Gary Arthur
White Belt
Troy Wideman posted
Your right I havent, BUT if what is claimed about the Amatsu Tarara is true i.e that
1/ The age of the Amatsu Tatara is the oldest document in Japan by far. If this was the case the Kamiyo Moji Script would be older than the writings found in the Kojiki i.e 620 AD rather than 700 BC.
2/ The distance traveled by King Mima from Babylon in a time most sea going vessels tended to travel by following the coast rather than going to open sea and vast distances like from Babylon to Japan a distance of thousands of miles.
Both of these would overturn both the scientific and historical world. It would be like finding a book with the blue print of Stonehenge written in the Neolithic/Bronze age period. In fact it would overturn world history.
Instead we have a script (Kamiyo Moji) that many scholars say is a fake, we have a king List from Babylon that contains NO King Mima (See below) and we have no evidence to back up the claims of what Mr Tanemura and others claim.
Now I'm willing to accept what is written as a fable, myth or oral tradition, but the moment you start talking about it as fact then you need to back up your statements and that includes Mr Tanemura.
(Footnote. The Kojiki includes a mention of a Mimo O but it is 5th century AD not 6th century BC, and Mr Tanemura mentions Caldia as being in Babylon. Its not it was a state in Korea.)
Oh dear, whenever I hear things like that i'm reminded of Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron.
The thing is that scientists and historians have a vast amount of evidence covering what we might call history. These include archaeological finds, dating methods, genetics, historical documents etc.
Yet what seems to be happening here with the Amatsu Tatara is that many of the claims go against held beliefs by most if not all scholars that work in this field.
So if you are making a claim i.e that the Amatsu tatara is thousands of years old and that king Mima O came from Babylon then its your teacher that needs to provide the evidence otherwise what he says is without merit.
And by the way saying...
"Just remember what is science today, can be proven wrong tomorrow"
Is a very weak argument and is that sort of argument that one would expect from creationists who try to disprove evolution and want a 6000 year old earth.
This whole Amatsu Tatara thing reminds me of the Turin Shroud. Yes people would love to believe that it was the shroud of Jesus Christ, but once you start examining the weave, colours, fabrics and dating then you get a date of 1300 AD and not the early 1st Century AD.
Actually I disagree, I think people 60 years ago expected us to be living on Mars by now, but this comment just goes to show how powerful science is not how it can be proven wrong. So this comment by you is just agreeing that science is a very powerful tool to understanding.
Then I open this up to any Shihan that want to answer.
What is the evidence for the claims made about the Amatsu Tatara (See above)
Oh I see its secret Knowledge available to only the few.
So even though this document/s would overturn science and history for the claims that are made of it, it is to stay a secret except for the few who dont happen to have access to carbon dating, or expertise in history or linguistics.
Isnt that just a little convenient.
Note: When I talk about No King Mima being in the Babylonian list I do not mean his name would be King Mima. This is not a Babylonian name but a Japanese Translation of a Korean Name. If one looks at the kojiki one will find many mentions of the word "Mima" including the land of Mima. Therefore it would be useful to have the name of King Mimas Babylonian name, which it appears we do not (Or neither Mr Tanemura or Dr Hatsumi have given us yet) but we dont have a Babylonian record of a King going missing at sea at least in that period.
Its possible that King Mima was King Mima Ki (Emperor Sujin) Emperor Sujin was a mystical mysterious figure much like King Arthur who invaded Japan but this would be 3rd 4th century AD and not BC.
Garth
Your right I havent, BUT if what is claimed about the Amatsu Tarara is true i.e that
1/ The age of the Amatsu Tatara is the oldest document in Japan by far. If this was the case the Kamiyo Moji Script would be older than the writings found in the Kojiki i.e 620 AD rather than 700 BC.
2/ The distance traveled by King Mima from Babylon in a time most sea going vessels tended to travel by following the coast rather than going to open sea and vast distances like from Babylon to Japan a distance of thousands of miles.
Both of these would overturn both the scientific and historical world. It would be like finding a book with the blue print of Stonehenge written in the Neolithic/Bronze age period. In fact it would overturn world history.
Instead we have a script (Kamiyo Moji) that many scholars say is a fake, we have a king List from Babylon that contains NO King Mima (See below) and we have no evidence to back up the claims of what Mr Tanemura and others claim.
Now I'm willing to accept what is written as a fable, myth or oral tradition, but the moment you start talking about it as fact then you need to back up your statements and that includes Mr Tanemura.
(Footnote. The Kojiki includes a mention of a Mimo O but it is 5th century AD not 6th century BC, and Mr Tanemura mentions Caldia as being in Babylon. Its not it was a state in Korea.)
Oh dear, whenever I hear things like that i'm reminded of Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron.
The thing is that scientists and historians have a vast amount of evidence covering what we might call history. These include archaeological finds, dating methods, genetics, historical documents etc.
Yet what seems to be happening here with the Amatsu Tatara is that many of the claims go against held beliefs by most if not all scholars that work in this field.
So if you are making a claim i.e that the Amatsu tatara is thousands of years old and that king Mima O came from Babylon then its your teacher that needs to provide the evidence otherwise what he says is without merit.
And by the way saying...
"Just remember what is science today, can be proven wrong tomorrow"
Is a very weak argument and is that sort of argument that one would expect from creationists who try to disprove evolution and want a 6000 year old earth.
This whole Amatsu Tatara thing reminds me of the Turin Shroud. Yes people would love to believe that it was the shroud of Jesus Christ, but once you start examining the weave, colours, fabrics and dating then you get a date of 1300 AD and not the early 1st Century AD.
Actually I disagree, I think people 60 years ago expected us to be living on Mars by now, but this comment just goes to show how powerful science is not how it can be proven wrong. So this comment by you is just agreeing that science is a very powerful tool to understanding.
Then I open this up to any Shihan that want to answer.
What is the evidence for the claims made about the Amatsu Tatara (See above)
Oh I see its secret Knowledge available to only the few.
So even though this document/s would overturn science and history for the claims that are made of it, it is to stay a secret except for the few who dont happen to have access to carbon dating, or expertise in history or linguistics.
Isnt that just a little convenient.
Note: When I talk about No King Mima being in the Babylonian list I do not mean his name would be King Mima. This is not a Babylonian name but a Japanese Translation of a Korean Name. If one looks at the kojiki one will find many mentions of the word "Mima" including the land of Mima. Therefore it would be useful to have the name of King Mimas Babylonian name, which it appears we do not (Or neither Mr Tanemura or Dr Hatsumi have given us yet) but we dont have a Babylonian record of a King going missing at sea at least in that period.
Its possible that King Mima was King Mima Ki (Emperor Sujin) Emperor Sujin was a mystical mysterious figure much like King Arthur who invaded Japan but this would be 3rd 4th century AD and not BC.
Garth
Last edited:
