Was the tiny Looe Island off the English coast actually visited by a very young Jesus Christ?

[Mr Walker]

11 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

 

 

These are not scholarly articles, so I do not expect to see detailed notes and references and neither do I plan to pepper my responses with distracting details.  However some statements (made by contributors of all persuasions, me included) appear so obviously at variance with any semblance of accuracy that they deserve challenge and critical analysis.  Here's one example:

This extract might lend credence to the assertion that Jesus came from a wealthy background and may have had the opportunity to travel (e.g. as far as Cornwall?).  Unfortunately there is no contemporary evidence to support this, and there are many more arguments that contradict the fundamental theme that "Jesus came from a relatively wealthy family". 

• Nowhere in the Bible says that Joseph was affluent, successful or even respected. 
• The word for Joseph's (and Jesus's) occupation is tektōn (τέκτων) which translates best as 'someone who crafts wood/ carpenter' as opposed to 'someone who crafts iron/ blacksmith' (χαλκεύς) or 'someone who crafts stone/ mason' (λιθολόγος, λαξευτής).  This does not belittle the role of the tektōn, but neither does it elevate Joseph's position or influence.
• The notion that tektōn implies more than woodworking dates to a 1983 work by the scholar Géza Vermes, who scoured texts from Bibles and the Talmud in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, looking for deeper significances.  At no point did Vermes call Joseph a 'master builder' or imply he enjoyed an elevated status or income.
• Wealth had no bearing on Joseph's decision to marry a pregnant girl and raise her child as his own.  This story is there to show that Joseph was a kind and compassionate man.  If he had rejected Mary she risked being stoned to death for adultery.

My knowledge of this topic is extremely superficial and I would welcome elucidation.  Does Mr Walker, Manwon or anyone have a source for the statement Joseph's occupation translates more accurately as  "master builder"?  I would welcome the opportunity to learn more.  Maybe somebody here has read and understands Vermes's works and can correct my limited understanding?

 

 

To respond to just this bit  

Much can be gained by a deconstruction of any text using contextual rather than direct evidences.

 

Ill give you the definition of carpenter even though I have read other translations which imply more a skilled tradesman  than a working carpenter.

The word tekton is translated in many ways.  Some see  it as carpentry  but more often it is seen as a worker in wood, stone and even iron, and a builder of things 

However context is important 

 Even if we just take the christ story as  a fictional narrative   several things stand out 

Joseph  was ASKED  (perhaps even required by Jewish law and custom)  as an older man to marry Mary.

It may have had nothing to do with either love or compassion but a social legal requirement  which was commonly applied in that time when a  pregnant woman was unmarried or indeed widowed 

However he would not have ben asked, if he was not wealthy enough to support a mother and child.

  He would not have been asked if he did not have some status in his community,  and he probably would not have been asked if he was not in very good standing with the religious authorities (indeed he was probably a member of that class, because this was the sort of person regularly required to marry or remarry women in such circumstances, as model citizens  )  

Second the family's abilty to travel locally and to attend weddings etc suggest at least modest wealth  and family connections 

Third Jesus was given an education. The story  says he got into trouble as a child for questioning the conservative /orthodox teachings of the rabbinical group in power at the time  

His teachings by age 30  follow the  Hillel rabbinical school's liberal  teachings, and there is some Jewish support for the probability the  he was taught in that  school, the members of whom were persecuted and even killed by the more conservative  group in power at the time  

To get an education required some  family wealth, otherwise he would have been working  as part of the family, to support and bring in income during his childhood and adolescence  

Lastly,  while not materially minded,  Christ's teachings show an appreciation of money management and its importance as well as the operation of wealthier  sections of his society Ie he knew and understood the significance of wealth and power, its dangers, and its social responsibilities. 

A few  quick googled sites on the question of josephs wealth and status

Its open to question but, again, context and translation are important  

 

https://leadership.lifeway.com/2017/04/04/the-forgotten-jesus-part-2-was-jesus-a-carpenter-or-a-stonemason/

 

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/48/48-3/JETS_48-3_501-519.pdf

 

Jesus: Born Poor or Rich? - African Journals Online

https://churchleaders.com/outreach-missions/346515-was-jesus-poor-was-jesus-rich.html

The modern consensus seems to be that  the term means that joseph was a house builder  who worked in both wood and stone  which would have required some capital

Oh yes, and I'd forgotten the gifts of the magi.

In the story's context, they would be worth over a million dollars today, so Christ was independently wealthy from  birth, (or a t least from  the time the magi visited)  if the story is true 

One countervailing argument is that they only offered a dove/pigeon as a sacrifice,   rather than the lamb  given by wealthy families 

However, if the y had the gifts of the magi they could have afforded an oxen  

It is also likely that  the sacrifice didn't represent their wealth, but heir humility, and/ or desire to not be noticed,  given the circumstances of Christ's birth Even in quite modern times  you would be reticent, in Mary's circumstances, to  "show off" in your community. ie pregnant by an unknown father, and married off to a much older man. Joseph owned property and while he was working away from  his home town he also had family with property there.

In the context of the time, this s not a poor man, but  t least comfortably middle class 

  Back then, you would have kept as low a profile as possible  

ps a master builder was a skilled craftsman who was able to take on apprentices and train them up There were levels in such trades, with master craftsman being the highest, and specific requirements which had to be met to attain each level, such as journeyman.  

Given his age and status, Joseph would have passed through apprenticeship and journeyman stages and have been a recognised master craftsman. 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Mr Walker

[Grim Reaper 6]

19 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Thank you for your thoughts here.  Of course you're totally correct in what you say.  The attitude that you never complain was so entrenched in society that when men collapsed on the battlefields of WW1 as quivering wrecks, utterly destroyed by shellshock, they were more often treated with disgust than any compassion, and hundreds were executed as examples for 'cowardice'.  

However - we know rather a lot about that period and very much less about turn-of-the-first-millennium Judea.  I'm still hoping for evidence to support the original statement:

 

Tom honestly did you serve military?

By your comments above you seem to have some experience with military service, which brand of the U.K. Military did you serve in?

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, Manwon Lender said:

Tom honestly did you serve military?

By your comments above you seem to have some experience with military service, which brand of the U.K. Military did you serve in?

Hi Manwon

Tom has a great sense of humor and is a very intelligent guy and have noticed at times you may take it more personally than intended. As to his military I do not know but would stand by him in a conflict of that nature simply based on how he gets people to react to him and the sublime inferences he makes. You and I know that yes one can either inspire leadership of rule or by breaking a man rather than harnessing their abilities for the benefit of both. My dad always told me that if you break a horse you will break it's spirit and you will never get it to give you it's best, you have to train it to trust you by showing respect and understanding.

Edited December 3, 2021 by jmccr8
not sure

[Tom1200]

46 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Tom ... is a ... horse.

Taking stuff out of context can be fun!  And in this case extremely accurate.  Well, one bit of me - fnarr, fnarr.

More importantly Manuel is finally correct on something.  (Even a broken clock is right twice a day, unless it's digital.)  Croydon Pals (established March '15, disbanded April '15; motto cacas sumus, sed mortui estis).  We didn't exactly make it to battle - our tram crashed after two miles, killing Crusher McKillall who was the only one who knew the way to France or actually wanted to go.  The rest of us spent the war hiding in the cellars of the Hanged Hun hostelry (formerly the Flayed Frenchman, and previously the Spayed Spaniard).

2 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

... something irrelevant

Tick.

   Tock.

Tick.

   Tock.

That's the sound of me waiting.  Waiting for you to provide even a single example of where I've taken your words out of context.

Tick.

   Tock.

By the way - did you read post #26?  Did you see what Mr W did there?  He addressed points I'd raised, in a thoughtful, measured, educated manner showing considerable study, research or prior knowledge.  He didn't resort to insults, smart-arsed comments or derision.  I think we could all learn from this - his approach as well as his message.

Tick...

   Tock......

11 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

... far too much for me to absorb today, but I promise to try soon.

Thanks ever so much for taking the time to respond.  A cursory scan of your post reinforces my conviction that I don't know enough about this subject to offer more than a superficial analysis.  There are levels - and levels of levels - I haven't even begun to think about.  (And each time I arrogantly imagine I'm making progress I come up against a scholar's lifetime's work that challenges everything I thought I understood.)  

I'm now interested in the translations and interpretations of the word tekton, not because of any status it might grant Joseph but because it challenges everything I thought I knew about 2000 years of Christian tradition.  As far as I knew Joe & sons were carpenters.  My grandad was a farmer in Ireland and, by all accounts, an accomplished carpenter.  He built furniture, beds, barn doors, and so on, but his main skill was in making and repairing carts and wagons including wheels.  That's the image I always had of Jesus - working with hammer and chisels to shape timber into a functional form: not necessarily pretty, but useful.  Value-added, if you like.

I've never seen tekton used to mean anything other than carpenter ... because three days ago I'd never even looked.  Now you've given me a whole load more to read through I doubt I'll be able to ask any intelligent questions for quite so time.  I don't plan to give up, but if you don't hear back from me it's because you've overloaded my poor little brain and I'm spending some 'me' time in a white padded cell.

One thing I would note - all your links are relatively recent ones (well, this millennium).  So they all may be influenced and informed by Vermes's works from the 1980s.  Do you know of any sources prior to him that push this debate further back in time?

All the best,

Tom

[Crazy Horse]

On 11/29/2021 at 9:58 AM, Manwon Lender said:

 

Legends surround this tiny island called Looe Island off Cornwall's south coast, including a visit by Christ himself, brought here by Joseph of Arimathea from distant Glastonbury. The team are out to discover the truth behind the myths. Could this island have witnessed the birth of Christianity in Britain? They are hampered by the tide, which limits the time allowed for digging. Previous digs have linked the now-vanished St. Michael's Chapel on the hill to the Celtic dark ages following the Roman occupation.  Two chapels are dug. One on the island, other on the mainland, between tides. Some excavators remain on the island, to continue digging. What was here before Glastonbury Abbey started a cult of Saint Michael?

Although evidence of an earlier church was not conclusively found during the archaeological investigation the name Lammana means ‘the early Christian enclosure or monastery of the monk’ and so an earlier building than the 12th century cannot be ruled out in the general area. In the papal taxation of Pope Nicholas IV, taken in 1291, the chapel at Lammana, opposite Looe Island, was worth 30s. St. Augustine is said to have written to the then Pope saying he had discovered a church in Glastonbury built by followers of Jesus at about 37 AD. A 6th Century cleric, St.Gildas, however, went one step further and said it was built by Jesus himself.

Additional about Looe Island is linked below:

Looe Island and Glastonbury: Medieval News: Looe Island and Glastonbury (celtic2realms-medievalnews.blogspot.com)

Additional information about the possible Visit of a very young Jesus Christ is in the link below:

Did Jesus Visit Cornwall? : Mike's Cornwall: Did Jesus Visit Cornwall? (mikescornwall.blogspot.com)

 

 

Per the words of William Blake..

Im gonna say, yep.

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

19 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Taking stuff out of context can be fun!  And in this case extremely accurate.  Well, one bit of me - fnarr, fnarr.

More importantly Manuel is finally correct on something.  (Even a broken clock is right twice a day, unless it's digital.)  Croydon Pals (established March '15, disbanded April '15; motto cacas sumus, sed mortui estis).  We didn't exactly make it to battle - our tram crashed after two miles, killing Crusher McKillall who was the only one who knew the way to France or actually wanted to go.  The rest of us spent the war hiding in the cellars of the Hanged Hun hostelry (formerly the Flayed Frenchman, and previously the Spayed Spaniard).

Tick.

   Tock.

Tick.

   Tock.

That's the sound of me waiting.  Waiting for you to provide even a single example of where I've taken your words out of context.

Tick.

   Tock.

By the way - did you read post #26?  Did you see what Mr W did there?  He addressed points I'd raised, in a thoughtful, measured, educated manner showing considerable study, research or prior knowledge.  He didn't resort to insults, smart-arsed comments or derision.  I think we could all learn from this - his approach as well as his message.

Tick...

   Tock......

Thanks ever so much for taking the time to respond.  A cursory scan of your post reinforces my conviction that I don't know enough about this subject to offer more than a superficial analysis.  There are levels - and levels of levels - I haven't even begun to think about.  (And each time I arrogantly imagine I'm making progress I come up against a scholar's lifetime's work that challenges everything I thought I understood.)  

I'm now interested in the translations and interpretations of the word tekton, not because of any status it might grant Joseph but because it challenges everything I thought I knew about 2000 years of Christian tradition.  As far as I knew Joe & sons were carpenters.  My grandad was a farmer in Ireland and, by all accounts, an accomplished carpenter.  He built furniture, beds, barn doors, and so on, but his main skill was in making and repairing carts and wagons including wheels.  That's the image I always had of Jesus - working with hammer and chisels to shape timber into a functional form: not necessarily pretty, but useful.  Value-added, if you like.

I've never seen tekton used to mean anything other than carpenter ... because three days ago I'd never even looked.  Now you've given me a whole load more to read through I doubt I'll be able to ask any intelligent questions for quite so time.  I don't plan to give up, but if you don't hear back from me it's because you've overloaded my poor little brain and I'm spending some 'me' time in a white padded cell.

One thing I would note - all your links are relatively recent ones (well, this millennium).  So they all may be influenced and informed by Vermes's works from the 1980s.  Do you know of any sources prior to him that push this debate further back in time?

All the best,

Tom

Tom said:

""By the way - did you read post #26?  Did you see what Mr W did there?  He addressed points I'd raised, in a thoughtful, measured, educated manner showing considerable study, research or prior knowledge .He didn't resort to insults, smart-arsed comments or derision.   I think we could all learn from this - his approach as well as his messag""

Wow Tom miracles never cease, I must take my hat off to you and I mean that sincerely. However honestly based on you behavior throughout this thread I really did not think you had in you. at least now you have finally proven me wrong!! However, even with that said its very refreshing to be proven wrong. Because in this situation Mr. Walker certainly deserves the credit for the manner in which he responded to you still I cant get over how well you have taken it, but no matter. Now you last statement truly proves you are catching on, and I am also glad that you realize that you can learn much from Mr. Walker because that is certainly true.

Respectfully 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Manwon Lender
Miss spelled word

[Tom1200]

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

(less than usual, for which we're all immensely grateful)

Tick...   tock...   tick...   tock...

Yep, still here, still waiting.  Manwon's missed yet another opportunity to stand by something, anything, he's previously written.  Ah well, no doubt there'll be further chances.  Many, many missed chances.

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

its very refreshing to be proven wrong.

Aha!  The secret to your eternal youth!  

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

I am also glad that you realize that you can learn much from Mr. Walker because that is certainly true.

I'm always receptive to wisdom and knowledge.  I have learned huge amounts from really smart people on this site and in the real world.  You choose to portray me as a luddite or dinosaur because you've never managed to teach me anything.  Perhaps you really are so vastly superior to me that I simply won't ever grasp your wisdom?  But maybe you could help just a tad by proof-reading your submissions; spell-checking them, completing sentences, correcting typos, and adding just an occasional smidgeon of order, logic or common sense?  Just a little - I don't want you changing your entire style of narrative just to make yourself intelligible to others.

[Grim Reaper 6]

3 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Tick...   tock...   tick...   tock...

Yep, still here, still waiting.  Manwon's missed yet another opportunity to stand by something, anything, he's previously written.  Ah well, no doubt there'll be further chances.  Many, many missed chances.

Aha!  The secret to your eternal youth!  

I'm always receptive to wisdom and knowledge.  I have learned huge amounts from really smart people on this site and in the real world.  You choose to portray me as a luddite or dinosaur because you've never managed to teach me anything.  Perhaps you really are so vastly superior to me that I simply won't ever grasp your wisdom?  But maybe you could help just a tad by proof-reading your submissions; spell-checking them, completing sentences, correcting typos, and adding just an occasional smidgeon of order, logic or common sense?  Just a little - I don't want you changing your entire style of narrative just to make yourself intelligible to others.

Tom my friend I have not missed anything, and your certainly are in no position to judge me or anyone else. Sir you come across like you are some kind of savior ( Or maybe you think your  Superman, by the way do you have large S on your chest ) and this is why my portrayal of you is completely accurate. Now either you are suffering from some type of memory lapse or your intentionally unable to speak truthfully. Now at first glance you appear to be  very intelligent, well spoken and very well educated, however once you open your mouth and begin typing you almost immediately your anger and Ego take control, once this occurs all bets are off Tom. You will never gain the wisdom you seek until you stop using the following words I I I, Me Me Me, My My My and so on, 

The comments you made below had me laughing for at least 20 min. Your posted comments are Oh My God!!! its not at all like your trying to share something for my benefit. What your comments do portray is that you are actually very insecure, and by making that statement your trying to convince yourself that its true.

""To respond in 'my' manner takes time, thought, research, contemplation, attention to detail, moderation, modesty, humility, intelligence, eloquence and humour.  It's not for everyone""

Additional quotes by Tom:

Post 7 

1.  Would this happen to be the same New Testament that's happy to record the family's flight to Egypt?  How they ran from Herod, inadvertently precipitating the Massacre of the Innocents?  How they stayed there until several years after Herod died even though they lived in Nazareth which is over 100 miles north of the Bethlehem/Jerusalem region? 

2.  Tune in next week to see some cranks debate "Did Jesus meet the Buddha six hundred years before He was born?"       This comment was designed to again make me angry, we call that Flame Baiting but, unlike you I certainly have my Ego in c he ckx

Post 16

1.""  Manwon did more than present someone else's theory.  He edited material from multiple sources and presented these as a single extract.  In post #3 he wrote unsubstantiated and erroneous views of his own.  Setting aside the plausibility (or otherwise) of the theory, his journalistic approach is open to analysis and criticism"".

The comment above you are stating that I intentionally have tried to deceive  forum members which is preposterous, and again all I can is laugh at your attempt to discredit. The reason this is so ridicule's is because people know who I am and what I stand for, and for those who don't I could care less

2.   But we can at least discuss it with skill and intelligence, and this includes looking up facts, sources and references.  And not making idiotic statements with nothing to support them, like this one

Here again your approach is typical, and you  just do know!!

3. Buddha would not have been interested in that meeting Jesus, they had far to little in common - My comment

.. which I suspect will offe nd pretty much every Buddhist and Christian on the planet.- Tom said

.Here again you cant get under my skin, so you try again to bring Buddha into the conversation, just more reticules behavior

Post 24

1. My bias is towards truth: honesty, accuracy, openness and transparency, no matter where that takes us.  In science we abandon long-held, cherished beliefs when they are demonstrably false; I see no reason to apply an alternative approach to wider matters.  I have no bias towards or against individuals, just the ideas or views they espous

2.  Point One: if you're going to quote me in an attempt to ridicule or undermine my position - make the effort to quote accurately.  Most of us aren't as lazy as your target audience.  We can - and will - check

3.  Point Two: if you're going to quote me in an attempt to ridicule or undermine my position - taking an extract out of context is only ever superficially clever.  Most of us aren't as lazy as your target audience.  We can - and will - check.  Here it was my closing sentence, intended to poke fun at anyone who tried to defend the notion that St Gildas could have used St Augustine's work and gone 'one step further'.  It's as preposterous as, say, Jesus meeting the Buddha six hundred years apart.  It's a comment on those who uncritically use unreferenced and poorly researched works.  Now do you get it?

4. Point Three: that was an example of flippancy, not sarcasm.

5. Point Four: I meant no sleight by referring to the Buddha.  I could have used any unconnected historical character out of context.  (I think I used the Buddha because - in addition to the nonsense that Jesus holidayed in Cornwall - there are also debunked woo stories that he studied in India, Tibet, etc. during his 'missing years'.  So he might have met Hindus and Buddhists and whoever else was there at the time.  Which of course he didn't.)

6.. which I suspect will offend pretty much every Buddhist and Christian on the planet. - Tom Said

7. t doesn't say much for the character of the Buddha if he would ignore meeting Jesus because of their perceived differences. It portrays him as rude, judgemental, supercilious and condescending.  But I know even less about Buddhism than I do about Christianity, so - in this matter at least - I'll concede that you're the Buddhist expert and you know best.

8.Which, of course, is your prerogative.  To respond in 'my' manner takes time, thought, research, contemplation, attention to detail, moderation, modesty, humility, intelligence, eloquence and humour.  It's not for everyone.

Post 32

1. ep, still here, still waiting.  Manwon's missed yet another opportunity to stand by something, anything, he's previously written.  Ah well, no doubt there'll be further chances.  Many, many missed chances.

2. I'm always receptive to wisdom and knowledge.  I have learned huge amounts from really smart people on this site and in the real world.  You choose to portray me as a luddite or dinosaur because you've never managed to teach me anything.  Perhaps you really are so vastly superior to me that I simply won't ever grasp your wisdom?  But maybe you could help just a tad by proof-reading your submissions; spell-checking them, completing sentences, correcting typos, and adding just an occasional smidgeon of order, logic or common sense?  Just a little - I don't want you changing your entire style of narrative just to make yourself intelligible to others      

Tom I am not even going to go through the rest above, they speak for themselves anyway!

Within you posts in this thread you have violated Forum rules twice. If I were you Tom I would review the Forums because you obviously are unaware what the rules state!!!!! Additionally your right about one thing Tom, I do make spell  Errors, and .I am not  proud of, but I had TBI while I was  still active duty and that was Long ago, and there is nothing I can do about, but even making fun of my handicap doesn't make mad at you It just makes pity you more. 

Take care ther Dude!!!!!!

Edited December 4, 2021 by Manwon Lender

[Tom1200]

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Tom my friend I have not missed anything

Yes.  You.  Have.  I asked you specifically to point out where I had taken your quotes out of context; something you repeatedly accuse me off without ever providing examples.  I've repeated this invitation several times now, and you have neither defended your allegation nor apologised for it.  That's what I was clearly referring to in statements like:

On 12/3/2021 at 11:42 AM, Tom1200 said:

Tick.  Tock.  Tick.  Tock.  That's the sound of me waiting.  Waiting for you to provide even a single example of where I've taken your words out of context.

(Edited to take up less space without altering the meaning of the original.  See how easy that is?)

Moving on:

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

"your certainly are in no position to judge me or anyone else." (sic)

If, by asking you to explain or clarify the words and sentences you type, you feel I am judging you... I apologise.  I'm not attempting to judge you; I'm not trying to hurt your feelings.  I'm trying to get you to explain or clarify the words and sentences you type.

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

"The comment above you are stating that I intentionally have tried to deceive  forum members which is preposterous," (sic)

Let's examine my words that have caused you such pain and anguish.  In response to Mr Walker's statement Manwon was just presenting a theory I wrote  Manwon did more than present someone else's theory.  He edited material from multiple sources and presented these as a single extract.  I wrote that because:

• that's exactly what you did in post #1
• it was pertinent in my reply to Mr Walker
• it's not offensive to draw attention to a correspondent who has edited material
• readers might have missed the fact that in post #1 you edited material from multiple sources and presented them as a single extract

I didn't elaborate on the specifics because the detail wasn't the issue - what mattered then was whether in editing the material you were just presenting a theory as Mr W thought, or were more than present(ing) someone else's theory as I was suggesting.  I thought Mr W might have missed the fact that you had edited material from multiple sources and presented them as a single extract, and I thought it might affect his perception of your position if I pointed out the truth.  

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

"Here again your approach is typical, and you  just do know!!" (sic)

?

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

".Here again you cant get under my skin, so you try again to bring Buddha into the conversation, just more reticules behavior" (sic)

Yawn.  I've explained that (post #24).  I could have chosen an historical character from Hinduism or Australia or the future - anyone to highlight the preposterous notion that Jesus might have met someone impossible - but I didn't.  Sorry but I wasn't aware you enjoy the exclusive right to talk about the Buddha.

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Tom I am not even going to go through the rest above, they speak for themselves anyway!

... so why exactly did you include all of that, if you're not willing to respond?  Since they're my words, and if they truly 'speak for themselves', why not just assume that anyone who cares can read them in my previous posts?  Surely the whole point of quoting extracts is to address matters that concern you?

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

"Within you posts in this thread you have violated Forum rules twice. If I were you Tom I would review the Forums because you obviously are unaware what the rules state!!!!! Additionally your right about one thing Tom, I do make spell  Errors, and .I am not  proud of, but I had TBI while I was  still active duty and that was Long ago, and there is nothing I can do about, but even making fun of my handicap doesn't make mad at you It just makes pity you more. 

Take care ther Dude!!!!!!" (sic)

Please clarify your statement that I am making fun of your handicap.  It should be quite simple: just reproduce accurately and honestly the quote(s) you feel make fun of your handicap.  Then I will review my comments and either defend them or apologise without reservation.  That's how intellectual matters get debated and (hopefully) resolved.

You might also want to elaborate on which rule(s) I have violated, and how.  Under the age-old principle of innocent until proven guilty I believe it is up to you, as my accuser, to provide evidence that shows (beyond reasonable doubt) that I have broken site rules.  Sweeping generalisations like those above do not provide the detail required to reach a conclusion.  Until then this will remain simply another unsubstantiated, puerile allegation to add to the weary list.

I await your reply with little anticipation of it illuminating any of the points I have raised.

Edited December 4, 2021 by Tom1200
typos.

[Grim Reaper 6]

On 12/2/2021 at 10:16 AM, Mr Walker said:

Ill take marwon's  word for his intention. He doesn't have a bone in this dog fight 

The historical facts you outline are (as far as  I know) correct  

But this is a legendary story,  not an historical account.  I'm more interested in the  narrative power and the motivations of the writers, than the historical accuracy .

I think it (almost) impossible that jesus ever left the  area of his homelands during his short   life.

The two other points are interesting contentious and debateable 

first  there are some good arguments that jesus came from a relatively wealthy family in the contextual stories of his family life.  Joseph was an older, successful and respected member of the community and church, when Christ was born.  He was a t least comfortably well of,f or he would not have been expected to marry Mary and provide for her and a child    The word for Joseph's occupation translates more accurately as  "master builder" than "simple carpenter"

Social customs vary considerably over time and location. I remember reading in several places about how beliefs and superstitions shaped the things people would talk about and how they did 

Certainly there were periods in history where grief was not to be  publicly expressed, and other times when it had to be very public

The ":stiff upper lip"  of Victorian times extended into the 20th century. Likewise there have been times when people did not talk about or dwell upon  negative past events.  Before psychology it was a way of avoiding PTSD and grief.   I cant definitively say, however, that historically, this was one of those times.  

Scottish stoicism is another case where people don't think about or dwell on past tragedies  You just get up and keep on going  after the loss of a child, or even half a dozen. Your partner dies but you remarry and go on.   Dwelling on the past can keep you living  in it 

Hey my friend I sincerely thank your support for not participating in the thread any longer, and I understand why you stopped posting in this thread. The only reason you were dragged into it was not the reason that it appeared to be. You were being used as pawn to further create drama, please don't misunderstand me, the comments about you did that describe your actions, the problem lays with the fact that the individual was only using you as a example to try and anger and belittle me. I think you are aware that even though we do not agree on everything that I still respect you and that I prove this with my comment's. I am old fashioned and I live by standards that many no longer practice, However, everything comes down to a few things for me. I value honesty and integrity more than gold, and I follow the principle of this a long with the following comments:( ACTIONS ALWAYS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORKDS EVERY CAN)  I didn't appreciate how you were brought into the conversation at all, however the decision you made by not responding any further was the best thing you could have done, because I fear that if you had continued to participate you would have been the next target.

Again thank you very much for handling the situation in the manner you did, much respect my friend!!!!  

[Grim Reaper 6]

9 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Yes.  You.  Have.  I asked you specifically to point out where I had taken your quotes out of context; something you repeatedly accuse me off without ever providing examples.  I've repeated this invitation several times now, and you have neither defended your allegation nor apologised for it.  That's what I was clearly referring to in statements like:

Moving on:

If, by asking you to explain or clarify the words and sentences you type, you feel I am judging you... I apologise.  I'm not attempting to judge you; I'm not trying to hurt your feelings.  I'm trying to get you to explain or clarify the words and sentences you type.

Let's examine my words that have caused you such pain and anguish.  In response to Mr Walker's statement Manwon was just presenting a theory I wrote  Manwon did more than present someone else's theory.  He edited material from multiple sources and presented these as a single extract.  I wrote that because:

• that's exactly what you did in post #1
• it was pertinent in my reply to Mr Walker
• it's not offensive to draw attention to a correspondent who has edited material
• readers might have missed the fact that in post #1 you edited material from multiple sources and presented them as a single extract

I didn't elaborate on the specifics because the detail wasn't the issue - what mattered then was whether in editing the material you were just presenting a theory as Mr W thought, or were more than present(ing) someone else's theory as I was suggesting.  I thought Mr W might have missed the fact that you had edited material from multiple sources and presented them as a single extract, and I thought it might affect his perception of your position if I pointed out the truth.  

?

Yawn.  I've explained that (post #24).  I could have chosen an historical character from Hinduism or Australia or the future - anyone to highlight the preposterous notion that Jesus might have met someone impossible - but I didn't.  Sorry but I wasn't aware you enjoy the exclusive right to talk about the Buddha.

... so why exactly did you include all of that, if you're not willing to respond?  Since they're my words, and if they truly 'speak for themselves', why not just assume that anyone who cares can read them in my previous posts?  Surely the whole point of quoting extracts is to address matters that concern you?

Please clarify your statement that I am making fun of your handicap.  It should be quite simple: just reproduce accurately and honestly the quote(s) you feel make fun of your handicap.  Then I will review my comments and either defend them or apologise without reservation.  That's how intellectual matters get debated and (hopefully) resolved.

You might also want to elaborate on which rule(s) I have violated, and how.  Under the age-old principle of innocent until proven guilty I believe it is up to you, as my accuser, to provide evidence that shows (beyond reasonable doubt) that I have broken site rules.  Sweeping generalisations like those above do not provide the detail required to reach a conclusion.  Until then this will remain simply another unsubstantiated, puerile allegation to add to the weary list.

I await your reply with little anticipation of it illuminating any of the points I have raised.

Well Tom you do deserve a reply, and I will make this very short and to the point. You misrepresented my intentions, and my comments  from your very first post to this thread. We both are aware this isn't the first time you have joined a thread and instead of participating and adding additional subject matter, you have directed you comment towards me personally. Now I don't mind your personal attacks, what bothers me is the manner in which you disrupted the thread and created an environment that effected others posting to this thread and which caused them to no longer participate.

So I have decided to place you on ignore, so you may have the last word on this topic and you can certainly be assured I will never respond to you again.

Take care!

[jmccr8]

6 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well Tom you do deserve a reply, and I will make this very short and to the point. You misrepresented my intentions, and my comments  from your very first post to this thread. We both are aware this isn't the first time you have joined a thread and instead of participating and adding additional subject matter, you have directed you comment towards me personally. Now I don't mind your personal attacks, what bothers me is the manner in which you disrupted the thread and created an environment that effected others posting to this thread and which caused them to no longer participate.

So I have decided to place you on ignore, so you may have the last word on this topic and you can certainly be assured I will never respond to you again.

Take care!

Hi Manwon

People have put me on ignore and still talk to me, my view on life is everyone loves me, some love loving me, and some hate loving me, and then there there those that love to hate me but in the end they all love me in their special way.

[jmccr8]

@Manwon Lender

Cookie Muncher put both of us on ignore the same day in the same thread and still quotes us, Ya kno wot I mean.,

[Grim Reaper 6]

32 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Manwon

People have put me on ignore and still talk to me, my view on life is everyone loves me, some love loving me, and some hate loving me, and then there there those that love to hate me but in the end they all love me in their special way.

Well that cool but your special, and I am able to say this because of our conversations. For me this is the second time I have ever used this feature. The first person I took ignore, however in the first cases I was asked to place that individual on ignore. In this case it been coming for a long time, this was mine alone, sometimes you can see the future outcome of certain situations and honestly didn't want to end up getting ban! As far myself and how I will react to the situation, if I place someone on ignore unlike you I will not ever speak to them again. 

The reason I felt it was necssary to make that ststement is so the the other member understand my intentions 

Thanks for your comment. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

3 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

@Manwon Lender

Cookie Muncher put both of us on ignore the same day in the same thread and still quotes us, Ya kno wot I mean.,

Yea, but it's important to look at the person and Cookie um is a unquie guy. When he was made the mold was broken, and I don't mean what I am saying ina derogatory manner, he is just different. 

Take care?

[jmccr8]

22 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well that cool but your special, and I am able to say this because of our conversations. For me this is the second time I have ever used this feature. The first person I took ignore, however in the first cases I was asked to place that individual on ignore. In this case it been coming for a long time, this was mine alone, sometimes you can see the future outcome of certain situations and honestly didn't want to end up getting ban! As far myself and how I will react to the situation, if I place someone on ignore unlike you I will not ever speak to them again. 

The reason I felt it was necssary to make that ststement is so the the other member understand my intentions 

Thanks for your comment. 

Hi Manwon

I grew up in a world where anyone can or will be a liability so ignoring people is not an option no matter how irritating it can be. Much to my dismay there is only one time that I told someone that I would put them on ignore. My regret was not that I actually put them on ignore because most of the time I like what they have to say, so my regret was telling them hat they had ired me enough to say I would and that was about me not them.

[Mr Walker]

On 12/3/2021 at 10:12 PM, Tom1200 said:

Taking stuff out of context can be fun!  And in this case extremely accurate.  Well, one bit of me - fnarr, fnarr.

More importantly Manuel is finally correct on something.  (Even a broken clock is right twice a day, unless it's digital.)  Croydon Pals (established March '15, disbanded April '15; motto cacas sumus, sed mortui estis).  We didn't exactly make it to battle - our tram crashed after two miles, killing Crusher McKillall who was the only one who knew the way to France or actually wanted to go.  The rest of us spent the war hiding in the cellars of the Hanged Hun hostelry (formerly the Flayed Frenchman, and previously the Spayed Spaniard).

Tick.

   Tock.

Tick.

   Tock.

That's the sound of me waiting.  Waiting for you to provide even a single example of where I've taken your words out of context.

Tick.

   Tock.

By the way - did you read post #26?  Did you see what Mr W did there?  He addressed points I'd raised, in a thoughtful, measured, educated manner showing considerable study, research or prior knowledge.  He didn't resort to insults, smart-arsed comments or derision.  I think we could all learn from this - his approach as well as his message.

Tick...

   Tock......

Thanks ever so much for taking the time to respond.  A cursory scan of your post reinforces my conviction that I don't know enough about this subject to offer more than a superficial analysis.  There are levels - and levels of levels - I haven't even begun to think about.  (And each time I arrogantly imagine I'm making progress I come up against a scholar's lifetime's work that challenges everything I thought I understood.)  

I'm now interested in the translations and interpretations of the word tekton, not because of any status it might grant Joseph but because it challenges everything I thought I knew about 2000 years of Christian tradition.  As far as I knew Joe & sons were carpenters.  My grandad was a farmer in Ireland and, by all accounts, an accomplished carpenter.  He built furniture, beds, barn doors, and so on, but his main skill was in making and repairing carts and wagons including wheels.  That's the image I always had of Jesus - working with hammer and chisels to shape timber into a functional form: not necessarily pretty, but useful.  Value-added, if you like.

I've never seen tekton used to mean anything other than carpenter ... because three days ago I'd never even looked.  Now you've given me a whole load more to read through I doubt I'll be able to ask any intelligent questions for quite so time.  I don't plan to give up, but if you don't hear back from me it's because you've overloaded my poor little brain and I'm spending some 'me' time in a white padded cell.

One thing I would note - all your links are relatively recent ones (well, this millennium).  So they all may be influenced and informed by Vermes's works from the 1980s.  Do you know of any sources prior to him that push this debate further back in time?

All the best,

Tom

Thanks .

Yep tekton itself  is interesting but the role and wealth of joseph has always been perceived via the current social gospel.

For most of Christianity the church NEEDED joseph  to be poor and humble because that's s how the y portrayed Christ himself .   This was to ensure ordinary people did not try to rise above their station and were content with their lot  Apart form a few orders  priests were were often rich and well supported financially  This was justified in their role of praying for all, but many became very rich and powerful.

Today  the prosperity gospel promotes joseph and Jesus as wealthy and prosperous and says faith can make you so,  too.

Personally i just try to deconstruct the clues in the bible (which in itself ma y or may not be an "historical"  account or a fictional narrative.)

Ps id never really thought about the gifts of the magi before, and it is not a  topic raised often. They, alone, would have made joseph and Mary   very very rich. Ive never seen an explanation for what happened to those gifts  

Here is one interesting thought bubble. which i just found.

 quote

In hindsight, I may have misspoken. Perhaps I should have answered that the Bible doesn’t literally give us an answer. It does give us some strong clues.

Call this exercise the quest to imagine what happened to the wise men’s gold.

Consider what the texts tell us about Jesus. Ask how Jesus obtained the advantages of literacy, rabbinical wisdom and cultural acumen coming from such impoverished circumstances.

How does a child born into a poor family become such a compelling figure capable of arguing with the best of the Pharisees? After all, he lived off the beaten path in the Jewish society.

One answer robs him of his humanity. That is, his ability to read from Isaiah, for example, came from his divinity.

Another answer is the pre-Protestant work ethic. He worked harder than everyone else, teaching himself Hebrew and studying the Hebrew texts by the fireplace until the break of dawn.

A third answer is that he was born with an IQ off the charts. He was a genetic anomaly.

If these answers ring hollow, consider a fourth speculative answer: His parents invested most of the gold in his education and future vocation, anticipating great things from their son (Luke 1:32-33 and Matthew 1:20-21).

Without the gold, answering these questions becomes tricky:

â—     Where did Jesus get the training to ask probative questions of the teachers in the temple and astonish them with his insight (Luke 2:46-47)?

â—     Where did he learn to read (Luke 4:16)?

â—     How was he able to teach in the synagogues “with authority” (Luke 4:32)?

â—     What gave him the confidence to interface with the tax collectors, who were among the wealthiest members of society?

â—     How was Jesus able to finance 12 disciples? Remember some of the disciples had families. How did these families sustain themselves while their husbands were wandering all over the country?

â—     Where did the startup funds come for the “money box” that Judas carried (John 12:6)?

Persian gold certainly helps answer questions about the education and vocation of the Palestinian prophet.

If Jesus did indeed have access to the wise men’s gold – firsthand experience with wealth – then we can better understand why he knew the dangers of wealth.

He rejected the evil one’s temptation of bread (the temptation of economic power) in the wilderness (Luke 4:3-4). He warned that one can’t serve God and mammon (Luke 16:13). He knew the earthly limits of wealth (Luke 12:21), what it meant to be lovers of money (Luke 16:14), the selfishness of the wealthy (Luke 16:19-31) and how difficult it was for the rich to follow him (Luke 18:18-25). He also recognized what it meant for the wealthy to repent of ill-gotten gains (Luke 19:1-10).

 

https://goodfaithmedia.org/what-happened-to-wise-mens-gold-the-long-awaited-answer-cms-19000/

Another theory is that the gifts also  financed Joseph's family's escape  to Egypt. 

 

Edited December 5, 2021 by Mr Walker

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Manwon

I grew up in a world where anyone can or will be a liability so ignoring people is not an option no matter how irritating it can be. Much to my dismay there is only one time that I told someone that I would put them on ignore. My regret was not that I actually put them on ignore because most of the time I like what they have to say, so my regret was telling them hat they had ired me enough to say I would and that was about me not them.

Well I appreciate your thoughts and if feel it was about you then you should not have done it. I see your analogy very clearly and the point your trying to make, and I can only assume it was best for you and them. Like the only other person I have placed on ignore, I told to do that. In this situationI made I made the decisions based upon two things. First this exact situation has occurred with this individual before.

This is just another repeat of past events that have transpired which were carried forward to this thread. Sadly some people hold grudges their entire life and keep their anger bottled up and they never release it and move forward. However I am not one of those people, to me what occurs today is forgotten the next day. When you hold grudges the only person harmed is the person holding that grudge.   

I understand the situation you described above and agree with you under the circumstances that you described above that you were completely wrong and I applaud you for attempting to fix your mistake. But my situation is different than yours in all respects, in the past I have become involved in similar situations which resulted in me being given a vacation from the forum. Well no longer, now when a situation gets out of control It better to end the situation permanently which I have done. 

• In this situation I can see a repeat of that occurring, especially when the other member is not familar with the forum rules and they make comments and violate them. Then when you tell them they should read the rules and their response is "" well That falls under the situation where I am innocent until proven guilty ""  which made me laugh do hard my stomach hurt.   I guess he isn't aware that not knowing the rules is not an excuse for violating them !!!
• Thanks.

.

[jmccr8]

47 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well I appreciate your thoughts and if feel it was about you then you should not have done it. I see your analogy very clearly and the point your trying to make, and I can only assume it was best for you and them. Like the only other person I have placed on ignore, I told to do that. In this situationI made I made the decisions based upon two things. First this exact situation has occurred with this individual before.

This is just another repeat of past events that have transpired which were carried forward to this thread. Sadly some people hold grudges their entire life and keep their anger bottled up and they never release it and move forward. However I am not one of those people, to me what occurs today is forgotten the next day. When you hold grudges the only person harmed is the person holding that grudge.   

I understand the situation you described above and agree with you under the circumstances that you described above that you were completely wrong and I applaud you for attempting to fix your mistake. But my situation is different than yours in all respects, in the past I have become involved in similar situations which resulted in me being given a vacation from the forum. Well no longer, now when a situation gets out of control It better to end the situation permanently which I have done. 

• In this situation I can see a repeat of that occurring, especially when the other member is not familar with the forum rules and they make comments and violate them. Then when you tell them they should read the rules and their response is "" well That falls under the situation where I am innocent until proven guilty ""  which made me laugh do hard my stomach hurt.   I guess he isn't aware that not knowing the rules is not an excuse for violating them !!!
• Thanks.

.

Hi Manwon

It happened during your elections and covid and things in the forum were getting testy here in the forum. The person that I chastised is someone I consider a friend here and have always liked them as a person. I know that they have accepted my apology as intended because they do still react in one way or another and we have no conflict in how we relate to each in discussions at present.

Generally speaking if I see that a member is unwilling to discuss a subject objectively and get personal I stay out of it although I do do a drive by wise crack every now and then. This is a forum no one can hurt you so other than maybe a bruised ego nor can they influence your life in the physical world, I work and live by myself so this is a social avenue to exchange ideas, education and personal observations about peoples interpretation of their environments and how accepting they are about how others interpret their reality in comparison.

 I don't blame myself for being human I just let something get to me that I should have just sloughed it off and made an apology it's not that big of a deal to me to say I was/am wrong

[Tom1200]

8 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well Tom you do deserve a reply, and I will make this very short and to the point. You misrepresented my intentions, and my comments  from your very first post to this thread. We both are aware this isn't the first time you have joined a thread and instead of participating and adding additional subject matter, you have directed you comment towards me personally. Now I don't mind your personal attacks, what bothers me is the manner in which you disrupted the thread and created an environment that effected others posting to this thread and which caused them to no longer participate.

So I have decided to place you on ignore, so you may have the last word on this topic and you can certainly be assured I will never respond to you again.

Take care!

... and there we have it.  That's the difference in a nutshell.  When I make statements they are always supported by solid evidence, which can then be examined for accuracy and truth.  When Manuel isn't getting his own way he throws out childish accusations with nothing to back them up.  He has repeatedly stated:

• I quote him out of context to misrepresent his views;

... but when asked to provide even one example of this he can't; he just repeats the allegation.

• I have made fun of his handicap;

... but when asked to provide even one example of this he can't; he just repeats the allegation.

• I have broken Forum rules;

... but when asked to provide even one example of this he can't; he just repeats the allegation.

So he's now going to ignore me?  Will I really notice any difference?

5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

For most of Christianity the church NEEDED Joseph to be poor and humble because that's how they portrayed Christ himself . 

That's certainly thinking outside the box, or removing the blinkers, or some similar idiom.  I've never looked at this scenario in such terms.  Being brought up a Christian (and worse - a Catholic) I was locked inside that box and the walls are slick with guilt.  Any attempt to peer out was met with the ever-present disapproving gaze of parents, priests, nuns (they're the worst), teachers, etc.  It was really hard aged 12ish to declare I just don't believe any of this.  Rather than attempt to engage us in potentially useful debate, dissenters in our school were treated like pariahs.  We were shamed, ridiculed and punished for any word or deed that challenged the 'caring' Christian creed.

Consequently I've spent my adulthood actively avoiding thinking about the absurdities of formal religion.  To my mind the books of the NT are nothing more than stories designed to perpetuate a series of fanciful myths.  From this perspective there's absolutely no point wondering or worrying about whether Joseph or Jesus were rich, handsome, well-travelled or even real.

I'm not saying that to cause offense!  It just strikes me as a totally futile exercise - if the goal is to obtain historical truth.  If, on the other hand, we're looking at the historiology (and yes, I did have to look that word up) and reasons why people said and thought the things they did - I'm more open to discussion.  So your statement I've quoted above is entirely plausible... but that alone is no evidence they were wealthy; hence your whole list of arguments I haven't yet tried to analyse.  But I promise:

• I will read your post with an open mind
• I will give your points serious consideration
• I will conduct research where I think that more information is needed
• I will not change my flippant, irreverent approach just because some readers have no sense of humour
• I will challenge and disagree with assertions I find unproven or illogical

and I might reach a different conclusion to you (or none at all).  But please don't expect a rushed response - we're horribly busy at the moment trying to sort the Omicrons from the Deltas, and wondering what happened to all the other letters...  All the best - stay safe.

Edited December 5, 2021 by Tom1200
I needed to add extra scathing and sarcasm.

[Doug1066]

Most of the Welsh kingdoms manage to claim descent from Jesus, Mary, Joseph of Aramathea, etc.  These were added to genealogies to give the royal family greater status.  I'd be real careful about citing them as a valid source.

Doug

[Mr Walker]

12 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

... and there we have it.  That's the difference in a nutshell.  When I make statements they are always supported by solid evidence, which can then be examined for accuracy and truth.  When Manuel isn't getting his own way he throws out childish accusations with nothing to back them up.  He has repeatedly stated:

• I quote him out of context to misrepresent his views;

... but when asked to provide even one example of this he can't; he just repeats the allegation.

• I have made fun of his handicap;

... but when asked to provide even one example of this he can't; he just repeats the allegation.

• I have broken Forum rules;

... but when asked to provide even one example of this he can't; he just repeats the allegation.

So he's now going to ignore me?  Will I really notice any difference?

That's certainly thinking outside the box, or removing the blinkers, or some similar idiom.  I've never looked at this scenario in such terms.  Being brought up a Christian (and worse - a Catholic) I was locked inside that box and the walls are slick with guilt.  Any attempt to peer out was met with the ever-present disapproving gaze of parents, priests, nuns (they're the worst), teachers, etc.  It was really hard aged 12ish to declare I just don't believe any of this.  Rather than attempt to engage us in potentially useful debate, dissenters in our school were treated like pariahs.  We were shamed, ridiculed and punished for any word or deed that challenged the 'caring' Christian creed.

Consequently I've spent my adulthood actively avoiding thinking about the absurdities of formal religion.  To my mind the books of the NT are nothing more than stories designed to perpetuate a series of fanciful myths.  From this perspective there's absolutely no point wondering or worrying about whether Joseph or Jesus were rich, handsome, well-travelled or even real.

I'm not saying that to cause offense!  It just strikes me as a totally futile exercise - if the goal is to obtain historical truth.  If, on the other hand, we're looking at the historiology (and yes, I did have to look that word up) and reasons why people said and thought the things they did - I'm more open to discussion.  So your statement I've quoted above is entirely plausible... but that alone is no evidence they were wealthy; hence your whole list of arguments I haven't yet tried to analyse.  But I promise:

• I will read your post with an open mind
• I will give your points serious consideration
• I will conduct research where I think that more information is needed
• I will not change my flippant, irreverent approach just because some readers have no sense of humour
• I will challenge and disagree with assertions I find unproven or illogical

and I might reach a different conclusion to you (or none at all).  But please don't expect a rushed response - we're horribly busy at the moment trying to sort the Omicrons from the Deltas, and wondering what happened to all the other letters...  All the best - stay safe.

And i was raised secular humanist/atheist  and only explored religions after I was 21,    so I carried none of the baggage which prejudices some people for or against a certain belief  

Among other subjects I studied  history politics and philosophy at university 

I've always seen faith and belief, as well as religions as a psychological /sociological phenomena.

That doesn't mean they are based on untruths,  but that it is not their  physical truths which are important.  It  i s the needs which are met, and the empowerment  which is given by faith, which is significant. 

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

 

Edited December 6, 2021 by Manwon Lender