Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Christian Designs Found In Tomb Stones Of Eastern Han Dynasty
CL2000.com ^ | 8-2-2002

Posted on 08/04/2002 3:00:50 PM PDT by blam

Christian Designs Found in Tomb Stones of Eastern Han Dynasty

[2002-08-02] Studies show that as early as 86 A.D., or the third year under the reign of "Yuanhe" of Eastern Han, Dynasty Christianity entered into China, 550 years earlier than the world accepted time.

When studying a batch of stone carvings of Eastern Han Dynasty (25-220 A.D.) stored and exhibited in the Museum of Xuzhou Han Stone Carvings, Christian theology professor Wang Weifan was greatly surprised by some stone engravings demonstrating the Bible stories and designs of early Christian times.

Further studies showed that some of these engravings were made in 86 A.D., or the third year under the reign of "Yuanhe" of Eastern Han Dynasty, 550 years earlier than the world accepted time of Christianity's entrance into China.

The 74-year-old professor, who is also a standing member of the China Christian Council, showed reporter a pile of photos of Han stone carvings and bronze basins taken by him. He also compared the designs on them with that of the Bible, composed of fish, birds, and animals demonstrating how God created the earth.

Designs on these ancient stones displayed the artistic style of early Christian times found in Iraq and Middle East area while bearing the characteristics of China's Eastern Han times.

The stone carvings, being important funeral objects, are mainly found in four cities, and Xuzhou is one of them. It is reported that by now more than 20 intact Han tombs have been found, from which nearly 500 pieces of engraved stones were discovered.

It is globally accepted that Christianity was first carried into China by a Syrian missionary Alopen in 635 A.D. the ninth year under the reign of "Zhenguan" of the Tang Dynasty (618-907 A.D.).

Some experts once raised doubts that Christianity may have entered China in an early time as the Eastern Han, but lack evidence. Nevertheless, professor Wang's discovery serves to strongly back up the theory and the earlier works of his own. By PD Online Staff Member Li Heng [From: CL2000.com]


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ancientchina; archaeology; artifacts; china; christian; christianity; churhhistory; designs; dynasty; economic; found; ggg; godsgravesglyphs; han; history; homerhdubs; liquan; romanempire; romansinchina; stones; tomb; uzbekistan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-157 next last

1 posted on 08/04/2002 3:00:51 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam

Han Stone Reliefs

2 posted on 08/04/2002 3:03:56 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Are there pictures?

I'd be interested in seeing them.
3 posted on 08/04/2002 3:18:39 PM PDT by trussell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trussell
Just the one in post #2. (The only one attached to the article, that I'm aware of)
4 posted on 08/04/2002 3:37:09 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: blam
Of collateral interest is how this again demonstrates the ability of at least some people to travel at that time and the apparent interaction between peoples. This is important in refuting the idea among some historians that societies were essential static and little happened from millena to millenia.

It takes on special significance in suggesting that Jesus did not spend 20 years of his life pounding nails. There is no Biblical reason to believe that after age 12 he ran the local arts and craft shoppe. Indeed, there is lots of extra-Biblical evidence to suggest he traveled very widely outside the region, including to France and England. Other evidence suggests he traveled to India. Did he also travel to South America???

5 posted on 08/04/2002 4:11:00 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
" Did he (Jesus) also travel to South America???

I've seen articles that say he was in America too but, I'm not about to post those articles.

6 posted on 08/04/2002 4:19:01 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blam
>I've seen articles that say he [Jesus] was in America too but, I'm not about to post those articles.

HaHaHa! That's funny, considering some of the other areas you lead us into! You are the internet equivalent of Art Bell! ---ggg---.

But the subject of Jesus visiting South America is not a new one at all. Dr. Barry Feld would be quite comfortable discussing it, I believe.

7 posted on 08/04/2002 4:22:21 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: blam
"It is globally accepted that Christianity was first carried into China by a Syrian missionary Alopen in 635 A.D."

Well that doesn't make it true.

Concensus is neither truth nor reality.

Concensus neither creates nor identifies truth.

I know. This violates everything "Liberals" believe and hold dear, including--horror or horrors!--the significance of New York Times's being the newspaper of record! They think that if something is "globally accepted" it is therefore true.

8 posted on 08/04/2002 6:16:39 PM PDT by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
I take it all back. You are NOT anything at all like Art Bell. He goes places NO ONE should go. ---ggg---.
9 posted on 08/04/2002 6:39:51 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: blam
The article is vague, but the "Bible stories" it refers to seem to be Old Testament stories.

If there is no mention of Jesus on these stones, how does he know the designs are Christian? They could be Jewish.

10 posted on 08/04/2002 6:44:58 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
FELL, not "Feld."

And he would not be comfortable discussing it in THIS plane, at least, for he died suddenly several years ago now, about late 1994.

11 posted on 08/04/2002 6:45:58 PM PDT by crystalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
This symbol also has no mention of Jesus, but it's Christian meaning is pretty obvious. FISH.
12 posted on 08/04/2002 6:48:35 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: crystalk
>FELL, not "Feld."

You are of course correct. His passing was a serious loss to all open-minded thinkers.

13 posted on 08/04/2002 6:49:40 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
This symbol also has no mention of Jesus, but it's Christian meaning is pretty obvious. FISH.

Do you see a specifically Christian fish symbol in the carving? I don't see it.

14 posted on 08/04/2002 6:53:29 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
To those unfamiliar with Dr. Barry Fell of Harvard fame, this is what we are talking about: America B.C. One of the seminal works in the field.
15 posted on 08/04/2002 6:53:38 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
>Do you see a specifically Christian fish symbol in the carving? I don't see it.

No, I'm making the broader point that it may not require a museum sign with a pointing arrow in order to possibly be understood.

16 posted on 08/04/2002 6:57:16 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: blam
This is not a new revelation. Please see the following link

http://reluctant-messenger.com/issa.htm

Very interesting reading.
17 posted on 08/04/2002 7:16:14 PM PDT by unitedwestand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
No, I'm making the broader point that it may not require a museum sign with a pointing arrow in order to possibly be understood.

Let me ask the question this way: Do you see anything in the article or the photograph that indicate that the carvings are based on Christianity rather than some other culture that had the stories of the Old Testament, such as the Jews.

18 posted on 08/04/2002 7:20:38 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
Of collateral interest is how this again demonstrates the ability of at least some people to travel at that time and the apparent interaction between peoples. This is important in refuting the idea among some historians that societies were essential static and little happened from millena to millenia.

I remember the stories of how scholars were belittling the idea of Abraham and family traveling from the Tigris/Euphrates region to the Mediterranean and down to Egypt. They said much the same thing about little movement of these ancient peoples. Subsequent discoveries proved them wrong. There have been found contracts dating from the time of Abraham, actually wagon rental agreements in which there appeared specific restrictions that enjoined the renter from taking the wagon on trips over to the Mediterranean region, a clear indication that such movement was common.
19 posted on 08/04/2002 7:28:16 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: unitedwestand
"Very interesting reading."

Thanks it was interesting.

20 posted on 08/04/2002 7:38:41 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
>Let me ask the question this way: Do you see anything in the article or the photograph that indicate that the carvings are based on Christianity rather than some other culture that had the stories of the Old Testament, such as the Jews.

No, I'm making the broader point that it may not require a museum sign with a pointing arrow in order to possibly be understood.

>If there is no mention of Jesus on these stones, how does he know the designs are Christian? They could be Jewish.

I really haven't had a chance to examine the stones under laboratory conditions (nor have you) so cannot give the definitive answer you apparently and argumentatively seek. (You have to be loads of fun to be around.)  Furthur, I am not qualified to make definitive judgements (nor are you) about what is or is not a Christian symbol of that time.

In that absence, I will either (1) accept  theology professor Wang Weifans premise, based on his presumed authority,  that some  stone engravings demonstrate Bible stories and designs of early Christian times: or (2) assume a default position that they may be Old Testament stories of the Israelites, either Northern Kingdom or Southern Kingdom.

21 posted on 08/04/2002 8:26:56 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
>I remember the stories of how scholars were belittling the idea of Abraham and family traveling from the Tigris/Euphrates

I would like to read an authoritative book which discusses travel in ancient times. We now know the amount of travel around the Med in Jesus time was very heavy. The Romans went to Britain so frequently upper class business men and military officers could have 2nd homes there in the region of Bath and elsewhere. There was already a major Roman highway running from the west of England to todays London, passing right by Bath. If you had the status and the money, you could travel.

22 posted on 08/04/2002 8:39:35 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: blam
This proves that the stories behind Christianity came from Chinese mythology. Maybe one of the wise men came from China with this beautiful story....
23 posted on 08/04/2002 8:43:38 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
Oh, come on now, don't give us some of that new age, mormon nonsense. Christ never left Israel.
"I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mat 15:24 Mark 7:27
Jesus Christ was a minster of the circumcision...to confirm the promises made unto the fathers. Rom 15:8
24 posted on 08/04/2002 9:09:49 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
In that absence, I will either (1) accept theology professor Wang Weifans premise, based on his presumed authority, that some stone engravings demonstrate Bible stories and designs of early Christian times: or (2) assume a default position that they may be Old Testament stories of the Israelites, either Northern Kingdom or Southern Kingdom.

It would seem to me that, if these were Christian from that time, they would show more of the central story of Christianity, ie. Jesus on the Cross, Jesus and the apostles, the nativity, etc. If they show Old Testament stories, it would seem to me that they would more likely be Jewish (or lost tribe).

25 posted on 08/04/2002 9:21:44 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
It will be interesting to follow the story of these designs as more people have the opportunity to evaluate them.
26 posted on 08/04/2002 9:27:11 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
Romans were aware of civilizations to the east. There was likely some trade with India. In any case, we'll need to see the carvings before deciding if they were Christian or pre-Christian since many icons of the mystery religions were very close to Christian symbols that arose or were adopted later. Stories of the Creation and Noah do not imply Christianity. In any case, Christianity and variants spread very rapidly to the east.
27 posted on 08/04/2002 9:27:58 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blam
A little hard to see due to size, but the figures have an Egyptian look to them.
28 posted on 08/04/2002 9:33:06 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
>Ruy Dias de Bivar signed up 2002-07-19.

Welcome to Free Republic!

>Oh, come on now, don't give us some of that new age, mormon nonsense.

Sorry, I'm not a Mormon. Read my Profile and you will understand that I speak for no one and no one speaks for me.

>Christ never left Israel.

Where is your evidence?  There is absolutely no Biblical evidence to support that position.

>"I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mat 15:24 Mark 7:27

To understand Jesus comment you have to first understand the meaning of the world GENTILE.  GENTILE is a generic word. Like the words FOREIGNER and STRANGER it has no specific meaning until the user gives it a context. A Foreigner to one person is a Countryman to another.  A Stranger to one person is a Friend to another.  A Gentile to one group of people is a Relative to another group.

Recognizing that "Gentile" simply means "not quite like us" Mormons call non-Mormons "Gentiles" and Jews call non-Jews "Gentiles".  But outside a specific context the word Gentile does not stand on it's own .

For Example: The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel are a unique sub-set of Gentiles who are Israelites, but not Jews. From a Jewish perspective they are Gentiles, but from an Israelite perspective they are not.  So when we read:

Matthew 10:5-6  These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles , and do not enter a city of the Samaritans . But go rather to the Lost Sheep of The House of Israel."

we need to remember that the Title House of Israel was assigned to the Northern Kingdom when the Davidic Kingdom split.  Its members were never Jewish, therefore Jesus command to go first to the Lost Sheep of The House of Israel was NOT a command to go first to lost Jews.

Jesus was both an Israelite and a Jew and what He said here was "do not go to the Israelite Gentiles."   (A common misinterpretation has Him talking about Jewish Gentiles .)

The House of Israel later became The Lost Tribes of Israel which won their freedom from the Assyrians ~610 BC. These 5 MILLION Israelites spread quickly to the West and North where they became known to history as The CELTS and later as The Europeans and Americans. It was to these non-Jewish ISRAELITE CELTIC GENTILES in Galatia , etc. that Jesus sent his 12 apostles.

These Northern Kingdom Israelites were not Jews, thus were Gentiles in the Jewish sense.  But they were not Gentiles in the Israelite sense because they WERE Israelites. This huge nation of Israelites was simply called the The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel .

These ISRAELITE CELTIC GENTILES made up the bulk of the early Christians, and all the promises they received as Israelites were, and are, still good today. Gods inheritance has no statute of limitations.

29 posted on 08/04/2002 9:39:16 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
This proves that the stories behind Christianity came from Chinese mythology.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha. That's a good one.
30 posted on 08/05/2002 6:20:55 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
For Example: The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel are a unique sub-set of Gentiles who are Israelites, but not Jews. From a Jewish perspective they are Gentiles

That is absolutely false. The lost tribes, if they could be found, would NOT be considered gentiles ("goyim" in Hebrew) according to Jewish law. No descendant of Jacob is a goy. The Ethiopean Jews have been declared (whimsically, perhaps) to be the tribe of Dan and are, therefore, not gentile.

Recognizing that "Gentile" simply means "not quite like us"

I do not know the etymology of the word gentile, but the word Jesus would have actually used would have been "goy," which means any descendant of Noah other than the house of Jacob.

Jesus was both an Israelite and a Jew

I do not understand what you mean by that, other than that all Jews are also Israelites. According the geneologies of Jesus in the New Testament, he was clearly of the house of Judah.

31 posted on 08/05/2002 11:10:55 AM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
>>The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel are a unique sub-set of Gentiles who are Israelites, but not Jews. From a Jewish perspective they are Gentiles

>That is absolutely false ... according to Jewish law.

But Jewish Law and Tradition are not worth a bucket of warm "spit" when it comes to ascertaining historic truths.  Most "tradition" is really "damnable tradition".  By our traditions we make void the word of God!

>No descendant of Jacob is a goy.

Goy, schmoy.  The Biblical and historic record are crystal clear as to who are Jacobs descendents.  Please read the 3-MINUTE HISTORY at my FR LostTribe profile below to view the historic record.

>The Ethiopean Jews have been declared (whimsically, perhaps) to be the tribe of Dan and are , therefore, not gentile.

That the problem with so much of history.  Too much of it "have been declared (whimsically, perhaps)".  It's not about culturally "declaring" anything, it's about actual history.

>>Jesus was both an Israelite and a Jew

>I do not understand what you mean by that, other than that all Jews are also Israelites.

There is nothing difficult about that.  Jesus was an Israelite, being descended from Israel/Jacob.  He was also a Jew, being descended from a tribe which was part of the Southern Kingdom returned from Babylon.  Jews are not defined as being from Judah.  They come from Judea, and include Levites and some Benjamites as well as Judahites.

All Jews are Israelites, but most Israelites are not Jews.
 

32 posted on 08/05/2002 12:56:41 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
But Jewish Law and Tradition are not worth a bucket of warm "spit" when it comes to ascertaining historic truths. Most "tradition" is really "damnable tradition". By our traditions we make void the word of God!

We are not necessarily talking about historical truths; We are merely talking about the definition of a word. The word "gentile" is used in the Bible as a translation for goy. A goy is someone who is not a descendant of Jacob. Therefore, the lost tribes of Israel, if they could be found, would NOT be considered gentile, contrary to what you claimed.

I really think you make up a lot of things in your head.

33 posted on 08/05/2002 2:41:21 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
>I really think you make up a lot of things in your head.

No, but maybe you've spent too much time living near dead lakes and dead trees to think new thoughts not part of your culture. --ggg--.

I am only interested in historic truths. The 3-MINUTE HISTORY (at my Profile) is only 8 paragraphs long. Starting with the first paragraph, where do you find the first historic error?

34 posted on 08/05/2002 4:30:15 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
Ha ha ha ha ha ha. That's a good one.

Thanks. I thought so too. People around here can come up with some really far out and amusing implications behind the smallest bit of information. I thought I would give it a try...

35 posted on 08/05/2002 6:34:14 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
I am only interested in historic truths.

Anthropological DNA studies will uncover the truh behind this. There have some very interesting results from tracing the DNA of the Jewish Cohan family name and the profession of Rabbi.

36 posted on 08/05/2002 6:40:47 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
I am only interested in historic truths.

You may claim you are interested in the truth, but you have expressed at least two provable untruths in this thread.

There is a difference between "thinking new thoughts" and making up things that are not true.

37 posted on 08/05/2002 6:44:04 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
There have some very interesting results from tracing the DNA of the Jewish Cohan family name and the profession of Rabbi.

I think you mean the priests, not the rabbis. A rabbi is just a guy who goes to rabbinical school. Priests are hereditary. The Hebrew word for priest is Cohen.

There have indeed been DNA studies showing that Cohens all around the world are descended from the same man. Theoretically, that man should be Aaron.

38 posted on 08/05/2002 6:55:30 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
>   You said that, from a Jewish perspective, the lost tribes are gentiles. That is clearly false.

That is my contention, as stated and clearly explained in post #29. And that explanation is supported in the brief 3-MINUTE HISTORY found at my LostTribe Profile.  Your disagreeing does not make it false.

> You said gentile means "not quite like us." That is also clearly false.

Tell that to the Mormons who use the word GENTILE properly, as a word which is meaningless without context.  Just because Jews have "co-opted" the word Gentile over time does not alter its usage-dependence.  Jews do not have a corner on the word GENTILE any more than on the word HOLOCAUST, ongoing efforts notwithstanding..

39 posted on 08/05/2002 7:23:55 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
Me: > You said that, from a Jewish perspective, the lost tribes are gentiles. That is clearly false.

You: > That is my contention, as stated and clearly explained in post #29. And that explanation is supported in the brief 3-MINUTE HISTORY found at my LostTribe Profile. Your disagreeing does not make it false.

It may be your contention but it is not based in reality. How do you know that the Jews consider the lost tribes to be gentile? Have you ever had any Jewish education? Where does your "contention" come from?


Me: > You said gentile means "not quite like us." That is also clearly false.

You: > Tell that to the Mormons who use the word GENTILE properly, as a word which is meaningless without context. Just because Jews have "co-opted" the word Gentile over time does not alter its usage-dependence. Jews do not have a corner on the word GENTILE any more than on the word HOLOCAUST, ongoing efforts notwithstanding..

The only problem with that reasoning is that the Jews were using the word "goy" (gentile) 3000 years before the Mormons existed. The word "goy" is in the book of Genesis. Explain how the Jews "co-opted" the word. I could use a good laugh.
40 posted on 08/05/2002 7:38:49 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
"There have some very interesting results from tracing the DNA of the Jewish Cohan family name and the profession of Rabbi."

I found that study interesting also. (I am still suspicious of DNA studies though)

41 posted on 08/05/2002 7:45:38 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
>Jews were using the word "goy" (gentile) 3000 years before the Mormons existed.

There were no Jews ~3200 years ago. Another attempt to co-opt history?

(For a much needed history lesson, please take 3 minutes and study the 3-MINUTE HISTORY at my LostTribe Profile. At least it will help you get some dates and definitions straight.)

42 posted on 08/05/2002 8:04:37 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
>There have some very interesting results from tracing the DNA of the Jewish Cohan family name and the profession of Rabbi.

There were several long and interesting threads here on FR last year (before you joined us) regarding the apparent fraud which was an integral part of several such DNA "studies". The techniques, objectivity and alleged "results" were roundly denounced by world-class DNA scientists.

The common thread which seemed to hlld these "studies" together was the consistant "proving" of what the financial sponsors set out to prove, without regard to scientific integrity.

43 posted on 08/05/2002 8:12:37 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
There were no Jews ~3200 years ago. Another attempt to co-opt history?

The Mormons have been around longer than the Jews in your world?

(I have nothing against Mormons, just idiots)

44 posted on 08/05/2002 8:45:04 PM PDT by Inyokern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
It's time for a basic arithmetic lesson:  You said:
>the Jews were using the word "goy" (gentile) 3000 years before the Mormons existed.

OK, lets do the math.  Since Mormonism began ~1830AD or so (I'm told), 1830AD minus 3000 years equals ~1170BC or so (ignoring any numbering probems involved in crossing the year of our Lord 0.) So you must be referring to the year 1,170 BC.  (Check my numbers, please. It's getting late.)

Then I said: There were no Jews ~3200 years ago. Another attempt to co-opt history?

In the year 1170 Before Christ the Israelites had returned from vacation in Egypt and were back "home" having a good time disobeying God.  They were not Jewish of course.  There were no Jews in Egypt either, only Israelites. Moses was not a Jew, but an Israelite.

In 1170 BC the Kingdom of David was still ~170 years away.  David was of course not a Jew.  There were no Jews in 1,000BC, only Israelites.

After Davids Israelite Kingdom collapsed ~922BC, with nary a Jew in sight, these fueding Israelites split the sheets and formed separate Northern and Southern Kingdoms.  No mixture of people would be identified as "Jews" for another 400 years, after the remnant of the Southern Kingdom returned from Babylon.

Well, I could go on with the story, but it's all in the 3-MINUTE HISTORY at my LostTribe Profile, so why don't you mosey on over there and get the rest of story.

Bottom line, (and I won't call you a liar like as you earlier implied about me), you have simply confused the arithmetic. I'm sure it was not another attempt on your part to co-opt history.

Then you sweetly said:

>The Mormons have been around longer than the Jews in your world?

which seems to add nothing but confusion.

>(I have nothing against Mormons, just idiots)

Oh, well. For a good look at a self-made one, check your mirror.

Love and Kisses,

-LT
 

45 posted on 08/05/2002 9:40:33 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
There were several long and interesting threads ...

Very interesting. Thanks for the heads up.

Thank God I can still trust my Glock.

46 posted on 08/05/2002 9:49:40 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
>Very interesting. Thanks for the heads up. Thank God I can still trust my Glock.

Ha! I hear you.

47 posted on 08/05/2002 9:59:21 PM PDT by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
If there is no mention of Jesus on these stones, how does he know the designs are Christian? They could be Jewish.

You figure that Jews were in China at that time?

48 posted on 08/05/2002 10:08:36 PM PDT by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Inyokern
It would seem to me that, if these were Christian from that time, they would show more of the central story of Christianity, ie. Jesus on the Cross, Jesus and the apostles, the nativity, etc. If they show Old Testament stories, it would seem to me that they would more likely be Jewish (or lost tribe).

Where are you seeing the 500 pieces of Han carvings? I clicked on the article source and only saw one. Could the other 499 have such symbols?

49 posted on 08/05/2002 10:21:29 PM PDT by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: blam
One of the most tantalizing cases of East-West interaction involves the Greeks in Central Asia. Alexander the Great established a number of Greek cities deep in that area around 300 BC. Every Greek city had a gymnasium where physical culture (including boxing and wrestling) was cultivated and sytematically studied. Some have speculated that early Chinese traders (and they were in contact with China) may have carried the idea of the gymansium back to China where they were modified into martial arts institutes which began about that period.
50 posted on 08/05/2002 10:29:52 PM PDT by Eternal_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-157 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson