Posts by peacefulpete

8

Holy Phallus Batman!

by peacefulpete in

heres a god one..."isreal" translates into "it/he stands up-el" and basically means god's erection.

phallus worship is throughout the ot.

i will provide examples if others don't.

Summary..The patriarchs are all depicted as using sacred pillars/stones to represent Yahweh. Even the Temple had two sacred pillars/phalluses as part of it's "divinely provided" blueprint. It was only later priests who found the practice objectionable due to asserting that such was not the very earliest manner of honoring Yahweh. (they by that time had tried to draw a ditinction between themselves and neighboring cults and being that this was a practice common to the region's cults it was seen as a contamination, and besides He may have originally been a She) The superstition that gods dwelled in naturally found stones was also part of the beliefs of the earliest Jews/Isrealites. Sorry about the formatting, it squashed. I can not edit from home.

8

Holy Phallus Batman!

by peacefulpete in

heres a god one..."isreal" translates into "it/he stands up-el" and basically means god's erection.

phallus worship is throughout the ot.

i will provide examples if others don't.

peacefulpete

I like the one where Abraham has his servant grab his privates and "swear by Yahweh". Yes the Jews worshipped Yahweh using the phallus to represent him. The "pillar of fire" that led them in the wilderness takes on a whole new meaning now doesn't it? The following is from the Jewish Encyclopedia. They have no probem admitting these facts. STONE AND STONE-WORSHIP:(print this article) By : Emil G. Hirsch Immanuel Benzinger Ma??ebah. (see image) Cromlech Near 'Amman.(From a photograph by the Palestine Exploration Fund.) Sacred stones are mentioned with great frequency in the Old Testament; they were erected by Jacob at Beth-el (Gen. xxviii. 18; comp. xxxi. 13), at Shechem (Gen. xxxiii. 20 [where should be read instead of ), at Gilead (Gen. xxxi. 52), and over the grave of Rachel; and by Joshua in the sanctuary of Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 26; comp. Judges ix. 6). The "stone of help" ("Eben-ezer") set up by Samuel (I Sam. vii. 12) was such a "ma??ebah"; and other sacred stones existed at Gibeon (II Sam. xx. 8), at Enrogel (I Kings i. 9, "the serpent-stone"), and at Michmash (I Sam. xiv. 33). Twelve stones of this characterwere set up by Moses near his altar at the foot of Mount Sinai (Ex. xxiv. 4), and a circle of twelve at Gilgal was ascribed to Joshua (Josh. iv. 20). Finally, Jachin and Boaz, the two columns of the Temple (I Kings vii. 15 et seq.), were such ma??ebot, not intended as supports for the building, but possessing an independent purpose, as is shown by their names. The Phenician temples also contained such columns, and ma??ebot long served as legitimate symbols of Yhwh. Even the prophet Hosea forewarned Israel of the terrible days to come (Hos. iii. 4; comp. x. 12), when they should be "without a sacrifice, and without an image ["ma??ebah"], and without an ephod, and without teraphim"?that is, without public worship; while Isaiah prefigured the conversion of Egypt to Yhwh with the words, "There shall be . . . a pillar at the border thereof to the Lord" (Isa. xix. 19, Hebr.). (see image) Dolmen.(After Conder.) (see image) Cromlech.(From Benziger, "Hebrische Archologie.") The Deuteronomic, code, on the other hand, rejected the ma??ebot, rightly recognizing that they did not originally belong to the cult of Yhwh, but had been adopted from the Canaanites (Deut. xii. 3, xvi. 22; comp. Lev. xxvi. 1, and the commandment to destroy the ma??ebot, "asherot," and similar objects of Canaanitish worship in Ex. xxiii. 24 and xxxiv. 13). The Deuteronomic historian accordingly regarded the downfall of the people as due to the erection of these ma??ebot by Judah and Israel (I Kings xiv. 23; II Kings xvii. 10), while the pious kings showed their righteousness by destroying them (II Kings iii. 2, x. 26, xviii. 4, xxiii. 14). Semitic Stone-Worship. The worship of sacred stones constituted one of the most general and ancient forms of religion; but among no other people was this worship so important as among the Semites. The religion of the nomads of Syria and Arabia was summarized by Clement of Alexandria in the single statement, "The Arabs worship the stone," and all the data afforded by Arabian authors regarding the pre-Islamitic faith confirm his words. The sacred stone ("nu?b"; plural, "an?ab") is a characteristic and indispensable feature in an ancient Arabian place of worship. Among the Canaanites, as the Old Testament abundantly proves, the worship of ma??ebot was common; while with regard to the Phenicians, Herodotus states (ii. 44) that the temple of Melkart at Tyre contained two sacred pillars. In like manner, two columns were erected for the temples at Paphos and Hierapolis, and a conical stone was worshiped as a symbol of Astarte in her temple in the former city. The representation of the temple of Byblos on a coin shows a similar conical pillar. Such examples may readily be multiplied (comp. Ezek. xxvi. 12). These stones were extremely diverse in form, ranging from rough blocks, over which the blood of the sacrifice, or the anointing-oil, was poured (Gen. xxviii. 18; I Sam. xiv. 33 et seq.), to carefully wrought columns, such as those erected in the Temple of Solomon or in the Phenician sanctuaries. A number of simple stone columns have been preserved. Thus there is a Phenician boundary-stone from Cyprus, in the form of an obelisk, and set on a small pedestal; others have been found in the excavations of the Deutscher Palstinaverein at Tell al-Mutasallim, the ancient Megiddo. The sanctuary at the latter place had at its entrance two stone columns, simple quadrilateral monoliths, tapering slightly toward the top, and very similar to the ma??ebot at the entrance to the place of sacrifice in the ancient Edomite sanctuary at Petra. (see image) Phenician Ma??ebah.(From Benzinger, "Hebrische Archologie.") Belief Involved. The original signification of the sacred stone iswell illustrated by the account of the one at Beth-el (Gen. xxviii.). Jacob slept with a stone for a pillow, and dreamed that the Lord addressed him. When he awoke he said, "Surely the Lord is in this place; and I knew it not"; then he anointed the stone, or, in other words, rendered an offering to it. This belief in a ma??ebah, or in a stone, as the habitation of a deity is spread throughout the world, and even the designation "Beth-el." was adopted among the Greeks and Romans, under the forms ????????? and "btulus," to denote a stone of this character. At a very early period the stone served likewise as an altar of sacrifice, and the offering laid upon it was by implication given to the deity that dwelt therein. It must also be borne in mind that originally, even in the case of a burnt offering, it was the blood and not the act of burning which constituted the essential of the sacrifice, and that the shedding of blood on the sacred stone served the same purpose as anointing it. There was no idea, however, of identifying the deity with the stone, as is shown by the fact that a number of stones, or trees, sacred to a divinity might stand together. Where specially chosen or prepared sacred stones took the place of natural landmarks, they expressed an invitation to the deity to take up his abode in them (comp. Hos. xiii. 2). Among the Greeks the sacred pillars of stone were developed into images of the deity, and received a head and a phallus; but the Israelitish ma??ebot, did not pass through this evolution. Relation to Altar. It is clear that the ma??ebah and the altar originally coincided. When the Arabs offered bloody sacrifices the blood was smeared on the sacred stones, and in the case of offerings of oil the stones were anointed (comp. Gen. xxviii. 18, xxxi. 13). The same statement holds true of the Greco-Roman cult, although the black stone of Mecca, on the other hand, is caressed and kissed by the worshipers. In the course of time, however, the altar and the sacred stone were differentiated, and stones of this character were erected around the altar. Among both Canaanites and Israelites the ma??ebah was separated from the altar, which thus became the place for the burning of the victim as well as for the shedding of its blood. That the altar was a development from the sacred stone is clearly shown by the fact that, in accordance with ancient custom, hewn stones might not be used in its construction. (see image) Dolmen near Heshbon.(After Conder.) It thus becomes evident that originally the ma?-?ebot were unknown to the Sinaitic Yhwh cult, although the entire course of history renders their incorporation in the religion of Israel readily intelligible. Such sacred stones were found by the Israelites in the Canaanite sanctuaries and on the "high places," and were thus taken over like so many other features of religious observance. No attempt was made, however, to justify such a usage, or to bring it into relation with the cult of Yhwh, but these sacred stones came to be regarded as memorials of events in the lives of the Patriarchs or in the history of the nation, as in the case of Jacob's stone at Beth-el, Joshua's at Gilgal, and the stone Samuel set up between Mizpeh and Shen. Bibliography: Kuenen, Religion of Israel to the Fall of the Jewish State, i. 390-395; Smith, Rel. of Sem. pp. 200 et seq.; Benzinger, Arch. pp.375 et seq.; Gall, Altisraelitischer Baalkultus, 1898; Lagrange, Etude sur les Religions Smitiques; Enceintes et Pierres Sacrees, in Rev. Bib. April, 1900.E. G. H. I. Be. Copyright 2002 JewishEncyclopedia.com. All rights reserved. Privacy Terms of Use Contact

20

questions from readers

by peacefulpete in

for the past few years the questions from readers in the wt have been pathetic rehashes of old material, or just stupid newbie quetions answered in the pe book.

i know that they must be getting thouands of well thought out questions from sincere readers, yet none of these questions make the column.

i know that this is not surprising to many here.

peacefulpete

I don't remember the name, some discovery channel thing that spoke about Christianity as a natural product of the Hellemic jewish first/second century mind. (mythology,mystery cults, philosophy,messianism) Ironically another person asked me about it at a convention (next day) and I put on the JW cloak and insisted that the program was wrong. It haunted me tho.

8

Holy Phallus Batman!

by peacefulpete in

heres a god one..."isreal" translates into "it/he stands up-el" and basically means god's erection.

phallus worship is throughout the ot.

i will provide examples if others don't.

peacefulpete

Heres a god one..."Isreal" translates into "it/he stands up-El" and basically means God's erection. Phallus worship is throughout the OT. I will provide examples if others don't. The Deuteronomist's (redactor)attempt to invent a new meaning "contends with God" was another effort to reinvent Jewish religious history. I know, more blaspheme.

28

Jews practiced human sacrifice

by peacefulpete in

lev.27:28,29 says ..."but any devoted thing which a man devotes to jehovah from all which belongs to him, of man or of animal, or of the field of his possession, it shall not be sold nor redeemed.

everyone devoted to destruction(sacrificed) is most holy no devoted thing which is dedicated by man shall be ransomed; it shall surely be put to death.

this explains why jeptha, when promising to offer as burnt offering the first person to great him upon his successful return from war, had to kill his daughter dispite his feelings for her.

peacefulpete

Bebu..thanks for the Maccoby article. I think tho you may have misunderstood it. It is posing an alternate reading of the Ez. passage that does not question the practice of human sacrifice but rather the odd phrasology that calls the laws of God "bad". The article pointed out that scholars must accept the reality of Jewish human sacrifices.

20

That's why they were sad-u-see

by peacefulpete in

everyone knows that the saducees differed from the pharisees over the teaching of an afterlife(resurrection).

they also didnot accept the idea of angels, demons, and miraculous healings among other things.

the question is why?

peacefulpete

oops I meant to post the stuff about "amen" on my other thread.

10

Amen and Amen

by peacefulpete in

ever wonder where that funny little word came from?

amen (aka amen ra) was the king of the gods in egyptian mythology.

in the name of amen egyptians invoked blessings for centuries.

peacefulpete

Damn you beat me to it. I apologize I read the site hastily over lunch at work. I misread the last section that speaks about the christian inscriptiions "of Egyptian origin". It is an interesting read tho. How the Jewish Mystics and Gnostics used the word "amen" as a magic charm. and the numerology thing is telling. I really screwed up and posted some of this on my samaritan thread.

20

That's why they were sad-u-see

by peacefulpete in

everyone knows that the saducees differed from the pharisees over the teaching of an afterlife(resurrection).

they also didnot accept the idea of angels, demons, and miraculous healings among other things.

the question is why?

peacefulpete

hooberus...I found that the first 5 books contain only 1 reference to angels(Numb.22:22) and this is considered suspect accordng to the Fordham University site. Maybe the Sadducees were right? I also wish to correct my statement earlier that the Saducees did not respect the other books of the OT by the first century, according to that same site they respected it as "inspired" but did not see it as Law or necessarily accurate. I don't know how people do those mental gymnastics but it is alot like many Bible believers today.

20

That's why they were sad-u-see

by peacefulpete in

everyone knows that the saducees differed from the pharisees over the teaching of an afterlife(resurrection).

they also didnot accept the idea of angels, demons, and miraculous healings among other things.

the question is why?

peacefulpete

The Jewish encyclopedia.com site expounds on the Liturgical does and don'ts about the use of the word "Amen". It was quite superstitious. The Catholic Enyclopedia writes about how the gnostics and jewish mystics used it in their prayers as a powerful incantation. Numerolgy played into this mess also.

20

That's why they were sad-u-see

by peacefulpete in

everyone knows that the saducees differed from the pharisees over the teaching of an afterlife(resurrection).

they also didnot accept the idea of angels, demons, and miraculous healings among other things.

the question is why?

peacefulpete

Neon..foregleams eh. The Rabbinical literature asserts that Job denied the resurrection. This alone would be very strange if in fact this passage so clearly referred to it. The early Talmud also makes clear that the Sadducees refused to accept the developing resurrection doctrine as it was not of Moses. As to the wording of that one passage in Job, the translating may be responsible for it's Pharisidic/christian flavor, or it may be a later interpolation, tho I have not reseached this. Again you are not arguing from a position of strength, the jews both then and now most certainly knew where the resurrection doctrine came from better than us who were trained to place a christian spin on the jewish books..