The Left's War On Christians
See other The Left's War On Christians Articles
Title: 'Jesus is a MYTH': Christ stories appeared decades after his 'death' - and he was probably many people rather than just one, atheist writer claims
Source:
Daily Mail Online
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet ... le-just-one-writer-claims.html
Published: Apr 3, 2015
Author: Richard Gray
Post Date: 2015-04-03 08:49:14 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 30640
Comments: 116
Jesus Christ was not a real person and is probably the result of a combination of stories about several different individuals, according to a writer and leading atheist activist. David Fitzgerald, a San Francisco based author, believes he has compiled compelling evidence that proves Jesus did not exist. He claims there are no contemporary mentions of Jesus in historical accounts from the time when he was supposed to have lived, yet other Jewish sect leaders from the time do appear. Mystery: This painting depicts Jesus Christ as single person but writer David Fitzgerald believes he was a literary invention that combined the stories from several cults and figures in Judea during the first century He also points to discrepancies in the early gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, claiming these were written decades after the supposed time of Jesus. Instead he insists the disciples of Jesus were also probably not real and their names only later attached to the gospels to lend them credence. In a new book due to be published later this year, he will argue that the figure of Jesus was actually a combination of pagan rituals and stories about other people. Speaking to MailOnline, he said: 'There is a paradox that Jesus did all these amazing things and taught all these amazing things yet no one heard of him outside his immediate cult for nearly 100 years. 'Or it means he didn't do all these things at all. 'The first gospel of Christianity appears to have been a literary allegory that were written decades after the time they portray. 'I believe that Christianity started as one of the many mystery faiths that appeared at the time where old Gods and old traditions were rebooted. 'Christianity appears to have been a Jewish mystery faith. 'By the time of Paul there appears to have been plenty of different "Lord's suppers" as he complains about the existence of other gospels and messiahs. 'It appears that early Christianity managed to take the stories from these other faiths and incorporate them into the story of Jesus.' Mr Fitzgerald, whose first book 'Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that Show Jesus Never Existed at All' was published in 2010, believes it is no longer reasonable to assume there has to be a single historic figure who began Christianity. Instead he says early Christians drew upon the beliefs and rituals of other cults and faiths around in the first century. He argues that John the Baptist's cult is one such example and had initially been a competitor to the cult of Jesus before being incorporated into the Christian story. Mr Fitzgerald says there are inconsistencies in the Gospels of the Christian bible (pictured above) that suggest Jesus Christ was a literary allegory and these accounts were written decades after his supposed life The statue of Christ the Redeemer (above) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, is one of many depictions of Jesus but Mr Fitzgerald says that many of the early depictions were unable to agree on his appearance Mr Fitzgerald said: 'There is nothing implausible to think that Jesus was a real person, but I just don't think that he can have been a single person if he existed at all. 'We also have no mention of Jesus in other historical texts from the time. There were certainly people writing about Judea at the time like Philo of Alexandria. 'During this period there were many other messiahs and wannabe messiahs who did far less exciting things than Jesus, but all of them managed something Jesus did not - to make a dent on the historical record. 'Two billion people believe all these miracles happened yet there is no evidence they did.' The earliest mention of Jesus yet to be discovered is a limestone ossuary on which the words 'James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus' is inscribed. The box, which has been dated to 64AD - several decades after the crucifixion - was seized by the Israeli Antiquities Authority and its owner arrested for forgery in 2003. Although he was later cleared in 2012, doubts about the authenticity of the inscription remain. Others have said there could have been several people named James, whose father was called Joseph and had a brother called Jesus living in Jerusalem at the time. The James Ossuary (above) is thought by some to be the first mention of Jesus in an inscription on its side There are three mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources which have been used to research the existence of a 'real' Jesus. A Jesus is mentioned in Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, which was written around 94 AD. Roman historian Tacitus later mentions Christ and his execution with Pontius Pilate in his Annals, thought to be written around 116AD. Both mentions were a considerable time after his alleged execution. Mr Fritzgerald also takes issue with many of the stories about the Crucifixion that stem from the first Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke. He said: 'There are many examples of inconsistencies in the gospels that suggest they were written by people who did not live in Judea at the time they are set. 'Mark makes many mistakes about life and geography during the first century in Judea. 'If Jesus really had been arrested on the eve of Passover, they would probably have just put him in jail and tried him after the weekend. 'The trial itself violates the rules of Jewish law - why was he not stoned? 'What we know about Pontius Pilate also suggests he was someone who would not do what the Jews asked him and would often do what they asked him not to. 'Instead Mark portrays him as being persuaded by the Jewish leaders to execute him.' Mr Fitzgerald argues that many of these stories were in fact incorporated into the story of Christ as literary devices rather than as a historical account. He said: 'There is also no evidence for the tradition that sees Barabbas - an anti-Roman rebel and murderer - being released while Jesus, an innocent, is condemned to death. 'What this actually seems to be is Mark using the story as an allegory for the Yom Kippur scapegoat ritual where one goat is released into the wilderness and the other is sacrificed for God.' Mr Fitzgerald hopes to have his new book 'Jesus: Mything in Action' out later this year. He added: 'It still puzzles me that as soon as anyone tries to pin down who Jesus is we get 50 different Jesus's emerging. There is no consensus.'
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-57) not displayed.
.
.
.
#58. To: redleghunter (#55)
He certainly wasn't associated with the clans: Sadducee or a Pharisee, either.
That is because of two reasons. They lack truth and lack eyewitness testimony...observation. Thousands witnessed the Risen Christ. Zero people witnessed or wrote about "Lucy."
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Well definitely not a Sadducee. They did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. Some debate Phasisee. By whom Christ condemned in His ministry, I conclude He was in fact, literally, His own "man." Meaning He preached the Holiness and purity of the Law where the other sects were laden with man-made traditions. Christ condemned them for that.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Your post #59 lacks substance. You should fix it.
You, perhaps by accident, have said in so many words, you don't know what you are talking about regarding proving the OT.
Proving the Old Testament? It is just a series of unrelated faebles about the Jewish belief system. The book of Genesis and all others were simply yarns handed down from generation to generation until the Babylon exile, about 600 BCE. After the Jews learned to write, while in Babylon, the Hebrew Bible was created: instant & presto! The data presented has little meaning outside of the bloodline of Jews as the books relate to the many issues that were confronted by this small wandering group of sheepherders.
In truth, the Muslims think that Jesus was the Purest Prophet, and that Jeusu revealed the truths of God, about life after death and all things. They believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, Mary. Mary is the only woman named in the Quran. Muslims think that Mohammed is the Final prophet. It's not that Mohammed is "higher" than Jesus. In fact,the opposite was true: Jeusu was born of a virgin and had all of the miracles. The problem, according to Islam., is that Christians distorted Jesus' message, and made it about the divinity of Jesus, and not about the pure message from God that Jesus brought. The Koran says that it will be Jesus who judges at the end. But the Christians, by turning Jesus into a God, twisted Jesus message and distorted things in their writings. So God sent Mohammed, who was neither miraculous like Jesus, nor as pure as Jesus, nor as high as Jesus, to be the Final prophet, to straighten out the story and restore Jesus' original message from God to men, which was not I am God, but rather, do this to worship God and pass judgment. Muslims believe that only Muhammad. Can be fully trusted, in the Koran, because the Christians and Jews twisted what God saiD and what the prorphets said. So in the end, Jesus will Judge Mohammed too, but the terms of the judgment will be what's in the Koran, not what the Christians said, because the Christians distorted the message, but Mohammed was sent by God to unbend what was bent. That is what the Koran really says. it''s not what Chrisitans think.
Ah, but there was my friend. Mark 15:7 And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. One of Jesus apostles belonged to the Militia of the day.
So the Jews didn't know how to write until 600 BC? NONSENSE ! Scientists have discovered the earliest known Hebrew writing — an inscription dating from the 10th century B.C., during the period of King David's reign.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Interesting conjecture. I've never heard such claims before.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations. Even then, they were thrown back as worthless but, they learned some skills by that time. Four hundred years earlier writings must have been borrowed from another culture. Any society, describing themselves as "the chosen people" when all they have were a few goats and living in tents must really be an asocial people wouldn't you say?
Mystery: This painting depicts Jesus Christ as single person but writer David Fitzgerald believes he was a literary invention that combined the stories from several cults and figures in Judea during the first s This same shallow unbelief and ignorance pops up this time every year. He also points to discrepancies in the early gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, claiming these were written decades after the supposed time of Jesus. Mark was written as early as 40 AD. We have a copy dated 80 AD, which was found in Egypt, which proves it had been in circulation for some time. Those so-called discrepancies are apparent, but not real. Instead he insists the disciples of Jesus were also probably not real and their names only later attached to the gospels to lend them credence. Not according to eyewitness accounts. Maybe I only imagined standing at John's tomb in Ephesus.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Wrong! The Paleo-Hebrew alphabet (Hebrew: הכתב העברי הקדום), also Palaeo-Hebrew alphabet, is an abjad variant of the Phoenician alphabet. It dates to around the 10th century BCE. It was used as the main vehicle for writing the Hebrew language by the Israelites, who would later split into Jews and Samaritans. The term was coined by Solomon Birnbaum in 1954, writing "To apply the term Phoenician to the script of the Hebrews is hardly suitable".[1] It began to fall out of use by the Jews in the 5th century BCE when they adopted the Aramaic alphabet as their writing system for Hebrew, from which the present Jewish "square-script" Hebrew alphabet descends. The Samaritans, who now number less than one thousand people, continue to use a derivative of the Old Hebrew alphabet, known as the Samaritan alphabet.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
No, Muslims consider Jesus a great prophet. What Do Muslims Believe about Jesus? Muslims respect and revere Jesus (peace be upon him). They consider him one of the greatest of God’s messengers to mankind. The Quran confirms his virgin birth, and a chapter of the Quran is entitled ‘Maryam’ (Mary). Jesus was born miraculously by the command of God, the same command that had brought Adam into being with neither a father nor a mother. During his prophetic mission, Jesus performed many miracles. Muslims believe that Jesus was not crucified. It was the plan of Jesus’ enemies to crucify him, but God saved him and raised him up to Him. And the likeness of Jesus was put over another man. Jesus’ enemies took this man and crucified him, thinking that he was Jesus. Neither Muhammad nor Jesus came to change the basic doctrine of the belief in one God, brought by earlier prophets, but rather to confirm and renew it.
Yep...
Two prominent Bible scholars are hitting back at a writer’s claim that Jesus Christ was a mythical figure who never walked the Earth. As TheBlaze previously reported, writer Michael Paulkovich claims he analyzed the works of 126 ancient writers who lived during the first to third centuries and found no mention of Jesus, claiming that Christians invented Christ in order to have a central figure to worship. But not everyone is buying into Paulkovich’s theory. Dr. Candida Moss, a professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame and Dr. Joel Baden, a professor of Hebrew Bible at Yale University, argue in a new Daily Beast article that “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “Let’s get one thing straight: There is nigh universal consensus among biblical scholars — the authentic ones, anyway — that Jesus was, in fact, a real guy,” Moss and Baden wrote. “They argue over the details, of course, as scholars are wont to do, but they’re pretty much all on the same page that Jesus walked the earth (if not the Sea of Galilee) in the 1st century CE.” The scholars go on to note that some of the people on Paulkovich’s list of ancient sources actually preceded Jesus and, thus, wouldn’t have commented on the Christian savior. Additionally, they noted that some of these people were philosophers — individuals not known to comment on current events. Many of the others were mathematicians, satirists, doctors or poets. While some historians are among the bunch, Moss and Baden noted that few of their writings remain in tact and that most of what historians have to go on are mere fragments. “Long story short: of the 126 people listed by Paulkovich, there are only 10 or so whom we might expect to have written about Jesus,” they wrote. “And it’s probably worth mentioning that there are, of course, writers from the first centuries CE who refer to Jesus, and even write quite extensively about him. But since those authors all got bundled into a collection called the New Testament, we should probably just dismiss them from the discussion.”l Moss and Baden also tackle the overarching question behind the claims of Paulkovich and others like him: If Jesus was so important and pivotal, why did many of his contemporaries — outside of those who appear in the Bible — ignore him? The Bible scholars noted that Jesus simply wasn’t seen as very important in his time. “He was just another wannabe messiah who ended up on the wrong side of the authorities,” Moss and Baden wrote. “The prime candidate for ‘Son of God’ in the Roman world was the emperor himself, who had coins, statues, and temples to back those claims up. Jesus had a small band of followers and a lot of stories about sheep.” The authors concluded on a comical note, claiming that, by Paulkovich’s own logic, some might assume that he, too, doesn’t exist based on a lack of biographical information and virtually no web presence. “It is safe to say that there are no historians that have, to this point, included Paulkovich in their writings (and let’s be honest, the chances going forward aren’t great),” Moss and Baden wrote. “What’s more, not a single mathematician, poet, philosopher, or gynecologist … refers to him even a single time.”
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
That seem to sum it up. Apart from the Gospels, there is little independent evidence and apparently, no indisputable evidence of an 'historical Jesus'. But the search isn't over.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Tacitus and “Christus” I begin with Tacitus. I’m referring to Annals book 15, chapter [44], written sometime between ad 110 and 120. “This name”—and here Tacitus is referring to the name Christian—“originates from ‘Christus’ ”—which is the Latin form of Christ—“who was sentenced to death by the procurator, Pontius Pilate, during the reign of (Emperor) Tiberius. This detestable superstition which had been suppressed for a while spread anew, not only in Judaea where the evil had started, but also in Rome where everything that is horrid and wicked in the world gathers and finds numerous followers.” Well, most scholars agree this is an authentic passage. No Christian would have invented it and inserted it into Annals. Unfortunately, some of Tacitus’ History and Annals does not survive, and so we don’t have a fuller exposé of what he’s talking about here or this particular period of time. But a couple of things ought to be noted. First of all, his very negative description of the Christian movement is not simply because he thinks poorly of Christians as such, but because Christians at this time are still very closely associated with the Jewish people or with the land of Judaea or Israel. Tacitus himself was an anti-Semite, and he wasn’t afraid to express himself very critically and negatively of the Jewish people. “Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
I've read it dates to 107BCE. And some doubt its authenticity, pointing out (among other things) that Pontius Pilate was not a procurator but a prefect and no authentic imperial document would make such an error.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
So, you agree with me. They borrowed what little they could understand from the Phoenicians and bastardized what little they could understand. As for the Old Testament or the Hebrew Bible (in part, "the Torah") it began in ~600 BCE, after the Exile. So, what happened to all that time from the beginning that God created? Did the Jews think that time stood still for them? I am confident of the fact, as they are the self proclaimed "chosen people" and can make up rules for just about anything because they possess few principles.
Not true. When the Jews came back from Babylon, they had to make a choice: use the new form of letters they learned in Babylon, the "Aramaic" script, or to return to their old style letters, the "Ivrit" script. The majority went with Aramaic script, so what we today call "Hebrew" letters are not, in fact, Hebrew. They are Babylonian letters. The original Hebrew Ivrit script stopped being used, except by a few. There are some Ivrit texts at Qumran, and they are the oldest ones. Also, the Samaritan Pentateuch is written in Ivrit letters. This, too, was a reason that the returning Jews ended up keeping the Babylonian script and not readopting their old form of the letters (the alphabet itself is the same): the old form was used by the Samaritans, and the Jews wanted to clearly distinguish themselves from them. The existence of the Ivrit, however, is well attested. And that means that the Jews knew how to write long before they went away to Babylon. They didn't learn to write in Babylon. They learned a new script.
No they don't. They say he is a liar and was not born of a virgin. Show me where it says that Muslims believe that Jesus is the son of God and was born of a virgin.
Your agreement is further substantiation about a false Biblical record. The Old Testament or any written document is not handed down by GOD.
The substance is from reading the Gospels for over 40 years.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Local rabble rousers:) Not a Roman opposition party.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Simon called Zelotes, one of the twelve Apostles. In the Greek, Zelotes, pronounced dzay-lo-tace' Search for 2208 in Strong's KJV, the same as 2208; a Zealot, i.e. (specially)a partisan for Jewish political independence,:--Zelotes. That would qualify as a party opposed to Roman rule.
Show me where it says that Muslims believe that Jesus is the son of God and was born of a virgin. I already showed you. You just don't want to understand. Here it is again: What Do Muslims Believe about Jesus? (Remember) when the angels said, “O Mary, God gives you good news of a word from Him (God), whose name is the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, revered in this world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (to God). He will speak to the people from his cradle and as a man, and he is of the righteous.” She said, “My Lord, how can I have a child when no mortal has touched me?” He said, “So (it will be). God creates what He wills. If He decrees a thing, He says to it only, ‘Be!’ and it is.” (Quran, 3:45-47) Lying about these people is not going to help your cause.
Have you studied Biblical Archeology? Yes or no.
The Muslims do not believe Jesus is the son of God and has the power to forgive sins. Muslims consider him a liar.
After 40 years of reading "begat, begat, begat" which is the basis of the gospels, what have you learned from all your reading?
Yes. John Hagee sez: It is not possible to say, "I am a Christian" and not love the Jewish people. The Bible teaches that love is not what you say, but what you do. (1 John 3:18) "A bell is not a bell until you ring it, a song is not a song until you sing it, love is not love until you share it." Yet, the man is a 100% PRO-Israeli fascist to steal Palestinian lands while murdering innocent women and children. It is the way it always was, just a different mask, this time.
He didn't agree with you. If you have any integrity quit pettifogging.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Vicomte13: Not true. The existence of the Ivrit, however, is well attested. And that means that the Jews knew how to write long before they went away to Babylon. They didn't learn to write in Babylon. They learned a new script. buckeroo: Your agreement is further substantiation about a false Biblical record. The Old Testament or any written document is not handed down by GOD. GarySpFC: He didn't agree with you. If you have any integrity quit pettifogging. Yes, he did. He unknowingly supported 100% of my posts.
Not in Rome. Not a serious threat to bring down the Roman regime. The Zealots today would be considered a regional faction. One which Rome obliterated ca. AD 70.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
That you haven't.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
The Scriptures were written by men, of course. They were inspired to write them by God.
Jesus' virgin birth is a miracle in which Muslims believe, but they don't believe this makes him a son of God. A miracle , yes, but not one that involved the fathering of a child by God. Rather, he was formed miraculously, like the first animals and men. His birth was miraculous, but there was no transmission of divine essence. In other words, Mary was given a cild in her womb by God, but God did not impregnate her, according to Muslims. Jesus is a miraculous prophet, made by God, but not BEGOTTEN by God. Thus, he is not God's biological son, and is holy, but not divine, for nothing shares in divinity, according to Islam.
Not in Rome. Not a serious threat to bring down the Roman regime. The Zealots today would be considered a regional faction. One which Rome obliterated ca. AD 70. A serious enough threat to send the better part of half the Roman Army to extinguish.
John Hagee? What does he have to do with this discussion? Red Herring. How have you studied Biblical Archeology? Or, should I ask what you know about it?
yeah, this guy professes to steadfastly follow the Bible based on all archaeological evidence he has studied which has demonstrated the truth of and about Israel. what's so wrong with bringing this charlatan up on this thread?
What makes you so sure that GOD inspired any man? Because they told you so through one form of communication or another? Why doesn't GOD inspire you and me and everyone else while simplifying the interpretation of GOD's word? I question all things on this planet. So any retort, "you can't argue with GOD's word," just won't go very far beyond your own post.
Comments (99 - 116) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#59. To: buckeroo (#56)
Absolutely correct ... and yet no one (of any merit) seems to worship "theories" or "hypothesis."
#60. To: buckeroo (#58)
He certainly wasn't associated with the clans: Sadducee or a Pharisee, either.
#61. To: redleghunter (#59)
#62. To: buckeroo (#53)
#63. To: Don (#62)
#64. To: Don, cranko (#42)
#65. To: redleghunter (#46)
(Edited)
There was no "opposition party" to the Caesars.
#66. To: buckeroo, all (#63)
#67. To: redleghunter (#46)
There was no "opposition party" to the Caesars. Just think if Obolo was emperor in 30AD, would he mention Jesus Christ? Would the emperor's MSM give any coverage of the Sermon on the Mount? No. Emperor Obolo would send drones to strike Gethsemane.
#68. To: GarySpFC (#66)
#69. To: cranky (#0)
#70. To: buckeroo (#68)
That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations. Even then, they were thrown back as worthless but, they learned some skills by that time.
#71. To: A K A Stone (#39)
They just consider him a lying prophet.
#72. To: Vicomte13 (#64)
#73. To: cranky (#1)
#74. To: GarySpFC (#73)
“Long story short: of the 126 people listed by Paulkovich, there are only 10 or so whom we might expect to have written about Jesus,” they wrote. “And it’s probably worth mentioning that there are, of course, writers from the first centuries CE who refer to Jesus, and even write quite extensively about him. But since those authors all got bundled into a collection called the New Testament, we should probably just dismiss them from the discussion.”l
#75. To: cranky (#74)
But he is aware at the beginning of the second century that Christians have been named after Christ —Christ, of course, or “Christus,” the Latin equivalent of the Greek Christos, which in turn translates Mashiach, the Hebrew word that means “one who is anointed.” So, he actually knows that and talks about it. The other thing that’s important is he recognizes that it’s Pontius Pilate. Jesus wasn’t executed by the Jewish people; he was executed by the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, the governor of Judaea in the time of Emperor Tiberius. All of that, historically, is correct.
However, Tacitus does make one little mistake. He anachronistically reads the rank of governor as procurator back into the time of Pilate. Prior to the year 44 the governors in Judaea were prefects. And we actually have proof of that now, thanks to the Pilate Stone that was unearthed at Caesarea Maritima in 1961. There, the Pilate Stone refers to Pontius Pilatus, Praefectus Iudaea.
#76. To: GarySpFC (#75)
written sometime between ad 110 and 120
#77. To: GarySpFC (#70)
#78. To: buckeroo (#68)
That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations.
#79. To: cranko (#71)
No, Muslims consider Jesus a great prophet.
#80. To: Vicomte13 (#78)
#81. To: buckeroo (#61)
#82. To: BobCeleste (#65)
#83. To: redleghunter (#82)
Local rabble rousers:) Not a Roman opposition party.
#84. To: A K A Stone (#79)
(Edited)
No they don't. They say he is a liar and was not born of a virgin.
#85. To: buckeroo (#63)
#86. To: cranko aka jwpegler (#84)
#87. To: redleghunter (#81)
The substance is from reading the Gospels for over 40 years. [note: not learning]
#88. To: Don (#85)
Have you studied Biblical Archeology?
#89. To: buckeroo, Vicomte13 (#80)
Your agreement is further substantiation about a false Biblical record. The Old Testament or any written document is not handed down by GOD.
#90. To: GarySpFC, Vicomte13 (#89)
buckeroo: That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations.
When the Jews came back from Babylon, they had to make a choice: use the new form of letters they learned in Babylon, the "Aramaic" script, or to return to their old style letters, the "Ivrit" script. The majority went with Aramaic script, so what we today call "Hebrew" letters are not, in fact, Hebrew. They are Babylonian letters. The original Hebrew Ivrit script stopped being used, except by a few. There are some Ivrit texts at Qumran, and they are the oldest ones. Also, the Samaritan Pentateuch is written in Ivrit letters. This, too, was a reason that the returning Jews ended up keeping the Babylonian script and not readopting their old form of the letters (the alphabet itself is the same): the old form was used by the Samaritans, and the Jews wanted to clearly distinguish themselves from them.
#91. To: BobCeleste (#83)
That would qualify as a party opposed to Roman rule.
#92. To: buckeroo (#87)
After 40 years of reading "begat, begat, begat" which is the basis of the gospels, what have you learned from all your reading?
#93. To: buckeroo (#80)
#94. To: cranko (#84)
#95. To: redleghunter (#91)
That would qualify as a party opposed to Roman rule.
#96. To: buckeroo (#88)
#97. To: Don (#96)
John Hagee? What does he have to do with this discussion?
#98. To: Vicomte13 (#93)
The Scriptures were written by men, of course. They were inspired to write them by God.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]