User talk:NazireneMystic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, NazireneMystic, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Michael C. Price talk 04:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yahoo Group request

You should approve me for your yahoo group-- I'm trying to join but need approval. You're obviously very, very knowledgable about all this, and while my personal opinion can't affect the notability issues, I would very much like to learn more for personal reasons. --Alecmconroy 00:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This will be an ongoing section dealing with surpression of large parts of source material listed in the Ebionite artical in an attempt by some editors to create a reality in agreement with their religous and political dogmas

The Ebionite artical's POV is typical of Wikipedian articals that may have anti- secular humanist and or Socialist, religous or political implications. In the past this unoffical wikipedian policy to surpress source material that would be religously ot politicly unfavorable to these mindsets has lead to horribly butchered articals and as of this date the Ebionite artical has been about as accurate as when Wikipedian articals claimed America had celibrated its 750th birthday.

One misconception of the artical's overseers is that the ideas expressed in the Clementine writings come from Gnostic christian sources. This can be found on the articals talk page or one of its many archived pages and has lead them to place disclaimers directly into the artical regarding the material and "Epiphanius of Salamis". One problem is much of the work done by the scholars mentioned is not publicly posted up on the internet and while some of the POV material used also may not be found on the net only internet posted material contrary to their POV is even allowed for discussion on its talk page.

One scholar mentioned as a source is "Hans Joachim Schoeps". His work is hard to find without being able to access research papers but here is evidence directly contrary to the POV of the editors regarding the source of the Clementine writings http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-9231%28195203%2971%3A1%3C58%3AAFZRU%3E2.0.CO%3B2-N&size=LARGE

It is interesting that the only mention of Schopes's opinion in the article is in the form of a narrative that seems to counteract the little that can be found in the public domain. The narrative does however fit in well with the dominating political views of most wikipedians. siting sources know to be knowledgeable and then denying what the very sources say seems to be a plague throughout wikipedia. Wikipedians have hijacked history and are attempting to rewrite it from a secular humanist prospective.

The current version of the Birtanica has taken into account new evidence and the updated ebionite article has been revised.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9031860/Ebionite

The wikipedians that seem to be overseeing the Ebionite artical have yet to change the fossilized link for a birtanica artical to the improved one of today. Maybe this will change?NazireneMystic 19:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Codex Sinaiticus

You asked if I have or know where you can get an English translation of the Codex Sinaiticus. I must admit I do not. As far as I know, it's impossible to see even the original apart from a handful of scholars, but I hear that is going to change in a few years as the British Museum continue to digitize it and eventually web-publish it.

Regards, ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 05:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I checked and found a work in progress here, only Matthew chapter 1 through 7 are up so far; but it translates the Greek and lists variants in all the old codexes, and if you look for the abbreviation S for Sinaiticus in the notes, you can figure out exactly what the variants are.
As for the Old Testament, CS is a version of the Septuagint, but I don't know right now where to find a complete list of in what specifics it varies. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 06:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Shalom Codex Sinaiticus, I will look into that soon, Do you know if the book of "Acts" will be translated any time soon?NazireneMystic 01:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ebionite Dispute Resolution

I've created the following two articles and mentioned them in the See also section of the Ebionites article:

Since you have a vested interest in one of these articles surviving a speedy deletion attempt or a full article for deletion debate, I suggest you not only watch over it but also improve and expand it.

I also suggest you move any debate about these two religious groups to their respective talk pages.

The Talk:Ebionites talk page is only for discussing changes to the Ebionites article. --Loremaster 14:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Allan Cronshaw, The long island mystic and Brother of Yeshua.

Here I will show evidence of notibility.

1) An entire page from a religous site actualy calling Allan by name and condeming us.The writer seems to not be discerning enough to understand what Peter contended with Simon Maguns over and links any spiritual concepts to him. religous group You can't make this stuff up.

2) P.H.D'ed religous scholars reprinting[with permition] Allan's articals.Artical by Allan Cronshaw

3) While records of the time show civil disobedence by Ebionites and early Christians no evidence shows it was done in the name of the Jewish state or the name of religion, Just as Yeshua said the truth will set you free, living thruth in your life will set you apart from the rest of the people on earth. The type of disobedence was not nationalist,socialist or communistic but rather aposing ignorance just as the Yeshua did, Based on truth. Different times,same spirit. fighting ignorance This is a link to court papers of a constitutional challange and evidence of endemic criminal corruption in the N.Y. court system.

4)If you understand why the Ebionites did not expect Jesus to return and rule the world and still call him Messiah after his death you understand the kingdom is purely spirital in nature. This site has spiritual Ebionite writings along side famous christian and jewish mystics like Max Heindel and Yonassan Gershom. Ebionite writings.

[edit] Yahoo Group request

You should approve me for your yahoo group-- I'm trying to join but need approval. You're obviously very, very knowledgable about all this, and while my personal opinion can't affect the notability issues, I would very much like to learn more for personal reasons. --Alecmconroy 00:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good faith?

Shalom Loremaster,

This is a big thing to ask that I assume good faith regarding OvadYah. This editor has been quite deceptive during this enite debate. First he was attempting to pass as a NPOV a few archived pages ago but I do not believe this can any longer be hid. Look at the exchange that took place right before you asked me to assume "good faith" were he states:

"I have never heard of Shemayah Phillips claiming for himself more than the title of Paqid, which is basically a secretary or clerk. By contrast, the claims of your leader are exceedingly pretentious, and he was also excommunicated -- from the Ebionite Jewish Community. I guess that's why you folks loathe Shemayah so much huh?

Given this statment what would you understand it to mean? I went to his site and searched for the term "Paqid" it says the term is irrelevent and it realy means "President" not only that but this office of President can be handed down to sucsessors like a Monarchy. This offices makes him the desider of all things Ebionite[in his little world]. This sounds like a type of "Priory of Sion" situation given Yeshua said to not even call another man teacher but all should be taught by the christ I.E. "Anointing",which by the way has nothing to do with oil being poured on your head.

In the above statment he tries to minumize this and then call Allan my "leader". All I can say is ive been in Allans fourms for over 3 years and hes never ordered anyone to do anything.

Then he says Allan was Excommunicated or some nonsence like that. Wouldnt you have to be converted before your excommunicated? If the EC will tell you of "Ebionites proper" if asked regarding someones standing as thier President says at his site then they must have records of the rituals practised at converson like circumsision. I would LOVE to see reconds of that converson. This editor is relating the joining of a online fourm to being converted to thier religion.If you are kicked off the fourm your"Excommunicated". In that sence one of the wikipedia Editors is now a member in autoplasty from our group because one joined and then left. read my talk page and see the person that asked to join, he joinded shortly afterward he asked me to accept him to the fourm and then he left in a few days. If you message him and ask I dought he thinks he ever converted and accepted Allan as a "Leader" I dought he would think he did.LOL However this is the type foolishness directed as us im to take with good faith.

I did assume good faith when I called him ignorant because if these things were knowingly done it would be diobolical.NazireneMystic 22:12, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Loremaster"

Even if everything you said were true, please remember that the Talk:Ebionites page is to discuss changes to the Ebionites article not to wage a campaign to expose OvadYah's sins. --Loremaster 17:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Ovadyah's editing is a big reason why the SE were rejected from the artical for totaly silly reasons not equaly applied to the other group. What that discussion showed was the fact he will do about any thing to have his point of view dominate the artical and deside truth of what an ebionite is dispite all notibily and relevance another group my have and the other wikipedia editors are approving of these things so it was talking about the artical and showing why our standard is so very high and for his group so very non existant. the mis nameing of our archive, the tring to hide us away are the same way people acted toward Yeshua and the Old Ebionites. Look at all the silly spellings of our lost gospel and general confussion the churchused to minumize us in the past. You were meant to appose us and your soul chose to before you were born. If we were accepted you and I would of both failed.NazireneMystic 03:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Ebionite question

Hi Loremaster, the post made asking if PHD'ed religous scholars reprinting an artical your group made would be notible seems to have been removed and im not sure if it was moved somewere or not. I did notice before it was removed you said it would be notible. Do I have to start another RFC regarding the last one that railroaded us? besides i see how it works now and it would be easy for anyone with a biased view of spiritual concepts to become the rfc and not listen to anything said.NazireneMystic 15:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Loremaster"

The post wasn't removed. You can find it here at Talk:Ebionites#Academic_sources_for_modern_Ebionites. --Loremaster 17:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Codex Sinaiticus

You asked if I have or know where you can get an English translation of the Codex Sinaiticus. I must admit I do not. As far as I know, it's impossible to see even the original apart from a handful of scholars, but I hear that is going to change in a few years as the British Museum continue to digitize it and eventually web-publish it.

Regards, ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 05:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I checked and found a work in progress here, only Matthew chapter 1 through 7 are up so far; but it translates the Greek and lists variants in all the old codexes, and if you look for the abbreviation S for Sinaiticus in the notes, you can figure out exactly what the variants are.
As for the Old Testament, CS is a version of the Septuagint, but I don't know right now where to find a complete list of in what specifics it varies. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 06:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Shalom Codex Sinaiticus, I will look into that soon, Do you know if the book of "Acts" will be translated any time soon?NazireneMystic 01:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ebionite Dispute Resolution

I've created the following two articles and mentioned them in the See also section of the Ebionites article:

Since you have a vested interest in one of these articles surviving a speedy deletion attempt or a full article for deletion debate, I suggest you not only watch over it but also improve and expand it.

I also suggest you move any debate about these two religious groups to their respective talk pages.

The Talk:Ebionites talk page is only for discussing changes to the Ebionites article. --Loremaster 14:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Allan Cronshaw, The long island mystic and Brother of Yeshua.

Here I will show evidence of notibility.

1) An entire page from a religous site actualy calling Allan by name and condeming us. religous group You can't make this stuff up.

2) P.H.D'ed religous scholars reprinting[with permition] Allan's articals.Artical by Allan Cronshaw

3) While records of the time show civil disobedence by Ebionites and early Christians no evidence shows it was done in the name of the Jewish state or the name of religion, Just as Yeshua said the truth will set you free, living thruth in your life will set you apart from the rest of the people on earth. The type of disobedence was not nationalist,socialist or communistic but rather aposing ignorance just as the Yeshua did, Based on truth. Different times,same spirit. fighting ignorance This is a link to court papers of a constitutional challange and evidence of endemic criminal corruption in the N.Y. court system.

4)If you understand why the Ebionites did not expect Jesus to return and rule the world and still call him Messiah after his death you understand the kingdom is purely spirital in nature. This site has spiritual Ebionite writings along side famous christian and jewish mystics like Max Heindel and Yonassan Gershom. Ebionite writings.

[edit] Deleted pages

Do not restore articles or talk pages of articles that have been deleted as the result of a deletion vote. Ben W Bell talk 14:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia policy I can restore it and since it was linked to the artical it should not beable to be instantly deleted.NazireneMystic 15:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Er no. That isn't what policy says at all. Restoration of deleted pages that have been deleted is not acceptable unless the page goes through DRV or if the page is very different from what the original page was.

Er it was actualy totaly different then the page that was deleted.NazireneMystic 18:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


JoshuaZ 00:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC) Please do not attempt to re-create this page again, or you will find yourself blocked. Jayjg (talk) 13:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Jay, You know ive found wikipedians love to do a certian thing when they stand correctly on an issue BUT they havent done in regarding this one. They just love to post the link to the policy.Jayjg, were you one of the voters to delete the artical? seems ive seen your ID somewere before. Werent you one to say this group can not be found anywere outside its own website? Did you just take one the the meatpuppets statements as fact? Are you another Wikipedian that sees reality as a personal attack as some that have reported me do? Do you know how to search the Internet? If you do please explain your comments on the page log dealing with the deletion of the "Ebionite Resotoration Movement" in light of the facts that exist right on my talk and user page.NazireneMystic 18:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Jayjg, here is your below comment from the archived page:

  • Delete. Existence not verifiable outside of a webpage of the alleged group. Jayjg (talk) 00:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

How does this compare to the facts on my page? I will assume good faith in you and just think you were lead by meatpuppets or just research is not your thing.NazireneMystic 18:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] meatpuppets

[edit] meatpuppets

While I, in "good faith" let what I thought would be unbiased editors to the deletion prossess without it seems Ovadyah and Alecmconroy were active meatpuppets in the discussion to delete the Ebionite restoration movement.

Both of them from the archived talk pages clearly know around 400 people are in our main fourm at any given time. We have around 6 other groups also.

The main one alone has more members then the other group that has been actively tring to discredit the majority of Ebionite writings In order to impose the POV of its agenda and slience all other opinions. Alecmconroy , in the role of meatpuppet said the Ebionite Restoration Movement has one or two members but how can this be taken in good faith with he personaly knows first hand that his statment is not true?

Ovadyah memtioned the mis- named neo-ebionite archives but failed to mention after that segment of the archive he posted we showed that our group was more notible in every aspect brought out in the prosses to exclude us then when we both became subs and removed from the artical.

Another voter claimed outside of Allan's sites there in no memtion of the group at all. On my talk page I clearly have one site that takes almost a whole page attacking Allan, another site were a P.H.D.ed religous scholar reprints an artical Allan has written, and still another site were Were modern spiritual Ebionite writings are listed side by side with famous Christian and Jewish Mystics.

By contrast the evidenceOvadyah claims to be showing his group doesnt even mention them by name and does not show the writers of the articals he links to even know the name of the group or its plaiq I.E. President I.E.King.

Only the reference that used the past wikipedia "Ebionite" artical back when the artical was mainly a billboard for the EJC mentions the group but that realy does not mean anything since it was obtained from Wikipedia. Oh, I should add in all fairness I found one site that claimed Ovadyah's President was an X- Bapsist preacher.NazireneMystic 16:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


When I was in about the 4th grade a teacher called me a malcontent and I remember thinking she was somehow attacking me but after I found out what the word meant it seemed to fit well and my feelings changed. Maybe you can look up thoes words you claim were attacks and review your actions through out this ordeal and you might find your feelings will change toNazireneMystic 19:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


Truly one can not be Happy unless he does the law. Untill you learn to reflect on self and deal with others as you would have them treat you using even measures and balanced scales you can not observe the Law. If you work hard and begain to walk in The Way you may one day even join us.NazireneMystic 20:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

Hi NazireneMystic. This kind of edit is not acceptable. Further edits of this kind will lead to myself or another admin blocking you. If you cannot see why this edit was not acceptable, please read WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Proto::type 15:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 24 hour block

You have been blocked for 24 hours for violations of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. DurovaCharge! 01:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The incivil acts were the meatpuppetry and other tactics used by a few editors . How is pointing this out a personal attack?NazireneMystic 03:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 48 hour block

You have been blocked for 48 hours for violations of WP:NPA. You appear to have misunderstood the reasons for your previous block. That one and this one are explained at Wikipedia:Personal_attack_intervention_noticeboard#NazireneMystic_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29. I have blocked only for verified edits made through this particular account. DurovaCharge! 22:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


Ofcourse I understand you tossed the rules out the window to preform these blocks, hay its wikipedia!NazireneMystic 17:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation

I didnt vandalize your user page. I was doing you a favor. A user page is supposed be a place where you explain who you are and what you are interested in. However, people have been using your user page as a discussion page. So I moved the content from your user page to your real discussion page. --Loremaster 17:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] blocked for 48 hours

Block is in response to Wikipedia:Personal attack intervention noticeboard. Please read WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Thanks. —— Eagle 101 (ask me for help) 01:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


As long as and accurate discription of how these editors act seems to you as a personal attack on them wikipedia will never clean up its act

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/a/z/User_talk%7ENazireneMystic_90d8.html"