76fd2657
XPost: soc.culture.greek, soc.history.ancient, alt.pagan
XPost: alt.magick
From: SolomonW@citi.com
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 03:26:15 -0700 (PDT), Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Jul 2, 5:56 am, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
>> On Jul 2, 5:19 am, SolomonW wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 19:33:37 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
>>> > "SolomonW" wrote in message
>>> >news:evw8lk7f6ycp$.5qbdgd4o1wri$.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> >> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 00:42:45 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
>>
>>> >>> "SolomonW" wrote in message
>>> >>>news:g565sv0g54iz.157rkifq0u48z$.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> >>>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 22:48:31 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
>>
>>> >>>>> "Martin Edwards" wrote in message
>>> >>>>>news:R_SGr.429269$JL5.417233@fx13.am4...
>>> >>>>>> On 27/06/2012 21:56, Agamemnon wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> "David Dalton" wrote in message
>>> >>>>>>>news:dalton-A6D8BB.23310026062012@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> >>>>>>>> Is there any evidence that Dionysus and/or Adonis
>>> >>>>>>>> once lived (as humans) and if so, when and where?
>>
>>> >>>>>>> There's plenty of contemporary evidence extant for Zeus, Sarapis
and
>>> >>>>>>> Jehovah..............
>>
>>> >>>>>> I'm intrigued, perhaps you could post some of it. I'm open to
>>> >>>>>> suggestions
>>> >>>>>> about Zeus, but Serapis was an amalgam of Osiris and the Apis bull,
>>> >>>>>> and
>>> >>>>>> the Tetragrammaton was never pronounced "Jehovah" in any
>>
>>> >>>>> Wrong on both counts.
>>
>>> >>>>> Sarapis is a contraction of the name of the Hyksos king Awoserre
>>> >>>>> Apepi(s)
>>> >>>>> (SerreApepis) who was the Greek king Apis of Argos hence Awos(serre),
>>> >>>>> ie.
>>> >>>>> Re
>>> >>>>> of Argos (with the r and gamma of Argos being corrupted to w in
>>> >>>>> hieroglyphics). In Manethos list he appears as Apophis. His cousin
>>> >>>>> Epaphus
>>> >>>>> apears as Apachnas, ie. Seneferankhre Apepi. Sarapis was succeded by
>>> >>>>> Agenor
>>> >>>>> as king of lower Egypt and Palestine, ie. Aqenienre Apepi (hence
>>> >>>>> Agenor)
>>> >>>>> or
>>> >>>>> Janins in Manetho ie. (A)qenien(re) .
>>
>>> >>>>> Zeus was Sheshi and appears in so-called Minoan king lists as
>>> >>>>> Saasi[tepi]
>>> >>>>> or
>>> >>>>> Saa[si]tepi king of Lato and Tiliss in 1650 BC, ie. Lyctos and
Tylissos
>>> >>>>> both
>>> >>>>> of which are credited as the places where Zeus was born and grew up.
>>> >>>>> Saasitepi was the sucessor of Satur who reigned between about 1725
and
>>> >>>>> 1675
>>> >>>>> BC, ie Saturn or Kronos the father of Zeus/Jupiter.
>>
>>> >>>> All irrelevant to the question
>>
>>> >>> Not at all.
>>
>>> >>> According to Porphyry the Greek and Phoenician gods were one and the
>>> >>> same.
>>> >>> Saturn, Kronos and El were all the same person, a Cretan king who ruled
>>> >>> over
>>> >>> the whole of Italy, Greece, Phoenicia and Palestine and who had
dominion
>>> >>> over Egypt where he put Tuthus/Thoth/Hermes (Dudimose or Tiamus in
>>> >>> Manetho)
>>> >>> in power. Agenor was a king of Phoenicia as well as a Greek king.
>>
>>> >> Porphyry lived two thousands of years later.
>>
>>> > Porphyry was using the Phoenician history of Sanchuniathon which was
written
>>> > in the time of Heirombalus (the biblical Juerubal) when Abibalus (the
>>> > biblical Abimelech) was king of Berytus (Beirut) who dates to 1092 BC.
>>> > That's within 536 years of when the original records in the possession of
>>> > Heirombalus were written so the history would have been as accurate as
any
>>> > account still extant of the fall of Constantinople and more accurate than
>>> > any account of the Crusades.
>>
>>> From what we know of it, the Sanchuniathon is not well regarded as a source
>>> by historians for history.
>>
>>> >>>>> According to Sanchuniathon there were two Phoenician kings called
>>> >>>>> Jehovah
>>> >>>>> or
>>> >>>>> Ieuo, ie. Pontus in Greek or the sea god Yam Nahar aka. Yaw in the
Baal
>>> >>>>> Epic, separated by 2 generations. They correspond to the Hyksos
>>> >>>>> pharaohs
>>> >>>>> Meruserenre Yakubher c.1675 BC and Yakobaam Sekkhaenre c.1600 BC.
>>
>>> >>>> No way it could be true as Phoenician does not have vowels.
>>
>>> >>> Poppycock. Phoenicians has vowels just like every other language
>>> >>> otherwise
>>> >>> consonants would be unpronounceable. The only difference with
Phoenician
>>> >>> script and Greek script is that the vowels are not written down, but
they
>>> >>> all still exist.
>>
>>> >> Of course they exist they are just not written so we do not know how
they
>>> >> sounded.
>>
>>> >> The other issue is that vowels sounds change over time, try reading
>>> >> Shakespeare without vowels, it is not so hard.
>>
>>> > You are comparing Hebrew with English. English is not an single ordinary
>>> > language and should never be used as a basis for linguistics. It's a mish
>>> > mash of Greek and Latin received through French and German and Viking
>>> > invaders overlaid onto an earlier framework of Welsh.
>>
>>> Please read what I wrote, I am not comparing I am giving you an example.
>>
>>> > The vowels in English contrary to your claims have not changed
>>> > pronunciation.
>>
>>> A lie.
>>
>>> Between Middle and Early Modern English (around Shakespeare's time) what
>>> took place is known as the Great Vowel Shift.
>>
>>> > The reality is that due to the various invasions of this
>>> > country there are over 100 regional variations in vowel sounds as one
>>> > language replaced or was incorporated into an earlier one to different
>>> > degrees in different regions.
>>
>>> For your information Hebrew has the same issue.
>>
>>> > Therefore there is no standard pronunciation
>>> > for vowels in English and never has been so it is impossible to make
such a
>>> > claim as change. Certain texts were written using spelling from certain
>>> > regional variations of the language and other texts used other regional
>>> > variations. Today's standard English is just one of these regional
>>> > variations and does not accurately reflect how 95% of the population
>>> > actually pronounce the language. Today's spelling isn't even the way
people
>>> > even pronounced the words which are written in it.
>>
>>> Not true, it is mainly because when they codified the English language they
>>> looked at the root of the word rather then how it was pronounced.
>>
>>> > In the case of Hebrew the fact that there are no vowels in the written
>>> > language indicates that when Phoenician was first coded there wasn't a
>>> > standard pronunciation of the vowels by any of the peoples who spoke the
>>> > language. So any pronunciation is as good as any other.
>>
>>> (a)
>>> Logic is wrong, I can read Hebrew with vowels using a number of different
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
