Ancient mosaic shows that Jesus was Russian?

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

In principle, all European peoples had origins from the Caucasus, since Noah's ark reached land on Mount Ararat in the Lesser Caucasus. It is believed that the Russians descended from Noah's son Japheth, although there is evidence that the Slavs nevertheless descended from Shem and his descendant of the tribe of Ephraim.

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: RussianTroll

Interesting thread RT some places like what we know call the Golant hights were not so long ago called the plains of Bashan
archive.org...

And they vanished in a short window after the author visited when the book was printed in 1865 there were photographs taken and in 1900 all was gone ! .

Sorry, I just saw your comment with a link to the book. Very interesting. I have a browser with an image translation function, so I’m happy to read it.

Thank you.

a reply to: RussianTroll

Noah's ark eh?

Personally, i don't place much stock in that sort of fiction, but i did like what Seth MacFarlane had to say on the matter.



Not denying there are plenty of flood mythoses out there doing the rounds in recorded history.

But "two by two of every creature with the breath of life" onto a wooden boat is complete and utter tripe.

a reply to: andy06shake

I accept your point. It is also very ancient, as is the point of view of “One God and Oneness of Creation.” But I drew attention to one fact: supporters of the One God are always more tolerant of the opinions of pagans. At least in Orthodoxy. This is the Strength.

By the way, today is a great holiday for the Orthodox - the Entry into the Temple of the Blessed Virgin Mary. I congratulate you, and you congratulate me.

a reply to: RussianTroll

The thing is monotheistic religion's entire theology and methodology depends upon the assumption that they are correct and that the one God is infallible.

Paganism does not exactly share the same limitations.

Ultimately though there is not much of a difference as BS is BS.

Organised religious practice in all its many guises be it monotheistic or polytheistic is a product of man with all his fears and fallibility laid bare.

People are free to choose to believe as they wish all the same and do indeed draw a measure of strength from their beliefs, so there is that i suppose.

a reply to: andy06shake

Stop and think.
Recent DNA analysis of hapligroups validate the white blue eyed race started right there where Noah's ark is said to have landed.
Aside from your expert scientific analysis from Seth McFarlane, though the prestigious scientist he is. He is not much of am anthropologist.
The out of Africa meme is destroyed by modern anthropology that shows without a doubt all civilization started with this area and groups that came from this area.
Think Scythians.
This group is the 1st to tame the horse and domesticated the cow and entered just about every culture and created their civilization.

They were blond/ginger blue eyed people.
Noah's sons were Aryan.

Examples.
Cleopatra, blue eyed.
Guatama Buddha, blue eyed.
Alexander the great.
Blue eyed.
Attila the hun, blonde blue eyed.
Mohammed, blonde blue eyed.
Ghengis Khan, blond blue eyed

There are moar

a reply to: andy06shake

You know, in the USSR there was a cult film “Beware of the Car”. In it, the hero stole cars from thieves and swindlers, sold them, and transferred the money to orphanages. So, he sold one car to a pastor who stole money from parishioners. To the question: how can he use parishioners’ money to buy a personal car, the pastor replied:

“Some believe that God exists, others believe that there is no God. Both are unprovable.”

So our dispute is a dialogue between a blind and a deaf)))

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

Stop and think.
Recent DNA analysis of hapligroups validate the white blue eyed race started right there where Noah's ark is said to have landed.

Go read that actual account in the Bible and then explain how such a thing could ever be accomplished.

Possibly best to take you own advice there.

Aside from your expert scientific analysis from Seth McFarlane, though the prestigious scientist he is. He is not much of am anthropologist.

Where as you are?

The out of Africa meme is destroyed by modern anthropology that shows without a doubt all civilization started with this area and groups that came from this area.

That's nice but it still does not make the account of the Lord commanding Noah to build an ark that held two of every animal any more tangible or believable.

Think Scythians.
This group is the 1st to tame the horse and domesticated the cow and entered just about every culture and created their civilization.

The Scythians were a nomadic people who inhabited the Eurasian steppes from the 9th century BCE to the 4th century.

And whilst they played a significant role in the ancient world, and no doubt had a profound impact on the cultures they encountered.

It's not accurate to say they were the first to tame the horse or domesticate the cow.

The exact origins of horse domestication and cow domestication are not definitively known, lost to the annuals of prehistoric times.

They were blond/ginger blue eyed people.
Noah's sons were Aryan

Still doesn't make the account of Noah's Ark any more believable.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: FarmerSimulation

Stop and think.
Recent DNA analysis of hapligroups validate the white blue eyed race started right there where Noah's ark is said to have landed.

Go read that actual account in the Bible and then explain how such a thing could ever be accomplished.

Possibly best to take you own advice there.

Aside from your expert scientific analysis from Seth McFarlane, though the prestigious scientist he is. He is not much of am anthropologist.

Where as you are?

The out of Africa meme is destroyed by modern anthropology that shows without a doubt all civilization started with this area and groups that came from this area.

That's nice but it still does not make the account of the Lord commanding Noah to build an ark that held two of every animal any more tangible or believable.

Think Scythians.
This group is the 1st to tame the horse and domesticated the cow and entered just about every culture and created their civilization.

The Scythians were a nomadic people who inhabited the Eurasian steppes from the 9th century BCE to the 4th century.

And whilst they played a significant role in the ancient world, and no doubt had a profound impact on the cultures they encountered.

It's not accurate to say they were the first to tame the horse or domesticate the cow.

The exact origins of horse domestication and cow domestication are not definitively not known, lost to the annual of prehistoric times.

They were blond/ginger blue eyed people.
Noah's sons were Aryan

Still doesn't make the account of Noah's Ark any more believable.

I am not debating Noah's ark atm.
I am debating anthropology and used Noah's sons as reference for the actual accounts.
I will be using Robert Sepehr for reference a lot here.

a reply to: RussianTroll

I think your propaganda pieces are going a bit to far here. Were you released from service with home work or something??

Most early Christians depicted Jesus as related to their race and culture and not Jewish.

academic.oup.com...

This chapter provides an introduction to early Christian mosaics that emphasizes the important role played by archaeology in improving our understanding of their geographical and architectural contexts. After a short discussion of the position of early Christian mosaics in the history of the medium, a brief review of the most productive methodologies used in research on mosaics is undertaken, followed by a survey of mosaic technology that includes the workshops and artists involved in mosaic production. In the rest of the chapter, a selection of mosaics in churches, martyria, chapels, and Christian mausolea located in various parts of the Mediterranean world is examined. The evidence from archaeology demonstrates that although early Christian mosaics share universal themes, the diversity reflected in their iconography and the presence of secondary themes rooted in local traditions necessitate a regional approach to their interpretation.

a reply to: RussianTroll

“Some believe that God exists, others believe that there is no God. Both are unprovable.”

I would argue that a belief in a god or creator force does not equate to man's accounts of organised religious practice.

And the thing is there are several concepts and ideas in various fields that due to the very nature of the beast, may be challenging or impossible to prove definitively.

God ticks that box.

Nonetheless i do enjoy spitballing the possibilities with you RT.

a reply to: FarmerSimulation

I am not debating Noah's ark atm.

Well, that's handy because it's just not possible the way it was laid out.

People escaping floods on a boat on the other hand is indeed a distinct possibility.

I am debating anthropology and used Noah's sons as reference for the actual accounts.

On that level, the information does indeed at least seem pertinent to the discussion.

But the thing is if the story is full of impossibilities and untangble accounts then the question begs as to the veracity of the rest of the account.

The current scientific consensus is that humans(Homo sapiens) originated in Africa.

The specific region is often cited as in East Africa, with evidence pointing to the Great Rift Valley as a significant area for early human evolution.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: RussianTroll

I think your propaganda pieces are going a bit to far here. Were you released from service with home work or something??

Most early Christians depicted Jesus as related to their race and culture and not Jewish.

academic.oup.com...

This chapter provides an introduction to early Christian mosaics that emphasizes the important role played by archaeology in improving our understanding of their geographical and architectural contexts. After a short discussion of the position of early Christian mosaics in the history of the medium, a brief review of the most productive methodologies used in research on mosaics is undertaken, followed by a survey of mosaic technology that includes the workshops and artists involved in mosaic production. In the rest of the chapter, a selection of mosaics in churches, martyria, chapels, and Christian mausolea located in various parts of the Mediterranean world is examined. The evidence from archaeology demonstrates that although early Christian mosaics share universal themes, the diversity reflected in their iconography and the presence of secondary themes rooted in local traditions necessitate a regional approach to their interpretation.

You know, now the “great and terrible” DontTreadOnMe will come into the dialogue and explain in a very correct form that there is no need to descend into a discussion of the OP’s personality, you need to write on the topic))))

originally posted by: RussianTroll

It was the Slavs who came to Iran and India, and not vice versa.

Indo-European languages

]
The peoples who came across Europe were neolithic so trying to label them a particular culture is incorrect and the language was the Proto-Indo-European language which came before your ramblings.
Proto-Indo-European

originally posted by: Kurokage
originally posted by: RussianTroll


It was the Slavs who came to Iran and India, and not vice versa.

Indo-European languages

The peoples who came across Europe were neolithic so trying to label them a particular culture is incorrect and the language was the Proto-Indo-European language which came before your ramblings.

I will leave it to your conscience to characterize my posts as “ramblings”
Try to stay within the realm of human morality and avoid personal insults.

a reply to: RussianTroll

How was it an insult? It is ramblings as they are incorrect and pure incorrect speculation on your part.