holy grail, does it exist?

[hffan2000]

hey guys,
i was just thinking about the legends of king arthur and was wondering about your opinions on the grail. do you think it exist ? if so which chalice that is talked about do you think it is?

[00Kevin]

sure ;)

[bob]

That is a very wide ranging question

If you are asking about the mythic cup then it does not exist but there are Medivial Forgeries of it, and old Celtic cups that it was based on.

If you are talking about a cup that Jesus (or Yeshu) drank out of then that is another matter but it wouldnt really be the holy grail.

The Grail is a Christian-Celtic myth where Christianity has been brought together with ancient Celtic mythology about chalices.

[Broomhandle Davis]

Where is there anything in the New Testament that says God or Jesus imparted special magical powers to an inanimate object? I think the whole idea is "second best" theology. Sort of Christianity without the Christianity drawbacks.

People who can't figure out the underly message want something wonderful they can acquire that asks nothing in return.

These magical items, the Holy Grail, the Spear of whatsis, pieces of the True Cross, give the possessor power and really nothing is asked in return. All you have to do is find it, and get your hands on it. Things are simple.

The underlying theology of Christianity is you have to do some things and be some things to benefit from the program. And material possessions (which these are) are not very important.

[Attila the Professor]

I'd like to respond with a nice combination of 00Kevin's sarcasm, bob's enlightening comments of Celtic mythology, and Broomhandle's theology insights.

But all those things have been responded with, so I'll just say I agree with them.

[00Kevin]

I wasn't being sarcastic, you assume too much

this is saracastic:

(monty python homage)"You guys are ALL Wrong, It's in the castle of ahhhhhhhh........." (/monty python homage)

[bob]

Originally posted by 00Kevin
I wasn't being sarcastic, you assume too much

this is saracastic:

(monty python homage)"You guys are ALL Wrong, It's in the castle of ahhhhhhhh........." (/monty python homage)

Your Mother was a hampster and your Father smelt of Elderberies, and you must bring me a....Shrubbery!!

[00Kevin]

http://www.theraider.net/theraven/showthread.php?threadid=2578

yeah, we've been over most of this befor, I remember, some of these posts were lost in the July 2002 cull as Bob and I say

[Leia Organa Solo]

I remember reading some King Arthur legends about the Holy Grail. Sir Galahad (my other love :p)delivered the grail back to the heavens. Of course then he DIED! Grrr...the always want to spoil the guys I love...

[hffan2000]

actually sir galahad saw a vision of christ when he drank from the grail and chose to go up to heaven instead of staying in this world

[00Kevin]

(monty python humor)

No, this is how Sir Galahad died:

(walks up to bridge keeper of the bridge of dead)

"STOP! WHo aproaches the bridge of dead must answer me these questions 3, there the other side, he sees"

(I know, a bit off)

"ask me the questions"

"Sir Gallahad"

(now remember, if he gets 1 of the 3 questions wrong, he is thrown into the gorge of eternal perril)

"what is your quest?"

"I seek the Grail"

"What is your favorite color?"

"Blue......NO! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

(is tosses into gorge---LAVA!!!!)

BWAHAHAHA!!!!!!

okay, sorry, WAY TOO OT

never again

[hffan2000]

nice one 00kevin lol i'm a big monty python fan myself. lol but back on topic do you think it's possible the knights templars actually found the grail and hid it?

[Kill Cavalry]

Who isn't a Monty Python fan? Just got it on DVD, and boy am I satisfied! "Now you see that violence is inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm bein' repressed!"

Anywho, about the Grail...It is true that it is Celtic mythology melding with Chrsition theology, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. I doubt that man will ever find the Grail if it still exisits on this earth and I doubt that Arthur and his knights would actually have found it and hidden it or sent it to heaven, I feel the same way about the Templar.

However, I believe something for nothing is supported by Christianity. Miracles are also reputed to happen to bad people, converting them. They do nothing, but they are saved. The true cross is said to have raised a man from the dead. He did nothing, in fact could do nothing, because he was dead. Yet he was raised by this artifact. I believe the stance of Christianity is "You'll get it in the end." Saints, prophets, or whoever you believe in, rarely lead happy and full lives. Often they are martyred in horrible ways. St. Sebastin was shot with many arrows only to live. He returned to the man who tried to kill him and tried to convert him. Sebastin was then beaten to death. And that's one of the happier endings to a Saint. And at the same time, madmen rule countries, conquer empires, and slaughter thousands at a whim, only to die of a disease at a ripe old age. In the end, after death, is when Christianity really kicks in. What you did on earth determines what you deserve. Religious artifacts, if you believe in them, merely exist to demonstrate God's power and reaffirm faith in your religion.

[bob]

Originally posted by Kill Cavalry

However, I believe something for nothing is supported by Christianity. Miracles are also reputed to happen to bad people, converting them. They do nothing, but they are saved. The true cross is said to have raised a man from the dead. He did nothing, in fact could do nothing, because he was dead. Yet he was raised by this artifact. I believe the stance of Christianity is "You'll get it in the end." Saints, prophets, or whoever you believe in, rarely lead happy and full lives. Often they are martyred in horrible ways. St. Sebastin was shot with many arrows only to live. He returned to the man who tried to kill him and tried to convert him. Sebastin was then beaten to death. And that's one of the happier endings to a Saint. And at the same time, madmen rule countries, conquer empires, and slaughter thousands at a whim, only to die of a disease at a ripe old age. In the end, after death, is when Christianity really kicks in. What you did on earth determines what you deserve. Religious artifacts, if you believe in them, merely exist to demonstrate God's power and reaffirm faith in your religion.

Hmmmm even if you accept that that relics have some sort of power which is very suspect as the evidence is extraordinaryly dodgy. If you accept a lot of the stories of Saints then you have to probably accept stories written at a similar time which incorperate Dragons, Leprecorns etc. Let us face it that most of the accounts were written by Monks who coincidentally collected a lot of their revenue from pilgrims looking at relics!

The Holy Grail is a purely mythical artifact, it has never been found at all, that is the essential difference between 'real' relics such as pieces of the supposed true cross etc and this.

[Tim]

As for whether the true grail does actually, or ever did in fact exist is a little far fetched. Like some of the others said, where's the evidence? And where do we get our information, but from the people making their living off of such relics.
The Grail is about faith, true faith. Not just in God, but in the eternal. It is something tangable that those who find faith a difficult concept.
Going slightly off track, for a very good read on the subject of the Grail are the Bernard Cornwell books Harlequin and Vagabond.

[Genevieve]

The Grail that was featured in indiana jones refers to the grail cup thta christ drank out of at the last supper, before he was betrayed and crucified. The idea that the relic exists and has such powers is more of a Hollywood/Celtic myth idea. Catholics used to big on relics though... But they didnt believe that they poseessed that kind of power... Immortality is a myth that is carried though many cultue's religions... Even the spanish were looking for the fountain of youth in america. So, in answer to the question... The grail probably does not exist and if it did it would be quite hard to identify it as Christ's cup in 100% certainty.

and in reply to Tim... In the movie the grail encapsultes the idea motif of faith... In reality, it has nothing to do with faith in Christ or God... You were right in that account. But many times people that do not know about Christ or Jesus (like in the reference to christ as a carpenter), and they may misinterpret that point.

[Tim]

I see what your saying, but I think to some extent the Indiana Jones films, from an archaeological point of view, work on the understanding that people watching the film already have a basic understanding. What I mean is, the people who are looking for the 'signs' already know where to look and what to look for. Much like bards and poets of classical greece would sing songs that their audiance would already know the story to.
You take out of these films what you put in.
And of course the films are just blerrie fantastic in all other aspects. Am I right??!

[Genevieve]

I would really have to agree with you on that point!

[Tim]

Good stuff! Do you mind me asking, are you english. Cause it seems like everyone on here is american.
By-the-by which Indy film is your favourite? Has to be the Last Crusade, surely?

[Finn]

<small>Well, we have some Brits, but also have Dutchies, Belgians, French and Finns. (Yeah, the plague of the web are here too.)</small>

[Kill Cavalry]

lol, "Indiana Jones and the Plauge of the Web"

Back you frenchmen! *whips them* Back dutchies! *whips them*

Anyway, yes the artifact may exist, but it certainly wouldn't have immortality powers. It's a Christian artifact, and Christianity practically revolves around the thought that we'll all get it in the end.

[Genevieve]

Sorry, Tim... I am American. But I have been to England and have relatives there, if that is any consolation. And I have been having emmense cravings for a traditional tea with scones, jam, and lovely clotted cream, which I have much difficulty in finding here! Why do ask? Are you English? Anyways, I am going to have to say that my favourite indy movie would have to be...Its a hard cross between the lost ark and the last crusade, and if i had to pick I'd go with the ark. Sorry! I am assuming yours is the Crusade? Have you read any of the indy novels? I can only find a couple here. They are not all that popular. I ordered one from Barnes and Noble a month ago... It seems that the publisher has to reprint the book, just for me and its taking a Very long time... Bah. I cant wait until the new movie comes out... And the playstation game for that matter...

And in regards to Kill Cavalry~ I am afraid that you have Christianity terribly mistaken. Not that I want to get into a theological argument, but Christianity does not revolve around the fact that everyone recieves immortality, if you will. Rather it centers upon the belief that Christ died and rose again to save everyone from their sins and eternal damnation. Salvation has nothing to do with an earthly immortality, but an eternity in heaven found through the belief in Christ's death and resurrection. Therefore, a single artifact such as the mythified grail in the last crusade does not prove to encapsulate Christianity. It holds no consequential significance in the scheme of things. Tim had said earlier that the makers of indy wrote the screenplay under the assumption that people knew something of the topic. I thought that to be an adequette guess. But in reality, unless someone actually knows the facts before they view the movie or does not approach a topic half heartedly or with assumption, there is bound to be some misunderstanding on the side of the veiwer or subject that cannot be prevented.
Dont get me wrong... I love the indy movies to death. They sparked my love of history and archeology as a young child, and feed my imagination to this day. I am sure it is one of the reasons that i am minoring in anthropology and am split between going to medical school or digging in the sand of egypt for the rest of my life, both of which suit my passions well. I am a die hard fan to the end and will continue to be so forever. I just think that someone should know all the facts before they sahre an assumption disguised as fact.

Sincerely,
Genevieve

[Tim]

Easy there boys and girls, lets not start world war three here.
Genvieve, yes I am an Englishman, and proud of it. I haven't read any of the Indy novels... I know, I'm evil and should be struck down. I simply can't find them. And I must agree scones wouldn't be right without jam and clotted cream. I still don't get jelly and peanut butter.
Back on to subject, I'd have to sit on the fence for this little one. I agree with Kill in that in Christianity everyone is expected to die. But to the same extent, what's heaven if not eternity. You may not neccessarilly be 'alive in the normal sense of the word, but it is an immortal existence.
The Indy Jones films turn the myth into fact, and the myth a myth of the Grail is that it would give the possessor immortality.

[Kill Cavalry]

I think you misunderstood, Genevieve. I was rather vauge. When I said "get it in the end" I meant that judgement is passed down in Christian beliefs at the end of a life. There is no earthly or material immortality, but there is a spiritual one after death. So, living eternally on earth would be a way of cheating the diety. Basically I agree with you!

[Genevieve]

Reading over my post, I did sound a little grouchy. Forgive me, I only got about 3-4 hours of sleep within a 48 period at that time. I am sure that you meant well when you said that Kill, No hard feelings? And Tim, Dont feel bad about the novels. I can barely find them here. Like I said before, they are really not in popular demand. And how can you not enjoy peanut butter and jelly?! *lol* I guess its like clotted cream and jam here. When i say it, people think that I am nuts!!! Oh, and I know that this is off the subject... But if you had to choose between Oxford and Cambridge, which would you recommend as a better school? Thanks alot!
~Genevieve

[Tim]

It all depends what you want to go there for. Cambridge has always been thought of as the science institute, where as Oxford is the English, history type institute. If you choose to go to Med school I'd recommend Cambridge. But for archaeology I'd recommend Swansea. Best school in the world for archaeology!! With out a doubht.
Are you thinking of studying here in sunny ol' England?

[Genevieve]

Yeah, I am, actually. The University that I am going to lets me study abroad for a semester to two years. There's a bunch of places that you can choose, but I have relatives in England, and I actually really enjoyed going there. And besides, its central enough that I can fly out of the country for a few days to visit other places. I think that I can pretty much pick where I want to go. The tuition is the same either way, I just loose my scholarships for that time period. Ill just take out loans, I guess. in regards to medical school or archeology... I will probably major in biomedicine with a minor in cultural or physical anthropology. I am not sure yet. I dont think that they will let me combine the archeology minor with the biomed. I will have to wait and see. I am really quite split with the decision though. I would love to go to Egypt and work there for the rest of my life, but again I will just have to wait and see how everything works out... What part of England are you from? Anywhere I've been? Oh, and here's another fun England question... Can you find Charles Dickens house? You'd be suprised how many people a block away from it had no clue what so ever! Anyways, I feel as though I am babbling on... and on... and on... And very off the subject of indy I might add. Have you ever seen teh movie the majestic with Jim Carrey? The idol used in the opening scenes of The Raiders of the Lost Ark, is used in a clip of a reproducation of an old movie that is shown in the Majestic and unless you really noticed it, you would never know that it was there... Well, I must go. Kwaheri! (Goodbye in swahili)
~Genevive

[Tim]

No I'm affraid I've never seen that film, but I'll certainly keep me eyes peeled. Charles Dickens house is in Portsmouth, which is about a thirty minute drive from me. But I've never actually been there.
I've known a few American students that have done what your doing and they had a great time.
You don't have to be an archaeologist or have any archaeological training to get on a dig, you could be the medical or anthropological (blimey, ain't that long??!) specialist.
Let me know how things go.
~Tim

[Redbeard]

Okay. I read a book about it and the theory was: Jesus was married to Maria-Magdalena and he got her pregnant. After the crucifying he an his wife fled to France. And that is where King Arthur enters the stage.

Maria-Magdalena carried the "blood" of Jesus, so she is the Grail. No kidding.



You'll find the book here:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0440136482/qid=1050964327/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-3281602-5395825?v=glance&s=books

[Aaron H]

That has to be one of the craziest theories that I have ever heard.:rolleyes:

[Kill Cavalry]

Um....no.

Let's just drop that theory right here and now.

[Broomhandle Davis]

...is there an inanimate object that gives the possessor a wonderous power?

Give me chapter and verse. I know of no such allusion.

Even the Ark of the Covenant is NOT described in that way, the way it is described in the flick. This stuff about religious relics and their mystical powers came centuries afterwards and could be described as left-handed idolatry.

I think Mark Twain or someone once said you could build a cathedral of two out of all the splinters of the True Cross.

[thegreatimposter]

Actually, Solomon's son stole the Ark of the covenant and crossed the border to Bethshemesh with it. They were so inflicted with boils rashes and death that they brought it back to Solomon. But he had ordered a fake ark built so that people wouldn't revolt. So, the real Ark went missing...(Ethiopia?) And the FAKE was buried in Tanis...

[thegreatimposter]

And what about the Horn of Jericho?

[Broomhandle Davis]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
And what about the Horn of Jericho?

Good suggestion.

But, is it written anywhere that who possesses the horn of Jericho can make walls fall down? I think it was Joshua rather than the horn that was key.

If, say, Goliath, had used the horn, would it have worked for him? My guess not. You had to be favored. Not just anyone could use the horn or Moses' staff, David's sling, Sampson's jawbone of an ass,etc. The miracle was in the chosen user, not in the chosen object.

[Von Beck]

Actually, Solomon's son stole the Ark of the covenant and crossed the border to Bethshemesh with it. They were so inflicted with boils rashes and death that they brought it back to Solomon. But he had ordered a fake ark built so that people wouldn't revolt. So, the real Ark went missing...(Ethiopia?) And the FAKE was buried in Tanis...

Why would the FAKE then have all those supernatural powers then? Maybe the real one not only had the powers but with those bonus 10 Commandants and radio as well. :D

[thegreatimposter]

I was under the impression that you were starting a commentary on what the Bible actually says, and what it doesn't. Where is it written that "The miracle was in the chosen user, not in the chosen object."??

And as for the Fake Ark having power? Religious artifacts may retain power. Even if you try to fake one. So, maybe the fake Ark brings death and the real Ark brings... oh, wait, different artifact...

[Broomhandle Davis]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
I was under the impression that you were starting a commentary on what the Bible actually says, and what it doesn't. Where is it written that "The miracle was in the chosen user, not in the chosen object."??...


It doesn't. But where in the Bible does it say Joshua used the horn and the walls came tumbling down. Then a decade later Waldo used the horn and the walls came tumbling down. Then Brittany picked it up several decades later and she made the walls come tumbling down.

All these miraculous items are all one-shot deals, they deal with a single occasion, a single crisis. They are not handed over to others and surely not others outside of the tribe or religion. Nor are they found, stumbled on, won in a poker game, or unearthed.

Nope it doesn't say expressly, but no where do magical props do magic for whomever possesses them. At least not in the Bible as translated into English. I'm not as familiar with the Pentauch as written.

[Edited by Broomhandle Davis on 05-01-2003 at 08:41 pm]

[DrJones56]

I have a theory...

The theory is, people in Biblical times were all from Missouri, they had to see it to believe it. So God had to pull a few tricks to get these people's attention, that's why there were a lot of Visions back then. Anywho, just a possible explanation. ;)

As far as whether it's real or not, I know it exists one way or another, it could be a chalice, or it could be a blood line, more practical theory, you never know. But some of you guys have it wrong, the Grail doesn't have healing powers, Spielberg took the Bible's talk of 'Blood of Jesus Christ giving you eternal life', he simply took the spiritual facts and made them into a cool visual feast. So you see, it didn't have powers, Jesus could have used it at the last supper, but you never know. Over time it has been mixed with myth to where nobody knows for sure.

Now, if it weren't an actual object it would be the blood line, shoot, I forgot all these names, been so long since I really studied it, but there was a Rabbi who wrote a book, he talked a lot about stuff like this, made sense, I'll have to search around for the title, but he laid it out. And he was a Jew who believed Jesus was the Messiah, so he was coming from a true believer's perspective. Anyway, it's one of those mysteries, but if we did ever find out the grail was a real object and it existed and we could prove what it was, it wouldn't do a thing, just make for a very cool cup. ;)

As far as God giving powers to an inanimate object, look at the Ark, it's what the Bible says he did, he 'lived' in the Ark, now I know, God is everywhere, this is one of those things that gets tricky, it's God's way of playing with our heads I guess, but that's what he says. We got a guy in Ethiopia who claims to have the Ark, he says that he can only approach it. Why is this bogus? Cause when Jesus died, the covenant was complete, and the veil was rent, and the Ark was then just a gilded box. If you still don't have a clue about what I'm talking about, try reading Luke 24, that talks about the death of Jesus.

But anyway, just my thoughts.

[thegreatimposter]

If you found an object, or was "given" an object that could destroy city walls, or wipe out whole armies, would YOU leave it lying around for others? Or would you hide it? Hence the Indy movies.

PS - the Ark DID do damage to others, 'cause they didn't know how to carry it, remember?

[DrJones56]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
PS - the Ark DID do damage to others, 'cause they didn't know how to carry it, remember?

I'm not saying it didn't have powers, no no no, I'm saying AFTER Jesus died, it left, but beforehand, it was one badass box. :D

[Broomhandle Davis]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
If you found an object, or was "given" an object that could destroy city walls, or wipe out whole armies, would YOU leave it lying around for others? Or would you hide it? Hence the Indy movies.

PS - the Ark DID do damage to others, 'cause they didn't know how to carry it, remember?

Where are you getting this from? The Bible or an Indiana Jones book?

[bob]

The whole concept of the Indy type relics actually existing and having powers are very, very silly; for two reasons.

1. A complete lack of historical evidence for these 'super relics' supposed powers, there is no need to explain them as they are just very dodgy myth and legend.
2. I really have objections from a theological point of view even though i am an athiest, i cannot imagine an omnipotent begin leaving ultra holy (TM) artifacts lying around the world. Also these artifacts being in some way passive objects like a gun that functions like a machine.

[DrJones56]

Originally posted by bob
The whole concept of the Indy type relics actually existing and having powers are very, very silly; for two reasons.

1. A complete lack of historical evidence for these 'super relics' supposed powers, there is no need to explain them as they are just very dodgy myth and legend.
2. I really have objections from a theological point of view even though i am an athiest, i cannot imagine an omnipotent begin leaving ultra holy (TM) artifacts lying around the world. Also these artifacts being in some way passive objects like a gun that functions like a machine.
You're an atheist, you don't believe. Christianity along with Judaism are based on faith, therefore we don't need proof, we just believe, like it or not.

I respect your opinion, and in some ways you're right, but then again, you're not coming from the same perspective as me. You only believe what you see, that's alright, but in any case, I would call it silly, just not proof.

But, hypothetically speaking, let's say a HUGE archaeological dig were to take place in Jerusalem and they were to find the ark and they could prove without a doubt that it was the 'One True Ark', what would you think then?

Just curious :)

[Broomhandle Davis]

Look faith is all very well, but what is the basis for your "faithful" intepretation that some of these objects do what somebody says they do?

The Holy Grail appears in no theological document. It is an ancient urban legend. It comes from the Arthur Legend as reduced to writing a century or so ago. Using theological logic there is no particular basis for its existence or its alleged powers. I'd go so far as to contend that it is inconsistent with the teachings and documents of the religions it is linked to.

I've asked where the traits attributed to the Ark of the Covenant come from and get no answer. In Isaiah there is talk of the fire and retribution of God, but it is not linked to the Ark necessarily. Where does it say outside of an Indiana Jones novel that the Ark was some sort of spiritual ray-gun?

Faith stems from a spiritual interpretation or understanding. The Holy Grail comes from an entertaining myth or work of fiction. As far as I can tell it comes from nothing more serious than that. I suppose I could read a Superman comicbook and say I have faith that men can fly if they come from alien planets, but it would be pretty lame.

[bob]

I respect faith to a certain extent but not to the extent that i have to ignore all of my rules about evidence. Tangible artifacts such as the Ark or the Grail or not ones that i accept on Faith, they exist in the physical world and so they conform to them. The Grail is worse than an Urban legend the first tales of it do not occur until deep into the dark ages there is no evidence that takes what we call the Holy Grail Legend beyond Medieval Northern Europe; and the only information on it comes from romanticised ballards about a legendary 6th century British warlord! It is just a pure legend no truthes are in there what so ever in a society obsessed with the getting of Relics the Grail just became the mystical ultimate Relic that Greedy monks dreamed of having to boost their income.

I really think that faith has come to depend more on Spiritual truthes than Enchanted knick nacks lying around Europe....

And if they did find the true ark in Jerusalem and it started smiting the unbelievers etc then i would really have no choice..would i?; i mean why would God leave his Holiest artifacts out for anyone to find?

[DrJones56]

Originally posted by Broomhandle Davis
Look faith is all very well, but what is the basis for your "faithful" intepretation that some of these objects do what somebody says they do?

The Holy Grail appears in no theological document. It is an ancient urban legend. It comes from the Arthur Legend as reduced to writing a century or so ago. Using theological logic there is no particular basis for its existence or its alleged powers. I'd go so far as to contend that it is inconsistent with the teachings and documents of the religions it is linked to.

I've asked where the traits attributed to the Ark of the Covenant come from and get no answer. In Isaiah there is talk of the fire and retribution of God, but it is not linked to the Ark necessarily. Where does it say outside of an Indiana Jones novel that the Ark was some sort of spiritual ray-gun?

Faith stems from a spiritual interpretation or understanding. The Holy Grail comes from an entertaining myth or work of fiction. As far as I can tell it comes from nothing more serious than that. I suppose I could read a Superman comicbook and say I have faith that men can fly if they come from alien planets, but it would be pretty lame.
You have a good point, Bible doesn't make itself easy to understand, that's why scholars spend their entire life trying to figure it out. Where's Greg when you need him? :p


Originally posted by bob
And if they did find the true ark in Jerusalem and it started smiting the unbelievers etc then i would really have no choice..would i?; i mean why would God leave his Holiest artifacts out for anyone to find? Trying to figure out God: one of the biggest mistakes man ever made, that's what happened in bable, and sadly nobody learned.

And in any case, what makes you think it would 'smite' anybody? Now, after Christ's Crucifixtion, it's just a gilded box like I said, just a relic, a Museum peice. God doesn't want to FORCE anybody to believe in him, that's why he gave us a mind of our own, why did he do it? He loved us, He wanted us to be free, He wanted us to decide, He wanted you to believe in Him for real, not just because you had to, and that rings true today. So please, don't missunderstand what it's all about. That's all.

And if we did find it, the Muslims would go nuts...

And Bob, you also make another good point, why would God leave him on Earth? Maybe the reason we havn't found them is because he took care of them himself. And don't say "Maybe it's cause they don't exist..." :p because you won't have a worthy argument with me because I'll just call you crazy. :D

[DrJones56]

Okay, after reading the thread and replies, I have this to say:

There is no 'Holy Grail'. There might have been a chalice that Jesus used at the Last Supper, that's it. Then, this was thrown into a mythological meat grinder in the dark ages and that's where the whole 'eternal life' came from. So, if you even found the 'Holy Grail', it wouldn't do a thing for you.

As far as the Ark, maybe what was happening that the Jews witnessed was so far beyond their comprehension, that they put it in their own context and did their best to interpret it. Now looking at their mind set, what they saw to them could be completely different to us, so to understand what really happened is nearly impossible, you just got to take it for what it is and make your own conclusion/theory.

[bob]

because you won't have a worthy argument with me because I'll just call you crazy. :D [/B][/QUOTE]

I can live with that :)

[DrJones56]

Originally posted by bob
because you won't have a worthy argument with me because I'll just call you crazy. :D

I can live with that :) [/B][/QUOTE]

Haha, well by that I ment you can't make a worthy argument by saying it doesn't exist, but hey, that's what the forum title is, look who's talkin... :p

I think it's safe to say Jesus drank from something at the last supper, but it had no special powers, I think that's a fair statment we can all agree on. Any objections?

[thegreatimposter]

Originally posted by Broomhandle Davis
Originally posted by thegreatimposter

PS - the Ark DID do damage to others, 'cause they didn't know how to carry it, remember?

Where are you getting this from? The Bible or an Indiana Jones book?

Book of Samuel:

"Seven months the Philistines were punished with the presence of the ark; so long it was a plague to them, because they would not send it home sooner."

"The Philistines consult how to send back the ark. (1-9) They bring it to Bethshemesh. (10-18) The people smitten for looking into the ark. (19-21)"

Thanks for the dis, but you know, maybe you should READ the Bible before talking about it...

[thegreatimposter]

Just so we're clear:

Samuel 2:

6:6 And when they came to Nachon's threshingfloor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it.

6:7 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.

Kinda sounds like the Ark aint somethin' to mess with, hunh? Which is why, by the way, the deleted scenes for raiders of the lost ark include one in which Sallah is about to reach out and touch the Ark when Indy stops him, bearing a warning from the priest who gave Indy the measurements for the staff of ra. "Don't touch the Ark."

So, yeah, I got it from an Indy book, and MOVIE!!

[westford]

To go back to the thing about the horn bringing down the walls of Jericho, etc - surely it wouldn't simply be the artifact or the person who could make these miracles occur, but that big guy (I think some folk call him 'God' or something) acting through them. So if Joshua had kept the horn and tried repeating the trick elsewhere, it wouldn't work - unless God agreed to do his big bad wolf thing again ("I'll huff and I'll puff...").

As you may know, I'm not religious, so quoting chapter and verse of a book at me isn't going to mean much. But to me, it would make more sense if a religious artifact only had power if the divine gave it power as it was used in its intended manner, rather than letting it have power all the time so that any old person could come along and use that power for their dastardly deeds.

That would mean that someone (let's say me) could pick up the holy grail thinking "ooh, nice cup" and use it to drink from without any divine power being involved - I'm not seeing it as an instrument of power, but as a cup. Then someone else could come along and find the grail where I'd left it. Perhaps they'd see it for what it was, and through their faith they'd be able to use its powers - presumably God would be able to reward them if their intentions were honourable, and punish them if not. Likewise if someone came across a false grail and tried to use it as the true grail, God wouldn't be impressed, but if it was me picking up what looked like another nice cup, God wouldn't be too bothered (or he'd have a good laugh at the dumbass mortal).

Well, that's my theory anyway, and it fits quite well with the Indy films too.

[Broomhandle Davis]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter

[QUOTE]Originally posted by thegreatimposter

Thanks for the dis, but you know, maybe you should READ the Bible before talking about it...

Asking for the cite is not "dising," it is asking where you found it. It is asking for you to disclose for the benefit of others so we all don't have to read the Bible cover to cover...again.

I have my thoughts now that you have provided the references. Personally I don't think those quotes give rise to the conclusion that the Ark can be "used" by anyone or that it has powers in and of itself.

You were talking about how someone was not lifting the Ark correctly and I was wondering where that came from. It didn't seem Biblical to me.

[Edited by Broomhandle Davis on 05-03-2003 at 03:02 pm]

[thegreatimposter]

Broomhandle, My apologies, you are absolutely right, there is no harm in asking for evidence. You're wording came across a little disrespectfully I thought, but maybe I read it with the wrong intonation.

Now to the meat:

Specific instructions we're given to the priests who were to carry the Ark. Once the Ark was stolen, and given to the Palestinians, people died. This is because they didn't know the instructions, so to speak. While Moses and the Hebrews were crossing the desert for forty years they habitually made camp every eight to ten paces and took a break. (Maybe that's what took so long) Some speculate that the Ark was in fact a Manna machine, used to create Manna frokm the atmosphere to live off of while they were in the wastelands. Also could be the reason people revolted against Moses because they'd been eating the same thing everyday. I'll get back to you with quotes.

And again Broomhandle, I am thoroughly enjoying these debates so keep it comin'...

[thegreatimposter]

I have an issue twith the property and ownership of God. When the burning bush spoke to Moses, God identified himslef as the "God of the Hebrews." And during the Visions at Fatima, the first Angel introduced himself as the "Angel of Portugal."

I don't get it.

But in these cases it would be conceivable that the "God of the Hebrews" would provide them with something (a tool) to further their cause. ie, the Ark of the Covenant. My argument is if God NEEDS a tool to help his people, than his power is limited. I mean, hey God, why not NOT allow the Egyptions to enslave the Hebrews, or just intervene yourself? Why use Moses?

So, He needs to give people something of power instead of just showing up himself, I'm betting it'll retain that power for others, because obviously God doesn't have ultimate control, or he wouldn't need to go through these "Corrections". The key is having access to operating instructions...

[Broomhandle Davis]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
...So, He needs to give people something of power instead of just showing up himself, I'm betting it'll retain that power for others, because obviously God doesn't have ultimate control, or he wouldn't need to go through these "Corrections". The key is having access to operating instructions...

Now, there's a very good argument for leaving magical tools lying around. They are a component of free will. Man has a brain so he can select good or evil. He can also use his brain to employ tools for good or evil.

There are all sorts of natural tools lying around all the time rivers and trees and plants, etc. Man has the power to use them to make his life better...or worse. These sacred objects are sprinkled around to "turn up the heat" and let man elect good or evil on a larger scale.

Better (though I stll don't buy it).

[westford]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
My argument is if God NEEDS a tool to help his people, than his power is limited. I mean, hey God, why not NOT allow the Egyptions to enslave the Hebrews, or just intervene yourself? Why use Moses?

Maybe God was trying to teach a lesson. I mean, I could have grown up without knowing how to tie my shoelaces cos my parents would do it for me, but is that really helping me in the long term? What if my parents were too busy to tie my laces one day? I'd have to go out without shoes, or risk tripping up and breaking my neck...?

I can't believe I'm arguing this when I don't even believe in God, but there ya go! :p I just love a debate! :D

[thegreatimposter]

It's great to debate, helps exercise your knowledge of a subject.

To respond:

Learning to tie a knot would develope out of necessity or you would choose to make SLIP ONS! God doesn't need to come down and hold our hands so to speak when Nature has endowed us with the ability to eveolve and adapt. My problem is that God is trying to correct "Mistakes" through the use of power objects.

In fact, God must be fallible because he had to wipe everyone out, save Noah and his Ark to clean the slate...

[dameain]

I think that it exsist, but not in the way that it is portrayed in LC.

[thegreatimposter]

Good for you!

[British_Lion_2003]

I couldnt be bothered to read all the posts but I have seen the Holy Grail on the news.

Its in some Church in Italy and behind like some bulletproof glass.

[bob]

Originally posted by British_Lion_2003
I couldnt be bothered to read all the posts but I have seen the Holy Grail on the news.

Its in some Church in Italy and behind like some bulletproof glass.

A grail maybe, but not THE grail as it doesnt really exist as a relic.

[Broomhandle Davis]

Originally posted by bob
Originally posted by British_Lion_2003
I couldnt be bothered to read all the posts but I have seen the Holy Grail on the news.

Its in some Church in Italy and behind like some bulletproof glass.

A grail maybe, but not THE grail as it doesnt really exist as a relic.



The son of a carpenter in about 30 AD would not, I believe, have drunk out of anything fancy enough to be called a "grail." It might have been a carved wooden mug or a dried gourd or some pottery or crockery.

The wood or gourd wouldn't have survived. What do you find a good amount of in archaeologic sites? Broken pottery and crockery. Shards. They wouldn't have survived.

Statistically there were at least 13 people present. Who would have even remember which cup/mug was his? If it had magical curative powers how would those magical curative powers have been discovered?

[bob]

Well i think that IF anything like the story in the New Testemant ever happened i would imagine that the Chalice would become something of central importance to them. However as far as i can see there was no culture of collecting relics until centuries after, and the early Christians were a very unwidely mob full of different sects it would be likely that a Grail would have been lost.

Also the fact that our sole source talking about the Grail is a work of Fantasy starring a Legendary King written over a thousand years later.

[thegreatimposter]

Actually our sources are a little more acurate than the Arthur fables. The grail cup is one of the central artifacts to the Cathar beliefs and also plays a symbolic role in Freemasonry. I suspect that although the bible is vague and embellished there are secret societies that do maintain the items of worship. Heck, if we see a celebrity now people want their signature on a piece of paper, as arbitrary as it is. So why not keep the cup that caught the blood of some guy who people think is a man of prophecy and who sacrificed himself for thousands. Sure beats a signature...

[bob]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
Actually our sources are a little more acurate than the Arthur fables. The grail cup is one of the central artifacts to the Cathar beliefs and also plays a symbolic role in Freemasonry. I suspect that although the bible is vague and embellished there are secret societies that do maintain the items of worship. Heck, if we see a celebrity now people want their signature on a piece of paper, as arbitrary as it is. So why not keep the cup that caught the blood of some guy who people think is a man of prophecy and who sacrificed himself for thousands. Sure beats a signature...

The Cathors werent around until around 1000 years after the Grail was lost (i think at least?)
The Freemasons did not turn up until 17th Century or so

The idea that the Grail caught the Blood of Jesus is a Legend and not mentioned in the NT or any of the heretical gospels.

[thegreatimposter]

Freemasons were knights templar who were hermetic order of the golden dawn...

They were around...

The origins of the Cathars began AT THE TIME OF JESUS DEATH. The church started killing 'em off about a thousand years later....

[bob]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
Freemasons were knights templar who were hermetic order of the golden dawn...

They were around...

The origins of the Cathars began AT THE TIME OF JESUS DEATH. The church started killing 'em off about a thousand years later....

The Freemasons have made up a lot of rubbish about themselves the fact is that they are a rich and influenticial persons club essentially; there is no line between a warrior monk order of Knights and Freemasons, the sucsession of the Templers runs through the Hospitilars.

Even so the Templers are still 1000 years after the time of Jesus

As far as i understand it the Cathars were a neo-gnostic group and there is no tradition of the Grail through them. These cults popped up and they fell only for their ideas to appear again hundreds of years later; there is no unbroken line of continuity between the Cathars and early christianity.

[thegreatimposter]

It was my understanding that the Cathars were responsible for the Grail art seen in stain glass windows in the olde churches speckled across europes countryside. These churches were also fronts for Hermetic orders.

But you mentioned Hospitilars? Can you give me more info about them, I've never heard of 'em...

[bob]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter


But you mentioned Hospitilars? Can you give me more info about them, I've never heard of 'em...

They were a bit like the Templers except without the power and the mystery; the Hospitilars were a lot more closely linked to the state structure than the Templers were. They existed from around the 13th or so to the 16th century when Monastic orders of Knights melted away.

The last direct link with the Templers and the Monastic orders were the Knights of St.John who resisted out numbered 10 - 1 by Turks when they besieged Malta; the Knights ruled Malta until the time of Napoleon.

[Sankiesh]

As an historian, I can tell you there isn't definetively any REAL evidence of templar continuity after the order's desolution. All templars who survived became hospitallers or, as Desmond Stewart puts it "peniless men."

All the myths of templar-massonery connection are false, as are all the other "facts" people seems to know. The templars being a diabolic congregation, the templars as a modern-day institution of power and treasure-hunting (as is suggested in the novel: Tresure of the templars, a western story"), all those things are false. But Phillip the fair created so many lies to be able to judge them (including general homosexuallity), that the popular imagination began to fly. Even today many "official" templar orders exist, and many esoteric books and groups take their spiritual ideas form the templars' false mysticism. Even Umberto Eco wrote a book about it, accepting later that he just wanted to prove how people can be fooled with historic myths.

About the holy objects and great treasures, I can only say the following. The Arc of the Covenant was supposed to be kept on Salomon's Temple. That's why it is said it was kept by the templars. There is no evidence of these. Even Salomon's temple was destroyed and the Templar's headquarters wa not the temple itself. About the holy grail, I do not doubt the templars may seen it or keep it in a time, but there is little probability of this. The Arthurian knighty mithology shows the cup of Christ as an unreacheable goal. Only one of the great number of knights searching it actually found it, and that was because he had a pure heart, Percival if I remember well. At the end of the day, medieval writers would not write of the grail as such unreachable object if it was in the templar's grasp.

Finally, the templar treasure, I think, is also a post-medieval myth. I dont believe that a plan so well made as the arrest on Friday 13th would go without reaching its principal goal: to refill the royal chests. Phillip the fair would not create such an intrincate plan to let go part of the money.

Anyway, all this objects have been great inspiration for novels and movies, such as Indiana Jones, "The Templar Treasure", "Treasure of the Templars", and many others.

[Venture]

In reference to the Grail, there is no biblical record of a cup catching the Lord's blood. And since the belief in the Grail stems from Christianity, wouldn't the Bible be the final authority?
As to the location of the Ark of the Covenant, Revelation 11:19 says:
"And the temple of God which is in heaven was
opened; and the ark of His covenant appeared
in His temple, and there were flashes of
lightning and sounds and peals of thunder
and an earthquake and a great hailstorm."

Sounds like bad news for us earth-bound treasure hunters. I've also heard rumors that a group of Israeli archaeologists actually located the Ark with imaging equipment underneath the Temple Mount. Supposedly, resident rabbinical leaders were aware of its presence since the time of Manasseh, when it was hid in tunnels and chambers within the Mount. This area is presently under Palestinian control, and so the archaeologists were called out by the Israeli government to keep from making a stink. Take it or leave it.

[westford]

Originally posted by Cain

"And the temple of God which is in heaven was
opened; and the ark of His covenant appeared
in His temple, and there were flashes of
lightning and sounds and peals of thunder
and an earthquake and a great hailstorm."


Isn't "which is in heaven" referring to God rather than to the temple? I know by modern grammatical standards that would be incorrect, but isn't there a version of the Lord's Prayer that begins "Our Father, which art in heaven..."?

[Venture]

If you read about the construction of the tabernacle in Exodus, you'll find that God said that the earthly schematics were a reflection of a heavenly temple. This was the reason the Lord was so specific with the dimensions. The ark was the place of God's earthly manifestation, and was therefore a typology of his throne. As to the specific Scriptures, I'll post them at a later date. Good call, though.

[thegreatimposter]

Hey Cain, what temple mount are you talking about? The one you said was in HEAVEN?!?!? Can you clear that up by giving the name of the temple that rabbinicle leaders say is buried there, and maybe a link to the official story...

[Venture]

The temple mount is the one in Jerusalem that the Dome of the Rock now stands on. The temple mount isn't in heaven , God has a temple in heaven mirrored by the one on earth. As far as the information about the tunnels and chambers underneath said mount, an evangelist/Hebrew scolar named Billie Brimm (sp?) has stated that information, and her web site should have the full disclosure.

[thegreatimposter]

Thanks, I'll check it out!

[Venture]

Welcome.

[VP]

Of course it exist! How can you ask something like that! :D

[bob]

Originally posted by VP
Of course it exist! How can you ask something like that! :D

I really hope you are not referring to the grail!

[thegreatimposter]

yeah, we could use a little clarification on your subject. Or at least READ the posts people have written....

[hffan2000]

it is possible that the grail exists. the only problem is how to figure out which of the supposed grails we know about is the actual one. the only way we'd know is if a miracle happened around one. i myself see galahad's quest for the grail as allegory of a christian's quest to be with christ in heaven.

[Patrick]

There has to be something like it. I just know it. We don't need to discover it though, Since what good would it do? It might cause the world to go into a war bigger than any war that has ever happened a may go on till all the people in the world vanish and it will be billions of years before we come back and become a VERY different kind of people while it is destroyed. The Bible doesn't say anything really about it since the bible barely told us anything about other religions and what they are about, like I think that all the religions are all the same and so that bible just tells the story about one people, even though there are plenty more. I would write my own bible (I'm NOT talking about creating a new religion I just mean I would put my philosophical views on it to make it a "WORLD" Bible) But the idea is too simple. But that's what I think. The Sankara stones are almost the same as the Ark of God ( The ToD didn't explain to much of the stones because the script didn't really allow it). And that it is just the occult of the people and this is why I believe in God. Even though the Grail can give eternal life it could destroy the world.

[Kill Cavalry]

Although I agree that finding the Grail would probably not do us any good, I sincerely doubt that, if it still exists, it would do any bad. We have to remember the earlier posts in which many of us agreed that it may very well exist, but it almost certainly would not have the powers of immortality. The very principle behind Christianity is that one will get it in the end, so why would God create an object that would keep people from dying and meeting their ultimate destiny?

I say again, if it has not been destroyed or already taken over the years, it will not have the power of immortality. Extending life? Perhaps. Granting miracles? Maybe. Immortality? Certainly not. It would merely be a relic or artifact of fantastic significance, not a weapon that would make invincible armies.

[Patrick]

I don't think the powers of God would allow such a thing to happen; y'know like, He wouldn't let just anyone gain immortality. Like even Jesus didn't have it when he was alive. But, people just like Donovan, would be going after this cup and many people for no reason be sent to war or to protect it. If they find it, if they put a price on it, it would be worth about a trillion dollars and large groups of people might want that like nations (Just like the Nazi- govermented Germany wanted it)

[bob]

I find it disturbing that the past few posts seem to be conjuring the Grail into existance.

Jesus drunk from a cup at the Last Supper and presumably many other occasions but that does not make it the 'Holy Grail'

However the Grail myth was entirely created in the main over a thousand years after his death in a different part of the world

There is no evidence of early christians dragging around a huge pile of trinkets that Jesus may have touched/drunk from; there is no evidence of any miracles reported in History from the Grail

Conclusion: There is no evidence of the cup that Jesus drank from being preserved and causing miracles it was most likely just used in the household for years to come until it was just worn out then thrown out and at the moment it lies in a midden somewhere outside of Jerusalem

[Patrick]

Well have you done extensive research on it? You might find out htat there IS some.

[bob]

Originally posted by Patrick
Well have you done extensive research on it? You might find out htat there IS some.

Really?

I am sure we would all be interested to see this

[Patrick]

Well a small part of the Ark of God has been found...
But tell me. Where in the bible present anything about artifacts?
Well in the Ark of God. It doesn't say anthing about the Ark of God
being open. It only says that the cedar rods not to be removed. And in Raiders,
The rods ARE removed and why? That was the thing that would send the wrath of
God! Since that would mean that the people are forgetting that they ever did anything
wrong. And also, Since I believe In the Grail ( I never said anyhting about immortality)
doesn't make me believe that everything that happened in the Last Crusade was real
like the cup scene. We don't know of that. Here are some reasons why this artifact
wasn't so popular that it was written in the bible: First of all, Christianity wasn't at all
popular. If it was a kid it would be the nerd that is constantly getting wedgies and
getting beaten up by thugs. So people were writing the bible in hopes of not getting
caught. If rumours of something so powerful to give a youthful life, Than people would
be listening in to try and get it they would find out about the Catacombs and murder
endless amounts of christians thinking they know where it is. Second, many people had
not have heard of the Cup of Christ having some power for those who are pure in heart
and will not keep it and had a reason to go after it.Because they wanted to prove it was
real. And if you believe in the neolithic objects ( I love that word. I'm refering to the Sankara
stones) It is a legend like that. If they have the powers that weren't mentioned in the ToD,
Than it is easier to have faith. Another reason why it wasn't mentioned is that Jehovah wanted
us to love the entire things that are good and not worship one particular object. And oh yeah
Bob? I wasn't saying I did any I was asking if you did. It does become "Holy" because Jesus
is the most important message that God has given us and the fact that the greatest man touched
it (in which this man symbols all the prophets and God) . The cup that caught the blood of
Jesus Christ, And had all his disciples drink out of to live as a true believer to show that they
believe. To drink out of the cup would to show that you believe, Not that you believe that it can
let you live forever.

[Patrick]

Originally posted by thegreatimposter
yeah, we could use a little clarification on your subject. Or at least READ the posts people have written.... .

[Patrick]

And what's wrong with the Grail existing it's not like It is something like believing Harry Potter is real.Originally posted by hffan2000
it is possible that the grail exists. the only problem is how to figure out which of the supposed grails we know about is the actual one. the only way we'd know is if a miracle happened around one. i myself see galahad's quest for the grail as allegory of a christian's quest to be with christ in heaven. That's what the Grail is for.
And HFFAN2000 said it perfectly.

[Patrick]

The one before the last one... I couldn't delete it. I accidently posted it thinking it was the last one

[bob]

Call me an old fuddy duddy but that wasnt really the evidence i had in mind:

What i want to see are some sources from within 750 years of Jesus that actually confirm a belief in the Grail

At the moment there is not only a lack of actual evidence but even a lack of belief in the Grail from early (ish) christians.

[Patrick]

Bob, I wasn't saying I was doing research on it! I said this twice! I wrote reasons why it might not be in the bible you old fuddy duddy! I'm just kidding but I never said I had done extensive research and my original post said " Have YOU,have YOU done extensive research" Not "I did extensive research!" Didn't you read that! I hadn't even said I've done a little research on the subject. Sorry about the clamitous writing but I never wrote anything of the kind.

[Patrick]

Originally posted by Patrick
Originally posted by thegreatimposter
yeah, we could use a little clarification on your subject. Or at least READ the posts people have written.... . Now I have a reason to put this post up.

[thegreatimposter]

Originally posted by Patrick
Well a small part of the Ark of God has been found...

WHERE?!?!!? Could you give us a link to this monumental news story PLEASE!!!!

Well in the Ark of God. It doesn't say anthing about the Ark of God being open. It only says that the cedar rods not to be removed.

Could you give us chapter and verse of where in the bible it says this. Because as far as I know, it is mentioned that the Ark not be TOUCHED, that the cedar rods are there to prevent the Ark from being touched directly by human hands. I have Bible references in my previous posts on this subject. There are some deleted scenes in RAIDERS where Indy tells Sallah not to touch the Ark. They left this out of the final cut, but you'll notice NO ONE touches the Ark directly until the end of the movie.

And in Raiders, The rods ARE removed and why? That was the thing that would send the wrath of God!

I don't know where you are getting you're information. If you could provide a reference I'll look it up myself...

[Venture]

It wasn't the rods being removed that brought the wrath of God. They were for carrying without touching the Ark of God's Covenant. Only the high priest, after some serious cleansing, could touch the ark, and that but once a year.

An instance of touching without the prescribed position and cleansing takes place in 2 Samuel 6:6,7. The Israelites were supposed to carry the ark on the poles, but they erred and put it on an ox-driven cart. When it began to tip, a man named Uzzah put forth his hand to steady it and was struck down. It wasn't mete for anyone not covered by the blood of a spotless lamb, thereby cleansed of sin, to touch the Holy Ark that carried God's Presence. These things are a foreshadowing of Christ's blood cleansing us and enabling us to come into the Presence of God.

Okay, I'm done preaching now.

[Patrick]

Okay first things first. I do not have a link to the piece being found since I found out about it about a year ago when I didn't use the internet very much. Have you read Exodus 22-24? This could be wrong but I was reading an illustrated bible since I remember reading it when I was 9... And I don't know where my other one is so certain parts could've been left out. It doesn't say anything about it being touched or opened. here's a quote:" They shall make me an ark of acacia (Not cedar which I accidently wrote) It shall be a chest four feet long, two feet wide and two feet high. It is to be covered with gold inside and out, and it shall have a gold band around it. At each corner It shall have a gold ring, and through these rings shall be passed gold-covered rods of acacia wood, so that the ark may be carried. These rods shall remain in the rings and shall not be taken from it. And they shall put in the laws that I shall give you." Funny eh? Nothing of that melting faces and stuff like that. Tommorow I'll read the adult bible if I can find it... And hey religion isn't for fighting about its secrets and passages. It's for LOVE... :)

[Patrick]

Yeah... I am kind of missing somethings but I can't remember even posting those things... I'm not trying to argue of history I'm just trying to say that I believe in it.

[Patrick]

Do you guy's think that I'm some arrogant history buff? Like I know EVERYTHING? If you do I'm SORRY. I was partially saying the piece of the ark being found to give some reason that in fact the grail can be found. As God did not want us to worship one object but love everything and everybody except true evil ( No one on earth is "true evil" and I can't actually believe in true evilness)and to try and keep away from evil. I believe the only reason why God would place this upon us would to give us more reason to believe in a reason why we should love. I think I've said Everything I need to say here so this is my very last post.

[thegreatimposter]

Patrick, don't worry.

I'm sure no one thinks you are being arrogant. Sometimes facts can be mistconstrued or misinterpreted so it is important to stick close with the sources. There are a lot of educated fellows in this community who prefer to rely solely on facts, and educated speculations, and so theories supported with information make them more accessible.

But you are interested and you are keeping this discussion alive. Don't stop. Take a gander at the "Tree of Life" thread to see what a speculation can turn into.

[Patrick]

What's the "tree of life" thread? Oh yeah everybody call me Pat okay? I kind of like that better.

[Venture]

Did I say something wrong?

[Patrick]

What do you mean Cain?

[Patrick]

Have you guys read what I wrote down? Is there some extra stuff in it I'm missing about the Ark?

[Venture]

I thought maybe I had offended you with my post. If so, that was not at all my intent. If not, then I'm really glad I was mistaken.

[Pale Horse]

Here is how the thread progressed:


thegreatimposter
07-22-2003 02:00 am <----

Patrick, don't worry.

(omited)

But you are interested and you are keeping this discussion alive. Don't stop. Take a gander at the "Tree of Life" thread to see what a speculation can turn into.


The "Tree of Life" thread is a post where several Raveners threw around knowledgeable ideas about how a Garden of Eden plot might be realized in Indy IV. We all SPECULATED ideas.


Patrick
Indyfan
07-22-2003 03:34 am <----

What's the "tree of life" thread? Oh yeah everybody call me Pat okay? I kind of like that better.





I have read some of your thoughts and I can say that you have good insight. But sometimes when you post, it seems as though you haven't given credence to the thoughts of others who have speculated before you. It also seems like you are treating these conversations as 'real time' chat, not 'stand alone' messages. This may offend some. Be sure that when you comment about a topic, you have given weight to those who have gone before you, Then misunderstandings will be kept to a minimum.

I'm sorry to digress, back to the thread:

No piece of the Ark has been found, though there is speculation that it is in a cavern deep under the Dome of the Rock

The grail and it's existance, to me, is far more speculative.

[Venture]

I have read some of your thoughts and I can say that you have good insight. But sometimes when you post, it seems as though you haven't given credence to the thoughts of others who have speculated before you. It also seems like you are treating these conversations as 'real time' chat, not 'stand alone' messages. This may offend some.

Not to continue the digression, but were you referring to Patrick or myself, Thanatos (the Greek name for the one who rides said pale horse). Seeing as how I can be rather opinionated at times, I'm trying to keep myself on a "No Offense" policy. And I hope you don't mind the nickname, apalehorse.

And Patrick, could the pieces of the Ark you're referring to be Noah's Ark? There is speculation that a large box shape that shows up in GPR and aerial photographs is a large chunk of that ark.

[Venture]

I haven't quite got the hang of the quote icon. The above post was intended for apalehorse and Patrick.

[Pale Horse]

My note was to Pat.

And I don't mind the reference at all. ;)

[Patrick]

What do you mean. Oh yeah Bob? Did I offend you when I called you a Fuddy Duddy? I didn't mean to... I got some email that said I offended someone and your the only one who I called a name okay...hahaha...yeah.

[Patrick]

I didn't think I was offending anybody... Basically I've never actually been in a "Chat room"
basically because I was kind of anti-social before going on to this site.
So I don't know what I wrote wrong here but I think that it could've been me asking for
what people are meaning.... Yeah... Is it how I write what I'm thinking? Cause that's
basically been a problem since forever...In speeches, essays I just do it off the top of
my head. What is wrong with it though... Apparently I lied about the one being my very last post.
Is that what the email was for? I'm so SORRY. Apalehores, Can you give me some tips?
haha... Like I have no idea what I'm doing wrong... I already have over a hundred posts...
Hard to believe I didn't like talking huh? I don't have anything else to say about the Grail...
but It could've been Noah's Ark... So why don't they go get it? Unless it's unreachable...
or if they try to get it they might harm it... I don't know. I found out about this when I was like
8 or 10 ( Like Abner's age in "Sons of Darkness") so I can't remebember. Sorry again who I offended.
Oh yeah, tell me which posts were wrong to write down... I'll try to not write them anymore.

*SORRY*

[Patrick]

Is it because of the "yeah" and the "..." That makes my posts like "real time" chat and the informalness? If that's it then why don't you get everybody to spell correctly? I don't understand... Or if it is because my posts can get off topic? I'm not trying to be harsh cause I don't want another email saying I offended someone. Tell me everything that is wrong with my posts!

[bob]

Originally posted by Patrick
What do you mean. Oh yeah Bob? Did I offend you when I called you a Fuddy Duddy? I didn't mean to... I got some email that said I offended someone and your the only one who I called a name okay...hahaha...yeah.

I aint sent any e-mails

PS You called me a what?! :)

[Patrick]

HAHAHAHA! Okay yeah What Apalehorse should have emailed me in the first place about was why I got emailed. Instead of repeating that, He wrote one sentence almost each time. Thanks for responding though, Nowing I didn't offend you... unless I write P.S. You're a Fuddy Duddy! Hahaha... Yeah. Next time though If I'm doing something wrong tell me okay? Thanks... My email's open but don't send me any like hate mail or anything like that okay?

P.S. Bob I called you a Fuddy Duddy :D