See other Religion Articles
Title: Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 18, 2007
Author: Bible
Post Date: 2007-10-18 13:09:07 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 2509
Comments: 195
I find it curious that so many people have so much faith in men. And, in what men say, and this is esp. true when what the men says flys directly in the face of what they claim to represent/say. I hold to this firmly; A man is known by his actions, and not by his words. And this leads me directly to what is wrong with America; the churches. And specifically those churches which claim to be Christian churches. And to the men who serve in those churches, and who know that they lie. After all, such men do, supposedly, read the Bible. Well, they have at least one time in their lives I think it is fair to assume. More than that? Pretty doubtful actually. So this brings me to the question I posed in the title of this post; Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross? The only acceptable answer to this comes from the Bible. I assume that everyone who claims to be Christian will agree with this. My first Bible (that I read extensively) was The King James Study Bible. I have continued to use it, although I have more than a dozen different Bibles now. In the King James; Galatians 3:13; Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, CURSED is EVERYONE THAT HANGETH ON A TREE. Second witness; "...for it is written ... " ; Deutronomy 22:22; And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him from a tree; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shall in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) ... Now, this may come as a surprise to many of you, but a tree ain't a cross; it is a post. In the Spanish translation of the King James, it is clearer, for they use the term madero, which means board, or, post. In addition, if you have read anything about the Roman Empire, one of the notable facts about the Romans was their efficiency in killing people. And it is not efficient to use two pieces of wood, i.e., a cross, when a single piece of wood, a post, will suffice. And, in fact, this is how the Romans did hang those who they wished to make examples out of; on a post. (Yeah, yeah, I know; all the movies use crosses. And, your point is?) There is another point that must be made here; when a man is hung on a post, or, for that matter, if he were to be hung on a cross, with nails, YOU CAN NOT DRIVE THE NAILS THROUGH THE PALMS OF HIS HAND. It will not work, because when the post/cross is lifted up and dropped into the hole prepared for it, the nails will rip out of the hands and the man will drop to the ground. The Romans knew this from, I am sure, experience, and the nails were ALWAYS driven into the wrists of the victim, between the two bones of the arm. This is the only location which offers enough strength to be usuable is such a manner. The best depiction of Jesus being executed that I have seen is contained in the Watchtower book; What Does The Bible Really Teach? on page 52. What does this mean: If you are attending a so-called Christian church, which uses the cross as a part of their worship, and protrays Jesus on that cross with nails through the palms of his hand, then you are participating in a deliberate lie. And, you are in a church properly described in Revelations a one of the daughters of the whore of Babylon. (I paraphrase; not going to look it up today.) Now, let's look at a couple of other Bibles and see what is said; New American Standard Bible; Galatians 3:13; Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us -- for it is writte, "CUESED IS EVERY ONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE" -- Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, (23) his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), ... Pretty good. Not far off, but.... let's take a quick look at another Bible. Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text (George M. Lamsa's Translation from the Aramaic of the Peshitta); Galatians 3:13; Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming accursed for our sakes (for it is writtenm Crused is everyone who hangs on a cross). OOPS! WOW! Boy, do we need that second witness now! Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if any man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is crucified on a tree, and thus put to death; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree but you shall bury him the same day (for he who shall revile God shall be crucified), ... Gotta a problem here, because the second witness does not confirm what was written in Galatians. That means that there is an error in this Bible, and brings into question any quotes taken from it, unless they be confirmed by a second witness. And this problem probably stems from the translator wanting to believe what he had been taught about the cross. And rather than translate directly, he transposed his beliefs into the translation. I am a Christian; I freely and happily and contentedly proclaim this to be true. Chritianity is NOT a religion; it is a way of life, attempting to follow in the footsteps of The Christ. As a Christian, I have a responsibility to study His Word, that I not be lead into error. I accept that responsibility. I also accept the responsibility to help others to learn as well, that any errors that I or they hold may be revealed and corrected jointly. I have stated this before; I ask for correction in anything that I am in error on. And I have been corrected, and I thank those who help me to learn, and, (this is a big one!) change. I hope you find this post helpful, and that it helps to bring all of us to a wider understanding of what is being, deliberately, done to America, through what is supposed to be His church (people). Next post, in a day or so; Is Jesus Christ God?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-112) not displayed.
.
.
.
#113. To: Critter (#112)
Exactly - good grief.
You claim to be a college graduate, do you not? You should know how to write better if you are. I have judged your evidence. You're a typical Bible thumper. I make you for a retired government employee. Post Office? Social Security? HUD?
I'm claiming the angel Moroni never existed. I'm claiming the Book of Mormon is a complete fraud, like much of your Bible. I'm claiming the stories Joseph Smith told, like many of those told by early Christians, are either made up or stolen from other sources. You're not very familiar with anything outside your flavor of Christianity, are you?
That's more distant from Socrates's death than Paul's epistles and the early Gospels are from Christ's. Very good points. I hope that this thread runs a while because I hope to see someone illuminate the topic of the historicity of Jesus' life in a meaningful way, one way or another. I'll admit that I have a materialist point of view that I grew up with that makes it hard for me to accept the miraculous part of Jesus' story as given in the Gospels. I tend to view Jesus as a synthetic figure in whom are blended the features of so many of the gods or heros that came before him and in whom may be found the words and deeds of Jewish sages that preceded him by not all too many years. I assure you, however, that I have an entirely open mind on the subject and when you cite and authority like Grant, it would be nice if you would at least capsule the essence of his argument or provide a link. Guess I'll have to do a little research myself here. (BTW, when I said, "your friend, Grant" I was only being figurative. Not trying to bait you, sir.)
Gloria est pro petroleo mori.
Some of us prefer not to view our history through the prism of FAITH and Religious Dogma. Writers who lived during the time Jesus supposedly lived, leaving extensive written historic works, none mentioning Jesus once: Arrian, Plutarch, Apollonius, Hermogones, Appian, Damis, Aulus Gellius, Appion of Alexandria, Philo Judaeus, Petronius, Juvenal, Quintilian, Silius Italicus, Phlegon, Pausanias, Dio Chrysostom, Favorinus, Seneca, Dion Pruseus, Martial, Lucanus, Statius, Phaedrus, Florus Lucius, Columella, Lysias, Theon of Myrna, Pliny the Elder, Paterculus, Persius, Justus of Tiberius, Epictetus, Ptolemy, Valerius Maximus, Quintius Curtius, Valerius Flaccus, and Pomponius Mela. Modern writers who do not believe Jesus is a historic figure. Prof. Arthur Drews of Karlsruhe, Charles F. Dupuis, Robert Taylor, David F. Strauss, Kersey Graves, John M. Robertson, Thomas Whittaker, Robert Arthur Drews, Peter C. A. Jensen, William B. Smith, L. Gordon Rylands, P. L. Couchoud, and John E. Remsburg.
"cross occurs 28 times in 28 verses Cite This Page: Blue Letter Bible. "Dictionary and Word Search for 'cross' " . Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2002. 20 Oct 2007. http://www.blueletterbible.org/c...ords.pl?word=cross&page=1 Strong's concordance: Lexicon Results for stauros (Strong's G4716) Greek for G4716 Outline of Biblical Usage 1) a cross a) a well known instrument of most cruel and ignominious punishment, borrowed by the Greeks and Romans from the Phoenicians; to it were affixed among the Romans, down to the time of Constantine the Great, the guiltiest criminals, particularly the basest slaves, robbers, the authors and abetters of insurrections, and occasionally in the provinces, at the arbitrary pleasure of the governors, upright and peaceable men also, and even Roman citizens themselves b) the crucifixion which Christ underwent 2) an upright "stake", esp. a pointed one, used as such in fences or palisades Cite This Page: Blue Letter Bible. "Dictionary and Word Search for stauros (Strong's 4716)". Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2007. 20 Oct 2007. http:// http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm? Strongs=G4716&Version=kjv richard, have you ever read Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew? In it, he talks of the Jews deleting passages from the Bible, including that they would be saved "from the wood". It's not as easy to cut and paste from http://ccel.org anymore, but here is one reference from another site: Chapter 138. Noah is a figure of Christ, who has regenerated us by water, and faith, and wood: [i.e., the cross.] "You know, then, sirs," I said, "that God has said in Isaiah to Jerusalem: 'I saved you in the deluge of Noah.' By this which God said was meant that the mystery of saved men appeared in the deluge. For righteous Noah, along with the other mortals at the deluge, i.e., with his own wife, his three sons and their wives, being eight in number, were a symbol of the eighth day, wherein Christ appeared when He rose from the dead, for ever the first in power. For Christ, being the first-born of every creature, became again the chief of another race regenerated by Himself through water, and faith, and wood, containing the mystery of the cross; even as Noah was saved by wood when he rode over the waters with his household. Accordingly, when the prophet says, 'I saved you in the times of Noah,' as I have already remarked, he addresses the people who are equally faithful to God, and possess the same signs. For when Moses had the rod in his hands, he led your nation through the sea. And you believe that this was spoken to your nation only, or to the land. But the whole earth, as the Scripture says, was inundated, and the water rose in height fifteen cubits above all the mountains: so that it is evident this was not spoken to the land, but to the people who obeyed Him: for whom also He had before prepared a resting-place in Jerusalem, as was previously demonstrated by all the symbols of the deluge; I mean, that by water, faith, and wood, those who are afore-prepared, and who repent of the sins which they have committed, shall escape from the impending judgment of God. Dialogue with Trypho (Chapters 109-142) http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01284.htm The other relevant passages are these: Chapter LXXI.—The Jews reject the interpretation of the LXX., from which, moreover, they have taken away some passages. Chapter LXXII.—Passages have been removed by the Jews from Esdras and Jeremiah. Chapter LXXIII.—[The words] “From the wood” have been cut out of Ps. xcvi. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.toc.html Excerpt: "Chapter LXXIII.—[The words] “From the wood” have been cut out of Ps. xcvi. “And from the ninety-fifth (ninety-sixth) Psalm they have taken away this short saying of the words of David: ‘From the wood.’22222222 For when the passage said, ‘Tell ye among the nations, the Lord hath reigned from the wood,’ they have left, ‘Tell ye among the nations, the Lord hath reigned.’ Now no one of your people has ever been said to have reigned as God and Lord among the nations, with the exception of Him only who was crucified, of whom also the Holy Spirit affirms in the same Psalm that He was raised again, and freed from [the grave], declaring that there is none like Him among the gods of the nations: for they are idols of demons. But I shall repeat the whole Psalm to you, that you may perceive what has been said. It is thus: ‘Sing...... Here Trypho remarked, “Whether [or not] the rulers of the people have erased any portion of the Scriptures, as you affirm, God knows; but it seems incredible.” “Assuredly,” said I, “it does seem incredible. For it is more horrible than the calf which they made, when satisfied with manna on the earth; or than the sacrifice of children to demons; or than the slaying of the prophets. But,” said I, “you appear to me not to have heard the Scriptures which I said they had stolen away. For such as have been quoted are more than enough to prove the points in dispute, besides those which are retained by us,22242224 Many think, “you.” and shall yet be brought forward.”" http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iv.lxxiii.html Chapter LXXII.—Passages have been removed by the Jews from Esdras and Jeremiah. And I said, “I shall do as you please. From the statements, then, which Esdras made in reference to the law of the passover, they have taken away the following: ‘And Esdras said to the people, This passover is our Saviour and our refuge. And if you have understood, and your heart has taken it in, that we shall humble Him on a standard, and thereafter hope in Him, then this place shall not be forsaken for ever, says the God of hosts. But if you will not believe Him, and will not listen to His declaration, you shall be a laughing-stock to the nations.’22192219 It is not known where this passage comes from. And from the sayings of Jeremiah they have cut out the following: ‘I [was] like a lamb that is brought to the slaughter: they devised a device against me, saying, Come, let us lay on wood on His bread, and let us blot Him out from the land of the living; and His name shall no more be remembered.’22202220 Jer. xi. 19. And since this passage from the sayings of Jeremiah is still written in some copies 235 [of the Scriptures] in the synagogues of the Jews (for it is only a short time since they were cut out), and since from these words it is demonstrated that the Jews deliberated about the Christ Himself, to crucify and put Him to death, He Himself is both declared to be led as a sheep to the slaughter, as was predicted by Isaiah, and is here represented as a harmless lamb; but being in a difficulty about them, they give themselves over to blasphemy. And again, from the sayings of the same Jeremiah these have been cut out: ‘The Lord God remembered His dead people of Israel who lay in the graves; and He descended to preach to them His own salvation.’2221" Chapter LXXII.—Passages have been removed by the Jews from Esdras and Jeremiah. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iv.lxxii.html "standard" I like that word: Isa 49:22 Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in [their] arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon [their] shoulders. Isa 59:19 So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him. Isa 62:10 Go through, go through the gates; prepare ye the way of the people; cast up, cast up the highway; gather out the stones; lift up a standard for the people. [Isa 62:11 Behold, the LORD hath proclaimed unto the end of the world, Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation cometh; behold, his reward [is] with him, and his work before him. Isa 62:12 And they shall call them, The holy people, The redeemed of the LORD: and thou shalt be called, Sought out, A city not forsaken.] more: Cite This Page: Blue Letter Bible. "Dictionary and Word Search for 'standard' " . Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2002. 21 Oct 2007. http://www.blueletterbible.org/c...s.pl?word=standard&page=1 Strong's concordance "standard" Lexicon Results for nec (Strong's H5251) Hebrew for H5251 Outline of Biblical Usage 1) something lifted up, standard, signal, signal pole, ensign, banner, sign, sail a) standard (as rallying point), signal b) standard (pole) c) ensign, signal see the rest: Cite This Page: Blue Letter Bible. "Dictionary and Word Search for nec (Strong's 05251)". Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2007. 20 Oct 2007. http:// http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm? Strongs=H05251&Version=kjv His standard here since 1607: Cape Henry Memorial - Plan Your Visit (U.S. National Park Service) They built a wooden cross and planted it in the sand naming the place Cape Henry. This is the first landing site of those adventurous Englishmen who, ... http://www.nps.gov/came/planyourvisit/index.htm
The lessons Jesus is alleged to have taught are important. It is not important whether he lived or not. It is the bundle of decent principles he is quoted as addressing that make him important, not the ridiculous religion people like the Apostle Paul and an army of Catholic Bishops created, or the beast that exists today as modern Christendom. I reject religion, including Christianity. I accept the positive lessons Jesus is said to have taught, and am a lot more dedicated to them than most Christians, because the essence of the Christian is a belief in worship and mythology. If Jesus lived, he certainly would not want all the rampant ass kissing directed at him so many Christians routinely perform in public. I support the programs that represent the ideals Jesus is alleged to have espoused, things like programs for criminals and their families, like programs for underage at risk pregnant girls, like programs to help criminals learn how not to be criminals, like food for poor people, like health care for poor people. Not one dime of my money, or the money of the charities I support, go to pay administrative costs. Every dime goes to the costs of some direct action, whether it's helping a family relocated from Katrina, or buying Christmas for the destitute families of prisoners. Most religious people are consumed with ritual, with the entirely manufactured parts of religion, which is to say most of religion. Each has some vision of their God, and instead of focusing on the actual teachings of Jesus, for example, they dwell on something they read from the Old Testament, or from the mad hatter of Christianity, the original Log Cabin Republican, the Apostle Paul aka Saul of Taursus.
Has anyone here ever looked into the Essenes? Yes. I think Jesus, if he lived, was probably of the Essenes. I think there may have been a teacher, a rabbi, who was a model for the Jesus story. Or he could have been a composite, with lessons built around the elements of the ancient sun myth. The story of Jesus fits the astro theology requirements of the sun myth, but it also includes many lessons which are found in texts as early as The Epic of Gilgamesh, before Abraham ever had his first close encounter. The Gnostic gospels, including those of Mary Magdalene, are important because they prove that early Christians were much more Eastern in their philosophies than the constipated Catholics who would expunge the gnostics from the Bible.
Ari said little to nothing about the story of Jesus that I can recall. From what I remember is that he, correctly, pointed out that there is actual historical data from several disparate sorces naming a personage that very well matches Jesus and his time. I view this as history, debatable sure, but history. Did a man that inspired the writer's of the gospels existed? Something must had moved them to write the ancient text, it seems to me. Did other such men exist whose good works affected the thinking of men, yet whose personal histories were forever lost? I say Yes. Heck Yes.
"Satan / Cheney in "08"
Oh come on Paul. That's no way to have a discussion. Here at least. I am excited by the idea to talk about the flaws of of the church, for they are, to me, Legion, and the divergence of what Christ taught and what passes for "christian thinking" by the Newt's of the world.
"Satan / Cheney in "08"
If you want to discuss something of substance, then do so, but keep your chiding to yourself.
Yes, being an asshole makes you right - and if people don't see that, then are stupid. You tell them!
Bunch of internet bums ... grand jury --- opium den ! ~ byeltsin
Let's not forget ... the children. Can we please all get along for the sake of the children? Someone's praying, Lord ....
The facts related to the existence or non-existence of Jesus Christ may be forth coming, the fact that Revere is an arrogant asshole is immediate.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
Never heard of a one of them. I asked for the name of an ancient historian. Correction: on consideration, I think I have heard of two of them. L. Gordon Rylands was an early 20th-century papyrologist, if I am not mistaken. And David F. Strauss was a French Biblical scholar of the mid-19th century. So I guess you have established that there have been a few scholars who have adopted your view. Further correction: David Friedrich Strauss was German, not French. (Renan was the Frenchman I was thinking of.) However, while Strauss denied the divinity of Christ and maintained the miracles in the New Testament are mythical, he did not deny the historical reality of Christ. Far from it. In fact, he seems to have been the first to have written about the "historical Jesus." I wonder how many of the other people on your list don't belong there.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
I'm claiming the stories Joseph Smith told, like many of those told by early Christians, are either made up or stolen from other sources. But what you're denying is just just the truth of the Bible, but the very existence of the founder of Christianity. If Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard had not existed, there wouldn't be any Mormonism or Scientology around, now, would there? You keep accusing me of having some ulterior motive for insisting that it is probable that someone named Jesus existed. But it is you who is showing a strange passion on the subject, even after I have shown you that scholars in general regard your view as irrational and disreputable.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Ive not been following all of your replies but was the extra-biblical writings of Josephus mentioned? Although I remember reading one of the passages are in question not sure if all are though.
I have provided links above. Look at the Wikipedia entry, for example.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
There's controversy about the authenticity of the passage or passages in Josephus (I don't even know enough about the matter to know whether or not there is more than one of them.) A lot of scholars think Josephus mentioned Jesus, but the passage or passages was/were later altered to make them more acceptable to later Christians. I've never made a study of the matter, so I can't speak authoritatively. (You'd need to know esoteric matters like the manuscript history of the text of Josephus.) It's for that sort of reason that I've been relying on scholarly authorities here, instead of trying to offer opinions of my own.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
It's been quite a few years since I've read the texts by Josephus.. looking at the entry in Wiki seems not a good source as far as the mention of Jesus.. thx carry on ! :P
I reject religion, including Christianity. I accept the positive lessons Jesus is said to have taught, and am a lot more dedicated to them than most Christians, because the essence of the Christian is a belief in worship and mythology. If Jesus lived, he certainly would not want all the rampant ass kissing directed at him so many Christians routinely perform in public. Ever stop to consider that there might be some connection between your rejection of religion and the sort of character you exhibit in your postings?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
That's more distant from Socrates's death than Paul's epistles and the early Gospels are from Christ's. And Herodotus is our only source for a lot of historical events and persons from a couple of generations (or even longer, up to a century or two) before he wrote his history. Historians generally only doubt details in Herodotus's account, not the existence of the people. The lives of Alexander contain a lot of fantastic details that nobody accepts as fact. That doesn't make people doubt the existence of Alexander.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
My, what tact you exhibit! Do you think that sort of language will persuade anybody? Is that an example of the reasoning you use in court?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Well, thanks aristeides for the link. Unfortunately, your link has about as much to say about Grant's arguments in favor of the historicity of the Gospels & the life of Jesus as this morning's Krogers receipt. I've spent the better part of an hour today surfing for the outlines of Grant's thinking on the subject and came up with little more than the quotes that you gave us above reiterated a dozen times. Guess I'll have to buy his books to see where this gentleman was at. Like I say, my mind is always open to new (& old) ideas), but I still want to know, "Where's the Beef?
Gloria est pro petroleo mori.
It matters that Jesus Christ lived--and died. God is a living God. Whether you like that, or accept it, or hate it is of little consequence to anyone, but you- -except for the fact that as a follower of Christ, I would prefer to see you obtain eternal life. The ideal would be for all to have eternal life. But His teachings tell us that He is the truth, the light, the way. Upon what do you base your assertion that Paul is a 'mad hatter'?
You're wrong again, as usual. Jesus had NOTHING to do with the creation of Christianity.
About this statement, you are correct.
Go sell crazy somewhere else, lady.
About this statement, you are correct. If Josephus mentioned Jesus, doesn't that imply Jesus existed?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
You can't be that stupid.
You're wrong again, as usual. Jesus had NOTHING to do with the creation of Christianity. When you can't win the argument, change the subject. Because you've lost the argument about whether Jesus existed, you change the subject to whether he founded Christianity.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Another example of your superb manners. Do you really believe such behavior is going to persuade or impress anybody? If I had manners like yours, I might say something about stupidity myself. I notice, by the way, how you've had nothing to say about how I've shown you were precisely wrong about the views of David Friedrich Strauss.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Jesus had nothing do with the creation of Christianity. That was done by fools who can't fathom spiritual matters, who can only understand silly rituals, and fumbling with beads, and worshipping idols, and thinking they've got it figured out. The fact that you think Jesus created Christianity demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of early history or how Christianity was created. You think that if you say something enough it becomes true. It doesn't. You're just another religious fool, stuck in first gear.
Nagging is your primary arguing tool, and I can see why, since you've got nothing else. And you'll keep nagging on this, and I'll keep telling you to go fuck yourself.
Is that an example of the reasoning you use in court? Let me explain this in simple terms, so there's a possibility it might be understood by you. This is a conversation about a topic. I'm not trying to persuade anyone of anything. I don't care what your opinion is, but when you state things as if they're fact and I know they're not, I'm going to call you a liar and a fool, if not both. This is also not a court of law. If it were, I would be there and you wouldn't, because you couldn't beat a first year lawyer in court. Admit it. You've never even tried a case, and couldn't cross examine a witness if your life depended on it. Since I've won a number of multi million dollar jury verdicts, I think that's very good evidence my persuasive abilities and demeanor in court are just fine. Now how many jury trials have you won, professor NOBODY?
Why would they be inclined to write about a 'nobody' from the Galilee? He wasn't born to notable parents, he wasn't a part of some rebellion, or uprising, nor did he 'discover' some star, or some piece of high technology, nor was he a part of any ruling class or community.
About this statement, you are correct. ======================================= If Josephus mentioned Jesus, doesn't that imply Jesus existed? The Pharisees think He existed: Who Was Jesus? The Bible gave a warning about a dangerous, false prophet who would arise to test our faith in G-d. In Deuteronomy 13, G-d describes this ... www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm : Who Was Jesus? The Bible gave a warning about a dangerous, false prophet who would arise to test our faith in G-d. In Deuteronomy 13, G-d describes this false prophet as a member of the Jewish people (v. 2, 7) who would tell true prophecies and would have the power of miracles. G-d Himself would give this false prophet the power to perform miracles and reveal prophecy, but the false prophet would try to seduce the people away from G-d's Law and towards strange gods unknown to Judaism. The purpose would be to test whether we are truly committed to living under the Law, or whether we will be dazzled and fall for the temptation to join a false path to salvation (v. 3-6, 7-8, 11). In this Biblical passage, G-d repeatedly commands the Jews to kill this false prophet, lest the evil spread and destroy many souls. To be accepted by the people, the false prophet would sometimes pretend to be a righteous Jew who fulfills the Law, but at key moments he would turn against certain details of the Law in order to make the breach (v. 6, 7). This is the reason that verse 1 commands us not to add or subtract any details from the Law, and verse 5 warns us to remain steadfast with all the traditions of the Law. In Deuteronomy 17, this false prophet is also described as someone who would rebel against the authority of the judges of the Jewish people, and who should be put to death for his rebelliousness (v. 8-13, esp. v. 12). Who are the judges? The highest court in Israel was the Sanhedrin, which was established by Moses (Exodus 18:13-26; Numbers 11:16-29), and which lasted more than 15 centuries. The members of the Sanhedrin were the rabbis known as "Pharisees" (Pirushim, "those with the explanation"). G-d gave permanent authority to these judges to interpret the Law and G-d's Word, and it is a commandment to follow their decisions without turning even slightly to the right or the left (Deut. 17:11). But the false prophet would challenge the authority of the Sanhedrin, thus revealing himself to be an evil man. In the book of the prophet Daniel, this false prophet is described as a king (the eleventh horn on a terrible beast) who would wage war against the Jews (the "holy ones"; see Deut. 14:2 on this term) and would change the Law including the calendar and the holidays (Daniel 7:8, 20-25). Elsewhere, this false prophet is described as a king who would disregard the G-d of his fathers, exalting himself as a god and giving honor to this new god-head (Daniel 11:36-39). The man known today as "Jesus" fulfilled all these prophecies. He became a "king" (over the Christian church) who changed the original Law, doing away with the Hebrew calendar and the Biblical holidays (Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkos the Festival of Tabernacles, Passover, etc.). He disregarded the one, infinite G-d of the Hebrew Bible in favor of a new "trinity" that included himself. And he repeatedly broke the Law by committing terrible sins, while openly challenging the G-d-given authority of the rabbis of the Sanhedrin. Naturally, Jesus did sometimes pretend to respect the Law, but whenever he thought he could get away with it, he turned right around and broke that same Law. In Matthew 5:17-19, he declared that he came to fulfill the Law, and in Matthew 23:1-3 he defended the authority of the rabbis. But the rest of the time, he rebelled against the Law—thus showing that his occasional words of piety were meant only to hide his evil agenda. The following sins of Jesus are recorded in the "New Testament": 1. Jesus repudiated the laws of kosher food (Mark 7:18-19). [Compare this to the prophet Daniel's strict adherence to kashrus, in Daniel chapter 1.] 2. He repudiated the laws of honoring one's parents, and called on his followers to hate their parents; he also dishonored his own mother (Matthew 10:34-36; Matthew 12:46-50; Luke 14:26). 3. He violated the Sabbath by picking grain, and incited his disciples to do the same (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-26). 4. 4) He again violated the Sabbath by healing a man's arm, which was not a matter of saving a life, and he openly defied the rabbis in his total repudiation of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9-13; Mark 3:1-5). [Compare this to G-d's view of violating the Sabbath, in Numbers 15:32-36, Nehemiah 10:30-32, and dozens of other places throughout the Bible.] 5. Jesus brazenly defied and disobeyed the rabbis of the Sanhedrin, repudiating their authority (This is recorded in many places throughout the New Testament, but look especially at Matthew 23:13-39 and John 8:44-45). The Talmud (Babylonian edition) records other sins of "Jesus the Nazarene": 1. He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a). 2. He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a). 3. He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh—which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b). The false, rebellious message of Jesus has been thoroughly rejected by the vast majority of the Jewish people, as G-d commanded. Unfortunately, however, this same message has brought a terrible darkness upon the world; today, over 1.5 billion gentiles believe in Jesus. These lost souls mistakenly think they have found salvation in Jesus; tragically, they are in for a rude awakening. Truth and eternal life are found directly from G-d, through performing His Law. Any "mediator" only separates man from G-d: 1. "G-d is not a man, who can lie, nor the son of man, who relents... He has not beheld iniquity in Jacob, nor has He seen perverseness in Israel" (Numbers 23:19). 2. Speaking prophetically of the Christian church, Moses declared, "For their 'rock' is not like our Rock... Where is their god, in whom they trusted?" (Deut. 32:31, 37). 3. "'See now that I, only I, am He, and there is no god with Me. I kill, and I bring to life; I wound, and I heal, and there is none who can rescue from My Hand...' Sing songs of joy, gentiles, with His people, for He will avenge the blood of His servants, and will take vengeance on His enemies, and will forgive His land and His people" (Deut. 32:39, 43). 4. "I, only I am Hashem (the L-rd), and besides Me there is no savior" (Isaiah 43:11). 5. "I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god... Is there a god besides Me? There is no rock; I do not know any" (Isaiah 44:6). 6. "Israel is saved in Hashem with an eternal salvation... Assemble yourselves and come, come near together, you gentiles who have escaped [the judgment]. (They have no knowledge, those who carry wooden sculptures and who pray to a god that does not save.) Announce and bring near, even take counsel together: Who declared this from ancient times, and announced it from then? Is it not I, Hashem? And there are no other gods beside Me, nor any righteous and saving god other than Me. Turn to Me and be saved, all ends of the earth, for I am G-d and there is none else. By Myself I swore, a righteous word went out of my mouth and it will not be withdrawn, that to Me every knee will bow and every tongue will swear" (Isaiah 45:17, 20-23). What is the true key to salvation? Those who return to the Law (the Seven Commandments for the Children of Noah, according to the eternal covenant made with Noah in Genesis 9) and who assist the Jewish people (Isaiah 60, 61, 66) will be saved and will participate in the miracles and revelations, including worshipping in the Third Temple, under the kingship of the Messiah. As described in many places, including Jeremiah 16:19-21 and Zechariah 8:20-23, all the old gentile religions of the world will disappear, and their followers will turn to the Jews for spiritual leadership. Until then, Christians are spiritually blinded, and cannot yet understand G-d's wisdom in the Bible. Ours is the last generation of the era of sin and evil and the first of the Messianic Era. Indeed, for the first time in history, there is a growing consensus of leading rabbis willing to name the man most suited to be the Messiah, and they are agreeing that he is the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson. The Rebbe is the spiritual leader of our generation, having boldly stirred up controversy over vital issues in which other leaders have remained tragically silent or have even caved in to the growing forces of darkness. He has upheld the Law perfectly and has worked mightily to strengthen the observance of the Law by Jews, as well as the observance of the Noachide Law by gentiles. Through his teaching of chasidus (Jewish mystical teachings, preserved from Moses and Mount Sinai), he has taught the world that G-d is One, the Infinite Who renews creation at every moment. The Rebbe is a direct descendant of King David and has received a true prophecy from G-d that we who are alive in this generation shall be the first in history to see the coming of the true messiah. Many Jews are eagerly anticipating the Rebbe's resurrection from the grave, ready to re-establish the Sanhedrin and anoint the king. Our job is to finish preparing the way, by announcing the truth and bringing all of mankind back to the Law immediately. Through our divinely mandated efforts, we shall now clear the path for the return of the Garden of Eden and the establishment of the eternal sinless world promised by Isaiah and the other Biblical prophets. ["yeshu" is a derogatory term. Zionist Christians - A Mossad Operation ....Do Zionist Christians Know That The Name Of Jesus Was Changed In Israel?.....Jesus' name in Hebrew had been changed so that it is now an acronym meaning 'Be His Name and Memories Forgotten.' By Reuven Schossen ... www.middleeast.org/forum/fb-public/1/4541.shtml Jesus' Membrum in the Talmud What did the Jewish priests think of Jesus? This information will supplement Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John -- a must read for serious Christians. www.come-and-hear.com/editor/censorship_2.html
okaaay....been suspicious of that "church" since I saw it last night. closing some windows, but am going to "park" them here until I can study them further.... started with a search "merovee fish" [don't ask me why, 'cause i don't know why] THE SIX~POINTED STAR THE MARK OF THE BEAST PART II HISTORY OF THE SIX-POINTED STAR [fish, merovee, Dagon, etc.] =================== The Roman Eagle (aquila) [Roman eagle, German eagle, Maccabes, Dan, snake, Habsburgs, Charlemagne, ODIN, Gauls, Franks, Celts [***isn't that a celtic knot in that mosaic?], Greeks, German "Kaiser", Russian "Tsar", USA re Roman Empire, etc.] www.chinahistoryforum.com...ion/index.php/t15405.html =========================== **** THE FALSE GOSPEL IN THE STARS PREPARING THE WAY OF THE ANTICHRIST . . .and the False Prophet and 10 kings downsized to 7 and. . . PISCES THE TWO FISHES "....THE TWIN MESSIAHS Gnostics claim to venerate Jesus and John the Baptist as the ‘twin messiahs.’ As Jesus was the “Christ” for the Age of Pisces, John, the Gnostic Christ, will incarnate another messiah for the Age of Aquarius. This is the reason all Grand Masters of the Prieuré de Sion take the name of John (Jean). The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail disclosed that for some time there has been in existence an esoteric papacy as well as the exoteric papacy of the Roman Catholic Church:...." "....Students of Scripture may recognize Oannes as the Philistine god, Dagon, but may not realize that this fish-god is also the ‘beast that rises out of the sea,’ in Rev. 13:1. Dagobert’s Revenge identifies Oannes as ‘Lucifer’ whose fallen angels sired a race of giants, the Nephilim, in Genesis 6: “...Dagon or Oannes, a half-human, half-fish combination who was known as the ‘Lord of the Flood’...was said to rise out of the sea every day to teach his secret knowledge to those who followed him. He is mentioned in Samuel, Chapter 5, when the Philistines capture the Ark of the Covenant and place it in the Temple of Dagon. Two nights later, ‘Dagon was fallen upon is face to the ground before the Ark of the Lord; and the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him.’ It is this character upon which Satan or Lucifer is based, but the physical description attributed to him applied to an entire race of ‘gods’, or as they were described in the Bible, Nephilim, or Fallen Angels, the ‘Great Old Ones’...” “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose… There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” Gen. 6:1-4 Oannes was the same fish-god described in Bloodline of the Holy Grail as the ‘mysterious sea-beast’ which sired Merovee, the Frankish king who founded the Merovingian dynasty. For this reason, **** the Merovingian dynasty were designated “Fisher Kings.” “Despite the carefully listed genealogies of his time, the heritage of Meroveus was strangely obscured in the monastic annals. Although the rightful son of Clodion, he was nonetheless said by the historian Priscus to have been sired by an arcane sea creature, the Bistea Neptunis.. “The Sicambrian Franks, from whose female line the Merovingians emerged were associated with Grecian Arcadia before migrating to the Rhineland. As we have seen, they called themselves the Newmage – ‘People of the New Covenant’, just as the Essenes of Qumran had once been known. It was the Arcadian legacy that was responsible for the mysterious sea beast – the Bistea Neptunis – as symbolically defined in the Merovingian ancestry. The relevant sea-lord was King Pallas, a god of old Arcadia... The immortal sea-lord was said to be ‘ever-incarnate in a dynasty of ancient kings’ whose symbol was a fish – as was the traditional symbol of Jesus.” (pp.166,175) “And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy...and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.” Rev. 13:1-2 In his blasphemous book, The Real Meaning of the Zodiac, D. James Kennedy stated: “In Pisces these fishes are a representation of the Church.” Fred Gettings associated the fish emblem with the so-called “Christian zodiac,” which the Neo-Platonists based on the pagan Zodiac. “In the Christian zodiac, as in the pagan zodiac, the two fishes of Pisces appear to be associated with the idea of the spirit and soul... Whether this Neoplatonic notion did influence the symbolism of Pisces or not, the spiritual nature of the fishes was adapted by the medieval image-makers as relating very distinctly to the spiritual nature of Christ. In any case, from the earliest times, Christ had been linked with the image of the fish. The drawings of fish in the catacombs were symbols for Christ, and a whole battery of more or less esoteric interpretation was erected to account for this symbolism. A sample of this esotericism, derived from a Sibylline prophecy, is set out in the notes on Augustine's acrostical treatment of the fish...” (911:28-9) Christians have been badly misinformed that the fish symbol represents Christ and His followers because they are “fishers of men.” This pagan emblem, which derives from the pagan zodiac, found its way into the Catholic Church via St. Augustine, a Neo-Platonist. Augustine attempted to justify the adoption of elements of pagan worship in the Church's syncretism, thereby Christianizing pagan practices, emblems and even pagan deities. Augustine wrote concerning the fish: “If you combine the initial letters of the five Greek words, which are Iesous Chreistos Theou Uios Soter, Jesus Christ the Son of God the Saviour, they make the word ichthus, meaning fish, and the mystic meaning of this noun is Christ, because He had power to exist alive, that is, without sin, in the bottomless pit of our mortal life, as in the depths of the sea.” In The Two Babylons, Alexander Hislop stated that Jesus Christ “began to be popularly called ICHTHYS (or ICHTHUS), that is 'the Fish', manifestly to identify Him with Dagon...[and] that Icthus, or the Fish, was one of the names of Bacchus.” Dagon was the Philistine Fish-deity and Bacchus was the Greek name for Tammuz, the Babylonian Sun-god. Making an artistic representation of the fish for religious reasons is forbidden in the Book of Deuteronomy. “Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.” (Deut. 4:15-19)...." www.watch.pair.com/pisces.html also: THE LOST TRIBE OF DAN: "Fish merovingian" and www.watch.pair.com/dan.html#3c1
Still no admission that you were totally wrong about David Friedrich Strauss? So how many of the people on your list actually did say Jesus did not exist, or even cast his existence into doubt? How many of them had any expertise on the matter? What evidence do you have? If you have no evidence that any experts have agreed with you, what does that mean? Do you really think ad hominem arguments attacking me do anything to prove your case?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
God, you're a cry baby. Whiner. This is why you could never try a case. You're incapable of focusing on the big picture. You get bogged down on some point YOU think matters. There's a reason why you peaked in life 40 years ago. See if you can figure it out.
Comments (154 - 195) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestDoes it really matter?
#114. To: aristeides (#109)
(Edited)
You claim to be a lawyer, do you not? I think that means being able to judge evidence.
#115. To: aristeides (#110)
(Edited)
Are you claiming Joseph Smith did not exist?
#116. To: aristeides (#108)
Plato seems to have written a generation or more after the death of Socrates.
#117. To: all (#110)
(Edited)
#118. To: richard9151 (#0)
(Edited)
#119. To: All (#117)
#120. To: richard9151 (#0)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#121. To: FormerLurker (#120)
(Edited)
the Essenes
#122. To: Paul Revere, aristeides (#101)
You're trying to bogart your way past the fact that you have no proof Jesus was ever born, so you believe what you want to believe. And contrary to your statement, you're more than a little bit religious. Just admit that you think of yourself as a Christian, and you believe the story of Jesus because you have faith, not proof.
#123. To: Paul Revere (#114)
I have judged your evidence. You're a typical Bible thumper. I make you for a retired government employee. Post Office? Social Security? HUD?
#124. To: tom007 (#123)
(Edited)
#125. To: Paul Revere (#124)
Why do you have this unctuous need to smooth discussions, and why do you think I care? If you don't like the way I opine, too bad. I'm not here to satisfy your need for friendly discussions. I'm having a discussion with Ari, your buddy, because he thinks he's an authority on whether Jesus existed. Hold his balls if you must, but don't bother me
#126. To: All (#124)
#127. To: Minerva (#125)
Yes, being an asshole
#128. To: Paul Revere (#117)
(Edited)
Prof. Arthur Drews of Karlsruhe, Charles F. Dupuis, Robert Taylor, David F. Strauss, Kersey Graves, John M. Robertson, Thomas Whittaker, Robert Arthur Drews, Peter C. A. Jensen, William B. Smith, L. Gordon Rylands, P. L. Couchoud, and John E. Remsburg.
#129. To: Paul Revere (#115)
I'm claiming the angel Moroni never existed. I'm claiming the Book of Mormon is a complete fraud, like much of your Bible.
#130. To: aristeides (#128)
#131. To: randge (#116)
provide a link.
#132. To: Zipporah (#130)
#133. To: aristeides (#132)
#134. To: Paul Revere (#119)
It is not important whether he lived or not. It is the bundle of decent principles he is quoted as addressing that make him important, not the ridiculous religion people like the Apostle Paul and an army of Catholic Bishops created, or the beast that exists today as modern Christendom.
#135. To: randge (#116)
Plato seems to have written a generation or more after the death of Socrates.
#136. To: Paul Revere (#114)
I have judged your evidence. You're a typical Bible thumper. I make you for a retired government employee. Post Office? Social Security? HUD?
#137. To: aristeides (#131)
#138. To: Paul Revere (#119)
#139. To: aristeides (#129)
(Edited)
But what you're denying is just just the truth of the Bible, but the very existence of the founder of Christianity.
#140. To: aristeides (#132)
There's controversy about the authenticity of the passage or passages in Josephus (I don't even know enough about the matter to know whether or not there is more than one of them.) A lot of scholars think Josephus mentioned Jesus, but the passage or passages was/were later altered to make them more acceptable to later Christians.
#141. To: aristeides (#134)
(Edited)
Ever stop to consider that there might be some connection between your rejection of religion and the sort of character you exhibit in your postings?
#142. To: Paul Revere (#140)
A lot of scholars think Josephus mentioned Jesus, but the passage or passages was/were later altered to make them more acceptable to later Christians.
#143. To: aristeides (#142)
If Josephus mentioned Jesus, doesn't that imply Jesus existed?
#144. To: Paul Revere (#139)
But what you're denying is just just the truth of the Bible, but the very existence of the founder of Christianity.
#145. To: Paul Revere (#141)
(Edited)
Go sell crazy somewhere else, lady.
#146. To: aristeides (#144)
(Edited)
#147. To: aristeides (#145)
(Edited)
#148. To: aristeides (#136)
(Edited)
My, what tact you exhibit! Do you think that sort of language will persuade anybody?
#149. To: Paul Revere (#117)
#150. To: aristeides (#142)
(Edited)
A lot of scholars think Josephus mentioned Jesus, but the passage or passages was/were later altered to make them more acceptable to later Christians.
#151. To: Alan Chapman (#80)
#152. To: Paul Revere (#147)
#153. To: aristeides (#152)
(Edited)
.
.
.