So provide some links. I've just done a 'simple google search' and got zilch.but a simple google search will show many articles proving that Josephus never existed.
I have read all the Fomenko you have referred me to plus various other chunks. Have you ever read any actual history, archaeology, philology, etc?You guys can dismiss what Fomenko is writing, but the various arguments that you guys are using to dismiss Fomenko would have more standing if you actually read Fomenko.
That's rich. You have still not answered any point I have made in point by point response to Fomenko's drivel.- Read the four Fomenko books that Grey Cloud found, then take Fomenko's argument apart, point by point(not just vague attacks with no examples from the books), and we will be happy to run with you
allynh wrote:You guys have found gold. They are an awesome source of counterfactuals.
allynh wrote: never guess. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data
Most, if not all, of these authors wrote several books. Tertullian for example is credited with 32. There is a huge amount of complex and arcane theology in these texts much of which was no longer dogma. That's a lot of forging.Tertullian, Ireneaus, Origen, Augustine, Jerome, Eusebius, Polycarp, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Barnabas, Clement of Alexandria, Hermas, Tatian, Hippolytus, Cyprian.
And to this we can add that the forgers would have had to have invented an archaic form of Latin which they would then have to evolve into mediaeval Latin. For example: If ghost author A is supposed to be a contemporary of ghost writer B then their Latin would have to be the same. If ghost author C is later than A or B then C's Latin would have have to reflect that difference.The real point here is the contention that Fomenko makes, ie that history before 1000 AD is fake, then the Jesuits must have faked thousands and thousands of cross-referenced and interlocking histories, . . .
Grey Cloud wrote:So provide some links. I've just done a 'simple google search' and got zilch.
allynh wrote:You can lead a man to Google, but you can't make him search.
sketch1946 wrote:People may have different opinions about Josephus' writings, but Fomenko is clearly stretching credulity to claim Josephus didn't exist.
Grey Cloud wrote:I'm not reading this drivel. I have some knowledge of the ancient Mediterranean so I looked at what Fomenko had to say. There does not appear to be anything to read, certainly no context or narrarative just a string of assertions interspersed with statistical graphs and charts.
Grey Cloud wrote:How does Fomenko account for the destruction of Pompeii and the subsequent uncovering of Roman era buildings and artifacts?
is nonsense. I have taken my objections directly from what Fomenko has written.Let us know when you guys have actually at least read Book One, so that we can get started discussing Fomenko
sketch1946 wrote:"According to historical records, it was a disaster of major proportions, which shocked the ancient world by destroying major cities and causing the deaths of thousands of people in coastal areas extending from present Croatia, to Greece and to the Nile Delta in Egypt."
skecth1946 wrote:Hi Allynh,
I hope you don't feel you are personally under attack, I believe that Fomenko is fundamentally wrong because the fundamental claim he makes that all history before 1000 AD is faked, is harder for me to believe than Father Christmas, or fairies at the bottom of the garden...
sketch1946 wrote:Again, Fomenko is telling a porky... the Wailing Wall has surely been holding up pretty well.... and what is the argument that proves Jerusalem/El Kuds/Al Quds isn't where it's always been? Fomenko dismisses Velikovsky as irrelevant, yet V's discussion of the dating of Ugarit/Ras Shamra, and the anachronistic Hebrew found there, surely relevant to chronology, and V's discussion of the name of Jerusalem as Al Quds, Kadesh, surely relevant, etc etc
Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests