• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The crucifixion of Jesus Christ

As penitence, perhaps you should listen to some of Maria Liwayway Alvaran's seance sessions.
 
Hmmm.
I see your point.
An alternative could be listening to readings from the Passionfruit Mahjong.
Or the world's worst operistic recording:

I leave it to your guilty conscience.
 
My post-birthday hangover is giving me sufficient punishment at the moment!

PeaceCrusader said:
Today, in my search, I think Reneliniyindi is Cleopatra of Jerusalem married to Philip. We have to know more about what happened to Cleopatra of Jerusalem and Philip. Ama said the very first Philip. I do not know if Herod Philip I is related to Philip II of Spain from whom the name Philippines was derived.
Click to expand...

Your previous claim was that Reneliniyindi was an Egyptian princess who died on her wedding day to 'the very first Philip'.

Now you are claiming that Reneliniyindi is actually Cleopatra of Jerusalem, who was the daughter of a Jewish or Edomite nobleman*. This woman was the fifth wife of King Herod the Great (the father of Herod Philip I), and who survived her wedding day and went on to have a son called Philip.

There are no apparent similarities between the two women, so why would you think that Ama's gibberish about Reneliniyindi referred to Cleopatra of Jerusalem?

*Yes, I'm aware that some people think Cleopatra of Jerusalem is the same person as Queen Cleopatra of Egypt. The evidence is not particularly persuasive, other than they had the same name, as Queen Cleopatra died in 30 BC but Cleopatra of Jerusalem's marriage to Herod the Great took place five years later, in 25 BC.

I have to ask you, PeaceCrusader, are you just making things up in an attempt to distract people's attention from the ghastly failure of 'Ama' to get anything right?
 
Last edited:
PeaceCrusader, I'm going to repeat an idea I floated earlier.

Many things said by Alvaran (no longer will I refer to her as Ka Apaz, since that name is her "stage name" and I want to reinforce the fact this person is putting on an act) said a great many things that were deliberately difficult to verify. She talked of giants in England, nails in Paris, and princesses in Egypt. Back in the 1980s it would have required letters exchanged by mail or a trip half way around the world to do research, to an area where not many people speak Tagalog (although I admit Spanish would be of some use.)

I think she did it so people would be unwilling to put in the effort to determine if what she said was correct or not, and be more likely simply to take her word for it.

What do you think?
 
Blue Mountain said:
Alvaran... said a great many things that were deliberately difficult to verify... I think she did it so people would be unwilling to put in the effort to determine if what she said was correct or not, and be more likely simply to take her word for it.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

And apparently Alvaran's pretend Holy Spook couldn't even predict the rise of the Internet, where a wealth of knowledge and instant 2-way worldwide communication is but a mouse-click away.

Alas, the poor in critical thinking and common sense will probably always be with us.
 
Last edited:
PeaceCrusader said:
The wounds is not superficial wound but you can poke through it that you can even feel the bones.
Click to expand...
I'll ask again. Where is the wound you're speaking of? Do you not understand my question? I seriously don't know how to make it any clearer.
 
pakeha said:
An alternative could be listening to readings from the Passionfruit Mahjong.

Or the world's worst operistic recording...
Click to expand...

(Springy G turns 3 shades of pale) Aaaugh! It's Florence Foster Jenkins!

(stops hyperventilating, Her sweat-beaded brow coming to rest on a copy of Materials of Western Music, Part 1, as Ms. Jenkins shrieks and tremolos in the background)

You know, that was... oddly exhilarating. And an excellent reason to practice due diligence in My music practice.
 
Agatha said:
There are no apparent similarities between the two women, so why would you think that Ama's gibberish about Reneliniyindi referred to Cleopatra of Jerusalem?
Click to expand...


Because "Ama" told him so, of course. If there is any discrepancy between what "Ama" tells him and reality, it is always reality that has got it wrong.
 
PeaceCrusader said:
Why is there a man without any underwear and just covered with linen cloth following Jesus ....
Click to expand...

Like Astreja, I personally think this is just a character in a fictional story. But assuming that this happened the way the bible says, we can now add the history of clothing to the long list of things of which you and'Ama' are ignorant.

In Biblical times, PeaceCrusader, nobody wore "underwear" as we understand it today. No boxer shorts for men, no bras or knickers for women.

In the warm climates of the Middle East, Greece, Rome and Egypt men wore loincloths - a simple strip of fabric which went between the legs and tied round the hips. There would be no seams or fastenings. For slaves, agricultural workers, children and poorer people, this would be their only garment. That's almost certainly what the young man was wearing in the story - just a linen cloth. He wouldn't have stood out as looking any different to the hundreds of young men walking around at that time. You've been shown temperature charts which show that other than the very depths of winter, it's warm enough all the year round for people used to that climate and not made soft by central heating to wear nothing but a loincloth.

Incidentally and on the subject of clothing in biblical times, more affluent men would wear simple draped tunics over their loincloth. Women did not wear any kind of underwear and just wore a draped tunic which was higher at the neck and longer than a man's. These would have had seams up the sides and at the shoulders and would have simple unfitted sleeves. These would look something like long white nightdresses, and could be belted with a leather belt for men, a wool or linen belt for women. An overtunic which was sometimes sleeveless and which could be decorated with embroidery (for women) would be added over the top, though this would be omitted in the warmer weather and amongst the poorer classes.

Both sexes would add a cloak over the top in the cool of the evening and early morning; it would be a simple one piece garment, made from homespun wool which would double as a blanket at night. Exodus 22:26-27 and Deuteronomy 24:13.

Adults would also wear a headdress which could be as simple as a scarf or cloth held in place with a linen cord, and some simple leather sandals or slipper-type shoes for those who could afford them.
 
Last edited:
LaurelHS said:
I'll ask again. Where is the wound you're speaking of? Do you not understand my question? I seriously don't know how to make it any clearer.
Click to expand...

^^
PeaceCrusader, would you please answer this? It intrigues me as well.

Where was the wound some people could 'poke'? Under what circumstances was it presented, and to whom?
A wound is not something that can exist on its own, because it is only a tear in living tissue. So where was the tissue that supposedly had the wound, was it under a sheet, or on a person? Was it on or in Alvaran herself or on someone else? In her house or somewhere else? Could you see it, could anyone see it or was it too dark? What did it look like?
 
This thread just keeps on giving.

I can now add history of Middle Eastern clothing to the things I never knew I wanted to know. Thank you, Agatha.
 
No problem! I did some study on the history of clothing (just for fun) a few years ago.
 
Astreja said:
(Springy G turns 3 shades of pale) Aaaugh! It's Florence Foster Jenkins!

(stops hyperventilating, Her sweat-beaded brow coming to rest on a copy of Materials of Western Music, Part 1, as Ms. Jenkins shrieks and tremolos in the background)

You know, that was... oddly exhilarating. And an excellent reason to practice due diligence in My music practice.
Click to expand...

:D

Mojo said:
Because "Ama" told him so, of course. If there is any discrepancy between what "Ama" tells him and reality, it is always reality that has got it wrong.
Click to expand...

Even to rewriting the history of Constantine the Great's rise to the purple:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8594420&postcount=246

Agatha said:
...In the warm climates of the Middle East, Greece, Rome and Egypt men wore loincloths - a simple strip of fabric which went between the legs and tied round the hips. There would be no seams or fastenings. For slaves, agricultural workers, children and poorer people, this would be their only garment. That's almost certainly what the young man was wearing in the story - just a linen cloth. He wouldn't have stood out as looking any different to the hundreds of young men walking around at that time. You've been shown temperature charts which show that other than the very depths of winter, it's warm enough all the year round for people used to that climate and not made soft by central heating to wear nothing but a loincloth.

Incidentally and on the subject of clothing in biblical times, more affluent men would wear simple draped tunics over their loincloth. Women did not wear any kind of underwear and just wore a draped tunic which was higher at the neck and longer than a man's. These would have had seams up the sides and at the shoulders and would have simple unfitted sleeves. These would look something like long white nightdresses, and could be belted with a leather belt for men, a wool or linen belt for women. An overtunic which was sometimes sleeveless and which could be decorated with embroidery (for women) would be added over the top, though this would be omitted in the warmer weather and amongst the poorer classes.

Both sexes would add a cloak over the top in the cool of the evening and early morning; it would be a simple one piece garment, made from homespun wool which would double as a blanket at night. Exodus 22:26-27 and Deuteronomy 24:13.

Adults would also wear a headdress which could be as simple as a scarf or cloth held in place with a linen cord, and some simple leather sandals or slipper-type shoes for those who could afford them.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Agatha.
So it's likely the linen referred to was a loincloth?
Makes sense.
 
They needed their woollen drawers in our benighted climate! ;)

Subligaria were more carefully folded, and sometimes seamed, loincloths, generally made of linen. However, gladiators and athletes sometimes wore leather ones. :D
 
PeaceCrusader said:
Do you know who the “medium” is? We call her Ka Apaz. Her full name is Maria Liwayway Alvaran. According to Ama, and I believe Him, she is the woman referred to in the Holy Bible, Matthew 24:41 and Luke 17:35. Matthew 24:41 states:”Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.” “Grinding at the mill” means working at the mill to powder the seeds. Who is taken? The Blessed Virgin Mary. Who is the other left? I believe, it is the spirit that is in Ka Apaz now. This spirit, according to Ama, was taken from the blood vessel of the heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary (“hinugot at kinuha na ugat ng puso ni Maria”; 16th paragraph of http://aristean.org/pahayag002.htm ). I believe that this spirit must have a name. And the name is Reneliniyindi, the first human being in whom the spirit first resided. Reneliniyindi was an Egyptian princess, I think, during the first century AD. When she died during her marriage to Philip I, her spirit was transferred to another human being, and so on, which we call reincarnation.

Today, in my search, I think Reneliniyindi is Cleopatra of Jerusalem married to Philip. We have to know more about what happened to Cleopatra of Jerusalem and Philip. Ama said the very first Philip. I do not know if Herod Philip I is related to Philip II of Spain from whom the name Philippines was derived.

The wounds is not superficial wound but you can poke through it that you can even feel the bones.

Why is there a man without any underwear and just covered with linen cloth following Jesus when He was arrested at the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:51-52)? Was it cold at the Garden that Peter was warming himself (Mark 14:67; Luke 22:56; John 18:25) at Jerusalem?
Click to expand...



No you call her that.

This is all just one person or as I call it Kazama

Just a linen cloth seems like a terrible way to warm yourself.
 
Last edited:
Aristeo, would you please answer why you lied to the members of this forum, and then hypocritically admonished others not to?

AdMan said:
PeaceCrusader said:
Just remember, Jack by the hedge, abaddon, and others, to always say the truth.
Click to expand...


Says the poster who LIED to the members of this forum when he said he would denounce Ama/Ka Apaz as a false prophet if the Olympic Games prediction failed to come true and that he would stop discussing her prophecies on the Internet.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom