Coalition of the Confused

Hosted by Jenifer (Zarknorph)

Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.

  • 925
    MEMBERS
  • 53243
    MESSAGES
  • 0
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Archaeology News   Science

Started 11/11/18 by Jenifer (Zarknorph); 36695 views.
In reply toRe: msg 232
bml00

From: bml00

5/30/20

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/eighth-century-jews-cannabis-burning-religious-ceremony-a9538566.html

The world’s earliest known use of burning cannabis in a ritual ceremony has been dated to the early eighth century B.C. in Israel’s Tel Arad.

Researchers from the Israel Museum and the Vocani Centre — an Israeli agricultural research centre —? published the discovery on 28 May.

The drug was found on two limestone monoliths, most likely altars, that were discovered in the Judahite shrine, originally excavated in the 1960s. By the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

There was unidentified dark material preserved on the upper surfaces of the monoliths, which were found to have residues of cannabinoids such as teterahydrocannabinol (THC) cannabidiol (CBD), and cannabinol (CBN).

  • Edited May 30, 2020 4:48 am  by  bml00
BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

5/30/20

RGoss99 said:

Christians as individuals, I agree, but as institutions the result is the same - crusades, inquisition, persecutions, and current unjust wars supported by Christians.

Christians don't generally form ignorant armed and separtist mobs the way that ISIS did.

We seem to have a problem with converts to Islam - including prison converts.

I think I know why.

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

5/30/20

bml00 said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/eighth-century-jews-cannabis-burning-religious-ceremony-a9538566.html The world’s earliest known use of burning cannabis in a ritual ceremony has been dated to the early eighth century B.C. in Israel’s Tel Arad.

These are racial Jews from before Judaism even became monotheistic.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

5/30/20

There is a parallel in the present Minissota situation. when Christians formed armed, separatist mobs against islam they were in a position of power in an effort to get their way. the Blacks in Minessota, and  those Muslim mobs are not, so they fall backon the solution at hand.

In the American revolution, the British complained that the colonials did not fight by the rules because they did not wear red coats and fight like "men" in straight lines, but hid behind trees and wore uniforms that were not good targets.

In the Nam war the VC were the technological under dog, so they broke the American rules.

Some anti Muslim Americans say that Muslim prisoners have no rights because they are not "regular" soldiers and illegally don´t wear uniforms, cowardly hiding among the civilian populations.

In reply toRe: msg 235
bml00

From: bml00

5/30/20

                                                                                            End of debate

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

May-31

RGoss99 said:

There is a parallel in the present Minissota situation. when Christians formed armed, separatist mobs against islam they were in a position of power in an effort to get their way.

I don't think its the same as desperate Muslims forming rogue militias in Iraq and coming together to form ISIS.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

May-31

while not quite the same, if one looks at the motivations of the individual crusaders, their leaders, "investors" and organizers, not a lot of difference.

Do you really think that all the younger sons who went on crusade did it for religous reasons?

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

May-31

RGoss99 said:

while not quite the same, if one looks at the motivations of the individual crusaders, their leaders, "investors" and organizers, not a lot of difference. 

People invested in Crusades, this is true - and Saudi Princes are thought to have invested heavily in ISIS.

RGoss99 said:

Do you really think that all the younger sons who went on crusade did it for religous reasons?

Yes - the foot-soldiers said to have attacked the homes of Jews in Germany and Christians in Jerusalem were fired by Xian mission.

Very, very different from the sons of the earth defending Iraq from the Americans.

Now, ISIS was then joined by a lot of converts from Western countries, people believing they were Muslims despite short-cirtuiting any recognised induction and conversion process.

The first group were Christians from 700 years ago and we'll never see their likes again (unless a US President declares a Crusade of course, as would never happen) the second group was natives seeking to govern themselves - but the third group were the hostage beheaders and that's a problem that is Islamic.

Does that make sense? Ancient Christianity might have had a terrorist inducing problem (but probably didn't) whereas modern Islam does.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

May-31

While history books probably support your point, but my experience with documentation of that period suggest that the religiosity of that period was grossly exaggerated. Of course the establishment promoted it because it meant control, but the writings of the monks, and stories of the returned knights suggest that the Trump equivalent of lockerroom cynical talk was not that much different. 

I am afraid you are containated with a rather Hollywood image, promoted in those times by those who had something to gain by their versions. Sort of like a former student of mine teaching a photgrapy course based on his training in the military. When he was my student he was a drug dealing gang banger. He got caught, and a judge, doing what would probably not happen today, gave him a choice of jail or Nam. The conquest of Mallorca, in the 1200s was a part of the Crusades, many of your "foot soulders" were simply younger sons with no prospects so the crusades were more a way of improving their lot, then a religious experience. Crusaders were often equal opportunity terrorists, partially responsible for destroying the <<Christian>> Byzantine empire, raped, looted, destroyed property - simply rationalizing their crimes based on religion. As with some ISIS I suspect their "adventures" are as much about participating in the only show in town as religious belief.

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

May-31

RGoss99 said:

While history books probably support your point, but my experience with documentation of that period suggest that the religiosity of that period was grossly exaggerated. Of course the establishment promoted it because it meant control, but the writings of the monks, and stories of the returned knights suggest that the Trump equivalent of lockerroom cynical talk was not that much different. 

Well, you say that the religiousity of the Crusaders may be greatly exaggerated - but in that case you can say the same of most members of ISIS.

We can barney on that - but my point is that ISIS was joined by people who believed themselves Muslims without having gone through any formal induction. Those people were almost inevitably dangerous.

RGoss99 said:

Sort of like a former student of mine teaching a photgrapy course based on his training in the military. When he was my student he was a drug dealing gang banger. He got caught, and a judge, doing what would probably not happen today, gave him a choice of jail or Nam. 

I came across that stuff in the 70s as well. With an emphasis on how wealthy his dad was.

RGoss99 said:

As with some ISIS I suspect their "adventures" are as much about participating in the only show in town as religious belief.

I think you're being unfair to ISIS - which mostly consisted of natives fighting occupation. Equating them to Crusaders (religious or not) is pretty gross.

TOP