What is "the holy grail"; is it a cup or a bloodline

reply to post by adjensen

Originally posted by adjensen
No, there are a number of Coptic scholars, and the clue that tipped them off to this being a fake was that whoever wrote it didn't really know Coptic all that well. If the piece was authentic, it would have been written by someone for whom ancient Coptic was their native language, so it immediately caused suspicion.

Yes, there are a number of Coptic scholars, but there are only a handful in the world, who are experts in the Coptic language…

So what about Ariel Shisha-Halevy, the Professor of Linguistics at Hebrew University, who is a leading expert in Coptic language; who stated the language showed no evidence of being a forgery…did he just make a mistake?…seems very hard to believe he did….

Originally posted by adjensen
Within the last ten years, a guy named Michael Grondin posted a web page with his translation of the Coptic Gospel of Thomas (available here). In preparing his translation, he made a mistake (since fixed,) a typo, on one of the words -- he'd accidentally left a letter off, turning one Coptic word into two nonsense words. That typo also appears on the Gospel of Jesus Wife, proving that Grondin's translation of the Gospel of Thomas was the source from where the forger copied the Coptic words that he drew on the fragment.

Ok, I see what you mean…so it would be a pretty strange coincidence, if the original scribe made the exact same typo/mistake…hmmm

But it’s not impossible, either though surely, even if unlikely…

Originally posted by adjensen
As I told you, Karen King was supposed to have the fragment and the ink carbon dated and analyzed to demonstrate that both are from the Fourth Century. That wouldn't dispel all distrust, because the papyrus probably is that old -- you can buy 1600 year old blank papyrus pieces on the antiquities market -- but it's pretty much her only hope for saving face.

If it’s been proven to be a fake though, then…

Originally posted by adjensen
That was over a year ago. Any rational person would say that they tested it, it was not legitimate, and they quietly let it go away to save face. I contacted Mark Goodacre a couple of months ago, and he confirmed that the authentication results have not been released.

…what confirmation evidence, are they still waiting on…? I assume you mean carbon dating testing results.

And it’s hard to tell from your above post, but do you mean the test results are in, but they’re just not releasing the results…or have they just not got any results confirmed yet…?

On a side note – If what your saying is all true, then it’s pretty irritating, that they still have all the authentication info up, on the “Harvard Divinity School” website…


- JC

reply to post by Joecroft

And it’s hard to tell from your above post, but do you mean the test results are in, but they’re just not releasing the results

Exactly.

Bear in mind, the people who would have egg on their face if the results are negative are:

1) A prominent scholar with a distinctive liberal/feminist perspective on Christianity (Dr. Karen King)
2) Yale University (where Dr. King is employed)
3) Harvard University (King's paper was to be published in the journal Harvard Theological Review)
4) Smithsonian (They had already produced a documentary on the "Gospel")

Do you think any of those four would prefer that the negative results of the dating tests not be released?

reply to post by vethumanbeing

Oh yes he did; and you are not telling me anything new that I do not already know.
Coptic is a bridge language he knew it and spoke it.

That is an assertive statement. What evidence do you have that Jesus spoke or read Coptic?

As I previously stated, we can say, from the texts in scripture that he cites, that he read both Hebrew and Greek, but I've never seen any evidence that he spoke or read Coptic.

reply to post by adjensen

Originally posted by adjensen

Exactly.

Bear in mind, the people who would have egg on their face if the results are negative are:

1) A prominent scholar with a distinctive liberal/feminist perspective on Christianity (Dr. Karen King)
2) Yale University (where Dr. King is employed)
3) Harvard University (King's paper was to be published in the journal Harvard Theological Review)
4) Smithsonian (They had already produced a documentary on the "Gospel")

Do you think any of those four would prefer that the negative results of the dating tests not be released?

There may of course be other reasons, for there silence, for example, if the find is dated between 40 – 70 AD, that would have huge implications; whereby they be reluctant, to release it to the general public.

But this is such a well known case, because of the media stir, which it created. I mean, anybody who’s anybody, who has an interest in Christianity, Archeology and History, will be aware of this find.

Reporters, prominent archeologists and religious historians will surely need confirmation of the results, even if not released on a wider scale to the public.

This is such a big case, and has huge historical importance, that I don’t think they’re going to be able to keep this quiet, in the long term.

Originally posted by adjensen
Within the last ten years, a guy named Michael Grondin posted a web page with his translation of the Coptic Gospel of Thomas (available here). In preparing his translation, he made a mistake (since fixed,) a typo, on one of the words -- he'd accidentally left a letter off, turning one Coptic word into two nonsense words. That typo also appears on the Gospel of Jesus Wife, proving that Grondin's translation of the Gospel of Thomas was the source from where the forger copied the Coptic words that he drew on the fragment.

I’ve been thinking about this typo error, that produced the two nonsense words.

First thing to note here, is that the Professor of Linguistics and expert in Coptic language, Ariel Shisha-Halevy, either missed these two nonsense words. Or he saw them, and just thought it was a natural mistake, and that other than that, the Coptic language checked out fine.

I used to write scripts in php, which is a web based computer language. Now sometimes there are common errors, which can occur, in certain situations. And within rare situations a certain type of mistake, can occur, between two different people.

In short, the same type of mistake can happen, between two different people, and it can occur quite naturally for the same reasons. (Although it can be difficult to pin down the reasons, why two different people, make the same type of error)

Now on the “Harvard Divinity School” it mentions how some scribes, had to transfer some texts, from Greek over to Coptic. There may be a certain type of error, that occurs quite naturally, for scribes who are used to writing in Greek.

But it maybe rare, in the sense it only happens, when writing certain phrases, and words, that are written along side each other. It would also appear that Michael Grondin, has knowledge of writing in Greek.

I don’t know Coptic very well, so I cant go into a greater explanation than that. But I think it’s possible, that two different people, could make, the same type of error.

Since pieces of blank ancient papyrus might have been found and written on in modern times, authentication involves more than just affirming that the papyrus itself is ancient, which it surely is in this case. It also includes close study of the handwriting and of how the ink was chemically absorbed by the papyrus, especially in the faded and damaged areas, since it is almost impossible to reduplicate these kinds of patterns of interaction between ink and papyrus at such a very fine level. King and Luijendijk used high resolution digital and infrared photography and also examined the papyrus itself in different kinds of light and with magnification

Thus, on the basis of the age of the papyrus, the placement and absorption of the ink on the page, the type of the handwriting, and the Coptic grammar and spelling, it was concluded that it is highly probable that the fragment is an ancient text.

Source

I’m really having trouble believing that highly skilled professors, have made a mistake, in regards to this key detail, of the ink transfer to papyrus. A Coptic error of missing the 2 nonsense word’s (assuming that’s the case), I can understand, but not this type of test, which must be done fairly regularly, with all types of ancient texts.

The above extracts state, that it’s almost impossible, to reduplicate the patterns of ink, and its interaction with papyrus.

And that absorption of the ink to the papyrus, was confirmed as authentic, via the use of high-resolution infrared technology.

The question we need to be asking is…has anyone demonstrated a way, in which that aspect could be faked…?


- JC

reply to post by Joecroft

There may of course be other reasons, for there silence, for example, if the find is dated between 40 – 70 AD, that would have huge implications; whereby they be reluctant, to release it to the general public.

What?

There is absolutely no evidence, and no claim ever made, that this dates from the First Century. If it is authentic, it is a Gnostic Christian document from the Fourth Century, similar to the texts from Nag Hammadi.

First thing to note here, is that the Professor of Linguistics and expert in Coptic language, Ariel Shisha-Halevy, either missed these two nonsense words. Or he saw them, and just thought it was a natural mistake, and that other than that, the Coptic language checked out fine.

The error is not really of any consequence until one realizes that the whole of the text is made up of Coptic text from the Gospel of Thomas, and that the typo existed in both an online version of Thomas and in this fragment. The odds that the person who wrote this did not do so by copying from Grondin's web site are ridiculously small.

Since that revelation, I have seen absolutely no one, including the original experts that King consulted, come forward to endorse this fragment as being legitimate. You are welcome to do so, of course, but that would seem to be more steeped in "I want it to be real, therefore it is" than the actual facts, which are overwhelming in favour of it being a fraud.

reply to post by adjensen

Originally posted by Joecroft
There may of course be other reasons, for there silence, for example, if the find is dated between 40 – 70 AD, that would have huge implications; whereby they be reluctant, to release it to the general public.

Originally posted by adjensen
What?

There is absolutely no evidence, and no claim ever made, that this dates from the First Century. If it is authentic, it is a Gnostic Christian document from the Fourth Century, similar to the texts from Nag Hammadi.

I never said it was from the first century. I was just making a possible explanation, for their silence because of the controversy and impact the find has acquired so far. I agree with you, that it’s most likely from the 2nd to 4th century. But there is a lot, we just don’t know right now…

But I don’t think silence, automatically means, it’s a fake…

Originally posted by adjensen
The error is not really of any consequence until one realizes that the whole of the text is made up of Coptic text from the Gospel of Thomas, and that the typo existed in both an online version of Thomas and in this fragment. The odds that the person who wrote this did not do so by copying from Grondin's web site are ridiculously small.

Well, I think the same error between 2 different people, is entirely possible, based on what I just explained to you, in my previous post. It may be a common error, for those who write in Greek regularly, and then transfer over to writing in Coptic. It’s not a perfect answer, but it’s certainly possible…IMO

Originally posted by adjensen
Since that revelation, I have seen absolutely no one, including the original experts that King consulted, come forward to endorse this fragment as being legitimate. You are welcome to do so, of course, but that would seem to be more steeped in "I want it to be real, therefore it is" than the actual facts, which are overwhelming in favour of it being a fraud.

And yet they still have the authentication details of the find, up on there website…strange…

You say it’s “overwhelming in favour of it being a fraud”, but I personally don’t see this overwhelming evidence, you speak of. All I see are scholars with different views, debating its validity.

Just to reiterate here…my stance, is that its appears to be most likely authentic, pending further results…I’m not wanting it to be fake, or wanting it be real…I’m fairly neutral actually…

Anyway, you haven’t responded, or offered a potential solution to the problem/question, from my previous post…

Here it is again….

Since pieces of blank ancient papyrus might have been found and written on in modern times, authentication involves more than just affirming that the papyrus itself is ancient, which it surely is in this case. It also includes close study of the handwriting and of how the ink was chemically absorbed by the papyrus, especially in the faded and damaged areas, since it is almost impossible to reduplicate these kinds of patterns of interaction between ink and papyrus at such a very fine level. King and Luijendijk used high resolution digital and infrared photography and also examined the papyrus itself in different kinds of light and with magnification

Thus, on the basis of the age of the papyrus, the placement and absorption of the ink on the page, the type of the handwriting, and the Coptic grammar and spelling, it was concluded that it is highly probable that the fragment is an ancient text.

Source

I’m really having trouble believing that highly skilled professors, have made a mistake, in regards to this key detail, of the ink transfer to papyrus. A Coptic error of missing the 2 nonsense word’s (assuming that’s the case), I can understand, but not this type of test, which must be done fairly regularly, with all types of ancient texts.

The above extracts state, that it’s almost impossible, to reduplicate the patterns of ink, and its interaction with papyrus.

And that absorption of the ink to the papyrus, was confirmed as authentic, via the use of high-resolution infrared technology.

The question we need to be asking is…has anyone demonstrated a way, in which that aspect could be faked…?


- JC

adjensen
reply to post by Joecroft

 

The error is not really of any consequence until one realizes that the whole of the text is made up of Coptic text from the Gospel of Thomas, and that the typo existed in both an online version of Thomas and in this fragment. The odds that the person who wrote this did not do so by copying from Grondin's web site are ridiculously small.

Since that revelation, I have seen absolutely no one, including the original experts that King consulted, come forward to endorse this fragment as being legitimate. You are welcome to do so, of course, but that would seem to be more steeped in "I want it to be real, therefore it is" than the actual facts, which are overwhelming in favour of it being a fraud.

I appreciate your effort to point out the fallacies in these findings however the maxim "a man convinced against his will is unconvinced still". is in effect.Joe is not seeking truth he is seeking to prove his theories no matter how good intentioned he may be he is wrong.The evidence of his pursuit is in all his post even though he can't see it.

Joe I am not condemning you in any way just making it painfully clear you are very mislead by your own misguided instincts.You will be finding "new evidence" to support your mysticism Belief System (BS) from here to eternity if gone unchecked. The only good thing is you are in a larger box than many others.The fact is you will not find the truth in any of the sources you are seeking.It will only end in"if the facts don't fit your ever changing theory ..changes the facts".

The fact is if you want to "know" ANYTHING about the creator God it will only be known by one source.The books of knowledge you seek will all come to naught.Until the knowledge is revealed to you even 'truth" in those books can't be known.All of the theory I've seen you propagate are very WIDE rabbit trails with red herrings strewn about as bait.It is the wide path of religion that leads to the gate of destruction of your Belief System.That is the only good thing about it.

I know for a fact you not only won't believe what I'm saying but that you can't believe it.It is the nature of being on the wide path that leads to destruction.One of the main works the creator God is doing in the process of salvation is the destroying of Belief Systems of ALL mankind.."your religion" that is in a constant state of flux.The facts is you are not born anew yet..none are.You are not a "spirit being" you are a human being that is alive (spirit) that is a soul.The myriad of "mysticism" that is believed by the masses is stupefying.The fact is the basis of truth is K.I.S.S...best of luck on your trip..

adjensen
reply to post by veteranhumanbeing

VHBOh yes he did; and you are not telling me anything new that I do not already know. Coptic is a bridge language he knew it and spoke it.

adjensenThat is an assertive statement. What evidence do you have that Jesus spoke or read Coptic?

Laughter required here. He was a fully 9 dimentional being and spoke many languages. Proof? He never wrote anything down, never kept a simple journal/diary of his travels/travails ministry relies upon others 'hearsay' (who werent there either in his lifetime) the man never existed according to your 'truth/proof detection methods'. Why would you question me; your thoughts ought to be the reason he left no physical record of his ministry (the insanity here). English is not his second language (I can testify to that) very hard to understand, his accent is very odd a wierd clipping off between syllables its (needing subtitles, as in the epic Mel Gibson movie 'The Passion'). I will illustrate an example. When he was traveling during the lost years with Joseph of Aramethea, to Great Britian, the orient, do you really think he was fluidly conversing with them in Greek, or Hebrew?

reply to post by vethumanbeing


Im not religious but even I know that the Holy grail was a cup challis that held Jesus blood. Its most likely the cup and Jesus were fictional stories.

If the grail was a blood line then multiple Jesuses would be alive today. If you believe this then point to some names who are these Jesuses then we will examine then.

Which thread is too what if ish to really make any sense.

reply to post by vethumanbeing

He was a fully 9 dimentional being and spoke many languages. Proof? He never wrote anything down, kept a simple journal/diary of his travels/travails other than others 'hearsay' the man never existed.

"He never wrote anything down"? What is your evidence for that?

How could Jesus have spoken a language that didn't even exist until a hundred years after he died? In Egypt during the First Century, they were still speaking Demotic.

Perhaps you're thinking of Aramaic, which is likely he did speak, but it's impossible for him to have spoken Coptic, because it hadn't been invented yet.

AthlonSavage
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

Im not religious but even I know that the Holy grail was a cup challis that held Jesus blood. Its most likely the cup and Jesus were fictional stories.
If the grail was a blood line then multiple Jesuses would be alive today. If you believe this then point to some names who are these Jesuses then we will examine then.
Which thread is too what if ish to really make any sense.

Thankyou for contributing here Althonsavage, always appreciated.
You do not know that. The metaphor is hidden (FOR SOME) in the 'idea' of a cup holding Christs blood (drank) at the last supper, the bread his body "the holy grail" is the bloodline of the family. There are two major genetics Dept. Universities in the USA that are desperately trying to determine this bloodline, as in be the first to identify it.
as they are looking for anomolies in DNA screens. Jesus had brothers and sisters that were biological to Joseph and Mary disregarding that other mysterious figure that impregnated Mary. Do you have any idea what the value of any discovery could mean (even identifying the Davidian line). Which thread is if ish? This one? mine are designed to be so.

reply to post by vethumanbeing


Stop mincing words if your aware of such studies then you are aware of the people they are testing. Come on out with it who do you think these magical Jesus blood line figures are, or you gonna have us all play hide and seek. Personally I think you into this belief because you are hoping to be one of the blood line figures yourself. Well you cant be because im a mortal and still have superior powers to you.

adjensen
reply to post by veteranhumanbeing

VHBHe was a fully 9 dimentional being and spoke many languages. Proof? He never wrote anything down, kept a simple journal/diary of his travels/travails other than others 'hearsay' the man never existed.

Adjensen"He never wrote anything down"? What is your evidence for that?

It doesnt exist; his writings would have been the first Epistle to the new testiment; or at least a forward to it (by an expert learned 'nailed this' pun intended theologian).

AdjensenHow could Jesus have spoken a language that didn't even exist until a hundred years after he died? In Egypt during the First Century, they were still speaking Demotic.

How could he have spoken a language not known until a hundred years after he died? You mean with his physical lips moving? I dont know (it would be a miracle).

AdjensenPerhaps you're thinking of Aramaic, which is likely he did speak, but it's impossible for him to have spoken Coptic, because it hadn't been invented yet.

.

I will give you this one, he did speak Aramaic. I might have been confusing the 'bridge' thing. My apologies. HE INVENTED COPTIC IN HIS SLEEP, just didnt see it manefest in his lifetime.

AthlonSavage
reply to post by veteranhumanbeing

Athlonsavage Stop mincing words if your aware of such studies then you are aware of the people they are testing. Come on out with it who do you think these magical Jesus blood line figures are, or you gonna have us all play hide and seek. Personally I think you into this belief because you are hoping to be one of the blood line figures yourself. Well you cant be because im a mortal and still have superior powers to you.

I am most personally aware of the testing and those being tested. No determinations, but anomilies have been found; the lack of a mitochondral Eve in the bloodline, no evidence of an 'inbreeding' marker (EVER) within the geneology; which is impossible regarding the darwinist theory of evolution or creationism, the (adama/eva). I am hoping to be one of the bloodline figures? Why would I hope, I am reluctantly a part of this study (blood was taken presumably to test the matriculating students for STDs) LIARS, Student Health Dept. Services nurse vampires (blood went to the genetics dept). You are mortal and have super powers, so we can get a posse together and fight evil. No special powers that Im aware of. Telepathy/empath only.

reply to post by vethumanbeing


Your another arpgme type, where you raise a highly speculative What if , which alludes to someone or a group of people living today being special but never come out and say who. To me its just childish mind games.

AthlonSavage
reply to post by vethumanbeing

athlonsavageYour another arpgme type, where you raise a highly speculative What if , which alludes to someone or a group of people living today being special but never come out and say who. To me its just childish mind games.

Apologies in advance to arpgme to be cast/thrown into this rabble of savages mind twists (I find very enjoyable BTW). Which what if speculation. Youve never been studied by an Athropology Dept in a University setting colluding with the Genetics Department? That would be absurd. Every new generation is born into a lighter frequency vibration and are by that fact are raising or already rised. They dont have to work as hard as us of the heavier cold war vibrations. They will change the course of this planet by mere fact they are of a higher frequency. They dont have to come out as they EXIST and being so ONLY if that; will change this planets high entropy. Childish mind games? I can give you a major childish manipulation: the crucifiction of Jesus; and how for centuries mankind is trying to understand or sort this one out. Just keeping you busy (so as not to seek the real truths of your creation and who you are in context to the heavens).

reply to post by vethumanbeing

Every new generation is born into a lighter frequency vibration and are by that fact are raising or already rised.

If there are any blood line gods alive today it wont be you that's for sure since the very fact of you being on the site and fumbling your answers means that you are on the lower hanging branches of spiritual tree. They would wasting their time studying you.

AthlonSavage
reply to post by vethumanbeing

VHB
Every new generation is born into a lighter frequency vibration and are by that fact are raising or already rised.

AthlonSavage If there are any blood line gods alive today it wont be you that's for sure since the very fact of you being on the site and fumbling your answers means that you are on the lower hanging branches of spiritual tree. They would wasting their time studying you.

These departments are not studying my intellect, they are looking at the blood draw and response to external stimulous applied to the body, and also how this body breaths; blood processes oxygen (how many beers drank before drunk 24) the saliva masticates the food; ear/head circumfrance measurements, hand size etc. Ive cast the dark shadow of my soul/being upon other sub-forums, RFT is the one I inflict myself most upon is all.

reply to post by Rex282




First of all, your entire post, reads like some kind of, off the wall rant.

Originally posted by Rex282
I appreciate your effort to point out the fallacies in these findings however the maxim "a man convinced against his will is unconvinced still". is in effect.

Joe is not seeking truth he is seeking to prove his theories no matter how good intentioned he may be he is wrong.The evidence of his pursuit is in all his post even though he can't see it.

What theories are you talking about…? The GOJW…?

All I have done is discuss evidence around the GOJW with adjensen. I even stated in my last reply to him, that I was neutral, as to whether the GOJW, is proven to be authentic or not.

Originally posted by Rex282
Joe I am not condemning you in any way just making it painfully clear you are very mislead by your own misguided instincts.

Misgiuded in what respect…my opening post on this thread…? Can you be a bit more specific…?

Originally posted by Rex282
You will be finding "new evidence" to support your mysticism Belief System (BS) from here to eternity if gone unchecked.

I don’t have a mystic belief system. lol

And seeing as you seem to know what my beliefs are, would you mind explaining to me, what you think they are…?

Originally posted by Rex282
The only good thing is you are in a larger box than many others.The fact is you will not find the truth in any of the sources you are seeking. It will only end in"if the facts don't fit your ever changing theory ..changes the facts".

Seeing as you seem to know, soo much about me… which/what sources am I seeking in?…

I’ve already found many truths, some of which I’ve never even talked about here on ATS.

Originally posted by Rex282
All of the theory I've seen you propagate are very WIDE rabbit trails with red herrings strewn about as bait. It is the wide path of religion that leads to the gate of destruction of your Belief System.That is the only good thing about it.

Show me these theories, I’ve have been propagating, with some links to my past posts…? And/Or, explain why you think they’re wrong etc…

I don’t have a belief system/Religion…I have a unique belief in Jesus…

Originally posted by Rex282
I know for a fact you not only won't believe what I'm saying but that you can't believe it. It is the nature of being on the wide path that leads to destruction. One of the main works the creator God is doing in the process of salvation is the destroying of Belief Systems of ALL mankind.."your religion" that is in a constant state of flux.

Well, I’m open to a discussion but you aren’t really making much sense here. Set up a thread, and I will listen to what you have to say. Most of what your discussing here, is way off topic…

Originally posted by Rex282
The facts is you are not born anew yet..none are.You are not a "spirit being" you are a human being that is alive (spirit) that is a soul. The myriad of "mysticism" that is believed by the masses is stupefying.The fact is the basis of truth is K.I.S.S...best of luck on your trip..

But we’ve already been through this, in this post

Only you, and Enochwasright, were of the opinion, that none are born again. 98 per cent, of the rest of the thread participants, believed in the opposite, as do I.

Why single me out, on another thread (which btw, isn’t fair on the OP), when I was in agreement with the rest of the believers, on that issue.

If you’re so passionate about the topic, then why not just set up a thread, and discuss/debate it, with believers openly…?



- JC

reply to post by vethumanbeing


What are you rambling on about speak English please