liturgical elements of those who came before. Tough. They did.

Hi Johnny,

How can we believe you when you say you are an archeoligist?
Can you post the definition of one and show how it hub bubs off your post above.
Thanks ljb

you can believe JC is an archaeologist because he IS an archaeologist
and a very experienced and methodical and careful one as well
he is highly regarded at ATS

sooo...how can we believe this Jesus Christ is the son of god?

are there any archeaologists that will vouch for that fact?
or is it a hoax?

Hi dan
Johnny looks stout enough to field his own questions eh?

CHRIST FIGHTS MUSLIM NATIONS ...
.....Even among so many Christians who claim to be experts on the subject of prophecy, I find as I question them on so many parts of the Bible, they actually lack understanding of many of the most important portions of Biblical prophecy. The most amazing prophecies in the Bible are hardly ever discussed today. In every portrayal of Christ's return to the earth, He is fighting a nation that today is Muslim

www.abovetopsecret.com...

here not much has changed in a thousand years has it?
its STILL kill the unbelievers!!!!

reply to post by longjohnbritches


ah
who are you?

reply to post by Danbones


Oh I dunno - I think think that in this case it's pretty much a Christian emblem, but she was buried with other grave goods which is definately not Christian. I think that this early in Anglo Saxon conversion, the edges were still blurred.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Danbones

 

you are familiar with the links to Catholicism and the Romans, no? That is why they build on top of other sites: it is a political religious cult. They didn't "convert", they "conquered".

Well That reminds of Islam to Remember Egypt Wasn't Islamic before in the past.

I guess all religions are like this then.

reply to post by ironorchid


Imention it because it is called a CELTIC cross
it has been shown to be a nvigation tool a measuring tool and a clock
parts of one were found in the pyramids
the mayans had them
and the celts used them LONG before christianity
the henges and barroes were layed out with these DEVICES
the celts based there whole cyclic existance around the timing observed with this instrument
thats how they laid out all those mounds that only have the sunlight enter on solstices etc...

again they were in use THOUSANDS of years before christ
of course dealing with the reality of that upsets some delicate apple carts


please refere to page one
there is a great deal of informnation on this there
how do you think the norse made there way around the ocean?
they guessed???






you have Celltic red haired mummies all over the world and they built pyramids
what tool did they use for that?


no wonder I have christaians who can't prove there is a christ screaming bloody murder all over this thread

Oh look, a christian hate thread, very typical of ATS. Humans destroy, not religions. Blame the gun or the user? Its common sense. But if you wanna blame religion, how about Islam, ravaging north africa, constantinople, building on the temple mount. How about atheism, make a list of all the people Stalin killed. Dont think youd have enough space to.

Originally posted by isaac7777
Oh look, a christian hate thread, very typical of ATS. Humans destroy, not religions. Blame the gun or the user? Its common sense. But if you wanna blame religion, how about Islam, ravaging north africa, constantinople, building on the temple mount. How about atheism, make a list of all the people Stalin killed. Dont think youd have enough space to.

responding for a request for proof with proof for people who cant supply proof them selves is HATE???

Jesus would be proud
its gonna be along eternity in the Heaven (why is it named after a summerian god Ea?) of catholic priests for you boys



well i wanted to know why the norse pagans hid their site
Now I know.
here comes the iNQUISITION!

reply to post by Danbones


Not arguing with your premise at all - perhaps that would be a topic for another thread, but in the link that I gave I believe the cross buried with the body was a nod to a relatively new religion in England at that time.

I just thought that it was an interesting crossover with your article about changing belief systems.

Originally posted by ironorchid
reply to post by Danbones

 

Not arguing with your premise at all - perhaps that would be a topic for another thread, but in the link that I gave I believe the cross buried with the body was a nod to a relatively new religion in England at that time.

I just thought that it was an interesting crossover with your article about changing belief systems.

well i notice the cross was worn so it may have been old
and it might be you are correct too
heres to fair discussion and thank you so much for the link it is one of the very important posts on this thread
LOL

reply to post by Danbones


All is cool Dan
And thank you so much for an interesting thread - props to you.

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

ah
who are you?

The sound I am waiting for is " Here's Johnny!!!

Would it be possible for you to fess up to the reality stareing you in the face.
Would that be ok with the rules?

Dan, you seem to be very confused.

Since when is someone asking for proof of claims "screaming bloody murder"? Does having honest truthful information go against your indoctrination?

You have been ridiculing people in this thread who are simply asking you for a little evidence. I asked for evidence and all i have gotten is responses like: "you should believe him", "he looked into it" or "why are you bashing"...as if asking for proof is bashing. These are very heavy handed traits being displayed. Why dont you and JohnTheCanuck (what i remember from his name) just say "just believe what you read, dont ask for proof".

Why would i do that? To stay stupid just to satisfy your fantasy? After all isnt that the result of NOT asking questions? Because i think it does not help us to learn by not permitting questions to be asked.

Not my job to prove someone else's claims. That is up to them. But dont try to stifle people asking for a little proof and truth.

So i will just ask again:

Was it the soil that was packed down hard (supposedly) or the beads that were found that lead to these conclusions?

Originally posted by Malcher
Dan, you seem to be very confused.

Since when is someone asking for proof of claims "screaming bloody murder"? Does having honest truthful information go against your indoctrination?

You have been ridiculing people in this thread who are simply asking you for a little evidence. I asked for evidence and all i have gotten is responses like: "you should believe him", "he looked into it" or "why are you bashing"...as if asking for proof is bashing. These are very heavy handed traits being displayed. Why dont you and JohnTheCanuck (what i remember from his name) just say "just believe what you read, dont ask for proof".

Why would i do that? To stay stupid just to satisfy your fantasy? After all isnt that the result of NOT asking questions? Because i think it does not help us to learn by not permitting questions to be asked.

Not my job to prove someone else's claims. That is up to them. But dont try to stifle people asking for a little proof and truth.

edit on 18-3-2012 by Malcher because: (no reason given)

here is a post that has nothing to do with this thread but everything to do with your conduct here'
enjoy

You made the claim that you've seen and read these intelligence reports. People don't believe you. It's on you to provide the source of your information. You don't post something without any reference as to what you're talking about as it were some "matter of fact" then complain about how people are attacking your claim. That's ridiculous.
:
YOU wrote a post. People challenged it. Now YOU provide the references you made, because that's the responsibility you take when you make a post with claims in it. Apparently it's NOT common knowledge, so go find your references and post them up. Nobody forced you to make a post referencing these sources of information that claim what you're saying they claim. YOU decided to post that, now source it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...&addstar=1&on=13707936#pid13707936

12th post down

I have no idea what that last post is about.

Is this some type of blog thread?

Some here are asking to support what you linked to because with no proof then where does this leave us?

here you go pal I hope you can read:

Although the Scandinavians became nominally Christian, it took considerably longer for actual Christian beliefs to establish themselves among the people.[1] The old indigenous traditions that had provided security and structure were challenged by ideas that were unfamiliar, such as original sin, the Incarnation, and the Trinity.[1] Archaeological excavations of burial sites on the island of Lovön near modern-day Stockholm have shown that the actual Christianization of the people was very slow and took at least 150–200 years,[2] and this was a very central location in the Swedish kingdom. Thirteenth century runic inscriptions from the merchant town of Bergen in Norway show little Christian influence, and one of them appeals to a Valkyrie.[3]

During the early Middle Ages the papacy had not yet manifested itself as the central Catholic authority, so that regional variants of Christianity could develop.[4] Since the image of a "victorious Christ" frequently appears in early Germanic art, scholars have suggested that Christian missionaries presented Christ "as figure of strength and luck" and that possibly the Book of Revelation, which presents Christ as victor over Satan, played a central part in the spread of Christianity among the Vikings

we have bribery for Jesus

In 826, the King of Jutland Harald Klak was forced to flee from Denmark by Horik I, Denmark's other king. Harald went to Emperor Louis I of Germany to seek help getting his lands in Jutland back. Louis I offered to make Harald Duke of Frisia if he would give up the old gods. Harald agreed,

crush kill destroy

Christian missionaries recognized early on that the Danes did not worship stone or wooden idols as the north Germans or some Swedes did. They could not
simply destroy an image