BBS: LINCOLN'S CABIN BBS Date: 06-28-91 (01:50) From: ICONO CLAST To: RS
SK>Quebec's biggest cathedral is dedicated to Ste. Anne, grandmother of Jesus. (on his SK>mother's side.....) To dedicate the cathedral in 1964 (? I think), the Vatican gave them
SK>a Holy Relic: Ste. Anne's preserved forearm which someone had brought back from
SK>some one of the Crusades.
RS>Yow!! You'd think with all the churches they'd have run out of saints' bones a long
RS>time ago. To get (1) a forearm of (2) someone as old as Saint Anne is truly amazing.
RS>I do wonder how they could have authenticated a body part over 2,000 years old,
RS>especially when there is plenty of debate among scholars whether Jesus actually RS>existed--or is a composite of several people (let alone Mary and Ste Anne).
RS>But, as they say, the church does amazing things.
Aw, c'mon, RS. I thought you knew your history better than that!
MMMThe Rosetta Stone made it possible to decipher hieroglyphics. During the lifetimes of saintly persons, the Romans required all of their detachable body parts to be tattoo'd. When the saints died, they were sent to Egypt for embalming.
MMMDuring the process, many of their bones were given identification, some in Latin, some in Greek, and some in hieroglyphics (higher-ups had decided against using Cuneiform). This primarily depended upon the graphological skills of the embalmer(s). This practice is also the primary reason the Rosetta Stone was created. Its content is more to facilitate the translations than to relay any information.
MMMMost people can neither see nor read the identification on saintly body parts. However, applying the appropriate scientific processes (known to Roman Catholic Big Manas for Centuries), anatoglyphtheologists have been able to rather readily determine to whom a bone, or body part, belonged.
MMMThe search continues for the penises of Jesus and Mohammad. But the find of the millennium will be either of their foreskins. Further, as I'm sure you realize, either of these finds will tend to erase any doubt that the persons to whom they were formerly attached really existed.
MMMI'm really surprised, and disappointed, RS, that you didn't know that.
Your comments will be considered for inclusion.
From: PAUL MOOR To: ICONO CLAST Date: 06-28-91 (08:25)
It is indeed shocking, isn't it.
But now tell the truth, Icono: what did you copy that out of?
From: DAN GULLEY To: ICONO CLAST 06-29-91 23:10
Yikes! That one will get you in the Moor Hall of Honorable Mention.
From: ICONO CLAST To: PAUL MOOR Date: 06-29-91 (05:04)
Now, indeed, Paul, you've made me angry.
MMMAlthough I've not lived as long as you, travelled as extensively as you, am not as linguistically competent as you, am not as musical as you, am not as well-read as you, and much else, I do have occasional moments, rare though they be (particularly when
inspired by the likes of RS), that result in things worthy of noting.
MMMThe text appeared at the tips of my fingers in little more time than it took for them to strike the appropriate keys. No references, other than those buried deep within me 'ead, were used.
MMMSince you appear to want us to believe that I'm incapable of such moments of brilliance, I can only say that, on this rare occasion, you are in error for, yesterday, the evidence was before you.
þ Must you REALLY engage in such braggadocio? Huh?
From: PAUL MOOR To: ICONO CLAST Date: 06-29-91 (07:09)
IC>Now, indeed, Paul, you've made me angry.
And that I regret, for I had no such intention. Reading your response makes it all too clear that I offended you. I may err, but reading what you wrote left me wondering, quite seriously, whether you intended it at face value or as a scintillating parody of so many learned scientific exegeses.
IC> . . . I do have occasional moments, rare though they be . . .
IC>that result in things worthy of noting.
In that sentence I'd question only the "occasional".
IC> . . . The text appeared at the tips of my fingers . . .
Then my hat's off to you, and I mean that.
IC> . . . Since you appear to want us to believe that I'm incap-
IC>able of such moments of brilliance . . .
[I want no such thing]
IC> . . . I can only say that, on this rare occasion, you are in
IC>error for, yesterday, the evidence was before you.
IC>þ Must you REALLY engage in such braggadocio?
(But what an odd tagline, I do believe you'll agree. . . !)
From: ICONO CLAST To: PAUL MOOR Date: 06-29-91 (23:35)
PMAnd that I regret, for I had no such intention. Reading your
PMresponse makes it all too clear that I offended you.
Reading only this far, I was going to make my [R]eply PriVaTe.
PMI may err, but reading what you wrote left me wondering, quite
PMseriously, whether you intended it at face value or as a
PMscintillating parody of so many learned scientific exegeses.
>>> Continued to next message
þ SLMR 2.1a #346 þ "What?" hell! Pay attention!
The balance appears to be lost.
Top of Page MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM Contents