If God Made Everything, Who Made Him ?

[Quarter bull 240]

Goodnight

[Quarter bull 240]

Goodnight

[Truther 1,579]

Here you go truther, wouldn't be arsed to text it out so I found this, any more supposed, mistakes cause that's petty an proves nothing.

 

More than One Census

Although on its face we seem to have a difficulty here, there are several pieces that we must consider before jumping to the conclusion that Luke and Josephus were speaking about the same event. Indeed, it seems that Caesar Augustus was the type of leader who ordered many censuses in his day. Records exist to show that Roman-controlled Egypt had begun a census as early as 10 B.C. and it was repeated every 14 years. And Augustus himself notes in his Res Gestae (The Deeds of Augustus) that he ordered three wide-spread censuses of Roman citizens, one in 28B.C., one in 8 B.C. and one in 14 A.D.2 In between there are several other censuses that happened locally across Rome. Luke's account corroborates the idea of multiple censuses for Judea when he writes "This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria." Certainly, the word "first" implies that more than one census happened.

On another occasion, an enrollment of all the people of the empire happened to swear an oath of allegiance to Caesar. In Chapter 34 of Res Gestae Augustus also notes, "When I administered my thirteenth consulate (2 B.C.E.), the senate and Equestrian order and Roman people all called me father of the country, and voted that the same be inscribed in the vestibule of my temple".3 Josephus also mentions a time "When all good people gave assurance of their good will to Caesar".4 These types of tributes would also require an enrollment of individuals from across the empire. Orosius, a fifth century Christian, links this registration with the birth of Jesus saying that "all of the peoples of the great nations were to take an oath".5

Taking all of this together, we have at least three censuses in the area of Judea - one in 8 B.C., one starting around 2 B.C. and one in 6 A.D. The only point that is really in question, then, is whether Luke was mistaken in ascribing this census to the time when Quirinius was in the role of Syrian Governor. Since Quirinius wasn't governor of the Syrian province until after Archelaus was deposed, critics claim Luke misidentified the census as the smaller one, which happened some 8-10 years after Herod died. Either Luke is wrong on his dating of Jesus' birth or Matthew made up the story of Herod the Great and the killing of the infants. Is this an accurate objection?

The Governorship of Quirinius

In studying this problem, there are two main solutions that Christian scholars offer, and each has some good merit. The first point is the terminology Luke uses when writing about Quirinius' governorship over Syria. In stating that Quirinius controlled the Syrian area, Luke doesn't use the official political title of "Governor" ("legatus"), but the broader term "hegemon" which is a ruling officer or procurator. This means that Quirinius may not have been the official governor of Judea, but he was in charge of the census because he was a more capable and trusted servant of Rome than the more inept Saturninus.

Justin Martyr's Apology supports this view, writing that Quirinius was a "procurator", not a governor of the area of Judea.6 As Gleason Archer writes, "In order to secure efficiency and dispatch, it may well have been that Augustus put Quirinius in charge of the census-enrollment in Syria between the close of Saturninus's administration and the beginning of Varus's term of service in 7 B.C. It was doubtless because of his competent handling of the 7 B.C. census that Augustus later put him in charge of the 7 A.D. census."7 Archer also says that Roman history records Quirinius leading the effort to quell rebels in that area at exactly that time, so such a political arrangement is not a stretch.

If Quirinius did hold such a position, then we have no contradiction. The first census was taken during the time of Jesus birth, but Josephus' census would have come later. This option seems to me to be entirely reasonable.

 

Assumptions QB, fact is there is no record of the census, funny how they kept records of other censuses but the important one is missing? He ends on "this option seems to me to be entirely reasonable" in other words, its an opinion and nothing factual, afraid this changes nothing mate.

 

Sorry you think me calling you "deluded" was meant to be an insult mate, it wasn't, here's the definition "make (someone) believe something that is not true" as there's no evidence that the bible is true its just an accurate description of anyone who believes in it, and that's not an "opinion" its factual.

[Quarter bull 240]

Truther if that's all you've got mate to discredit the bible then I think your deluded, what's not to say the two above is not true, there's a better reason for it as well, but its being well put to bed with when Jesus was born, the bible is full of it with records as you say...

 

If that's what your discrediting the bible then I would say your deluded, how about look in the bible for guarantees of when an were Jesus birth cause there's loads of records as you say......an because the record is missing for one of Luke's description that don't mean it didn't happen does it

 

 

Example

 

Dossier of paedophiles Leon Britt on supposedly got, it disappeared destroyed, we knew it was there but no evidence for it,

[Quarter bull 240]

Truther if that's all you've got mate to discredit the bible then I think your deluded, what's not to say the two above is not true, there's a better reason for it as well, but its being well put to bed with when Jesus was born, the bible is full of it with records as you say...

 

If that's what your discrediting the bible then I would say your deluded, how about look in the bible for guarantees of when an were Jesus birth cause there's loads of records as you say......an because the record is missing for one of Luke's description that don't mean it didn't happen does it

 

 

Example

 

Dossier of paedophiles Leon Britt on supposedly got, it disappeared destroyed, we knew it was there but no evidence for it,

[RemyBolt 420]

 

As for the "God created death and evil and imperfection" argument, this is an odd one. The world as God originally created it was perfect. Death was not a part of the Garden of Eden. When man sinned, that's when he became mortal and started to suffer. That's when disease was created. It was a corruption of what God put in place for us. We were meant to exist in perfection, but ruined it for ourselves…darn Adam + Eve. Screwed us all.

 

If we were meant to exist in perfection why would a loving god immediately attempt to undermine it? Why wouldn't he have simply created a place that we couldn't screw up? More to the point is the Tree Of Knowledge a euphemism? From the writers of the religious texts? So that we're encouraged not to think for ourselves? But I digress...

 

The biggest problem I have with the text is it's origin. The way it's been written. Re-written. Changed. Translated. Redacted. Re-translated and written again. The current "correct" version was written in the 1600's. That's a 500 year margin of error.

 

But what about kids dying and the alike? What about natural disasters killing millions and the alike? The Bible says that man has dominion over all things on this earth. Within that it includes disease, sickness, health, famine, wars, and the alike. The issue is that we're too busy watching TV and stuff like that, to actually work together as one species to solve the issues we're facing. Okay, it's not just TV, it's loads of different things, e.g. wars, music, arguments, porn, etc. Could we stop world hunger, disease, and such, as a species, if we worked together? YES! Will we? NO. So why do babies get diseases and die early? Why do the innocent suffer? Firstly, we're looking at it as if this earth is the be all and end all. If there is a heaven, we'll be there for longer than on this earth, so we should really start changing our perspectives on people dying as being 'The End'. Oh, and as people we could have prevented these killer diseases, and still can, if we would only work together as one unified species. Secondly, the idea of things being 'fair' or 'just' are again wrong perspectives. They are views that this world is the be all and end all. If there is a heaven, then is it not more important that judgement be for an eternity than for 4 score and 10?

 

As I said earlier in the thread, regarding innocent kids. I take offense at a loving god that would refuse to intervene, when kids are involved. Humanity could work together but it won't. But what kind of a father could sit by and watch his kids opressed in such a way. Even more so when it's done in his name? There cannot be one homo sapien, on this forum, that can look at pictures of kids in war torn areas and not think why?

 

Who wouldn't want to ease the suffering of the world's innocent?

 

So if he can intervene, but refuses to, then what kind of "heaven" are we heading for?

 

Is it because of this future paradise that we're leaving the current world in the shit it's in?

 

Last but not least, "Religion has killed more people than both world wars added together." Well that's true…kind of. The killing in the name of God, and following the teachings of God are very different things. In fact, if you follow the teachings, you wouldn't be killing. If you're killing, then you're not following the teachings. So you can't really call yourself a Christian if you're killing people and saying "It's for Jesus". I'm not sure if any of those 'holy wars' were actually following the word of their perspective religion, to the letter…or even close to it. Thou Shalt Not Kill, seems to have been omitted from the preaching of those people, but is in pretty much every religion on earth. This means that it isn't the religion causing wars. It's the people falsely/wrongly/misguidedly 'following' the religion. All religions on the planet preach peace and love above other things…apart from maybe Viking religions. The murders/death's in the name of God should never have happened, and those people committing those sins will be held to judgement for their actions.

 

The bible I read is full of commandments to kill. Infact the Lord regularly breaks his own commandments. Leviticus tells the faithful to execute blasphemers. Deuteronomy tells the faithful to lay siege to cities. If it's inhabitants refuse to surrender they're to be put to the sword. Women, children and livestock are considered plunder. If they do choose to surrender then the faithful may use them as slaves, for forced labor. Deuteronomy also tells the faithful to stone to death women who cannot be proven as virgins.

 

So I'm at a loss. Which bit do we follow?

 

Thou Shall Not Kill was a commandment. But the lord broke it killing around 2million people according to the bible?! Satan is tributed with less than 20?!

 

Maybe I'm interpretting it wrong? Taking it out of context?

 

But can we now see how war, subjugation, and asset seizure, in his name, is possible?

 

Why is the whole thing so f***ing ambiguous?

 

 

Hi Chris

 

Good to know you're able to quote the Bible. A lot of people will just say stuff and not bother to referrence the Bible, so I'm genuinely impressed.

 

With the ideas that you're talking about, it's well thought out, and genuinely a pretty decent argument. The only issue with it is it's working on the premise that this earth is the be all and end it. Our existence on this planet is less than a blink of an eye in eternity.

 

But let's look at Deuteronomy and Leviticus. The Old Testament is there as a preface to Jesus. The Jews were referred to as being God's Chosen people. Meaning they were chosen to bring forth Jesus. Prior to Jesus, the law on earth was the law of the land. If God knows everything, then God would have known that those being killed would never turn to the truth and follow him to paradise, so the price for sin was death, physical and spiritual. But then came Jesus. That's when the rules changed from "An eye for an eye" over to "Turn the other cheek". Why not fight back? Because the rules had changed, there was a substitute option above the law of the land. After Jesus, there was forgiveness for sin. So forgiveness came first and over came death for sin. By death, it does not mean a physical earthly death, it is talking about a spiritual death, namely a spiritual-separation-from-God death. That is the eternal death.

 

As for the 'Corruption of perfection' that I was referencing and you noted "Why not make it incorruptable", if everything was left as perfect and we were unable to 'damage it' then we would not have free will would we? If we were 'trapped' in paradise, then there is little to no free will. If you are unable to do wrong, then the decision between right and wrong has been taken away....no free will.

 

The 'Tree of Knowledge'...'The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil' (it's full name) is there for a few reasons. One, it speaks of the only "Do not..." condition that God provided. Originally there was only 1 sin "Do not eat the fruit of that tree". We always overlook the other tree in the centre of the Garden of Eden, the Tree of Eternal Life. If we ate from that one, which we were allowed to, then we would be immortal (the reason man was kicked out of the garden was to stop them eating from that tree). But instead they ate from the one that we were told not to eat from :-( They broke the only 'Do not' commandment God initially gave to mankind. This is the ultimate 'free will' realiser/revealer. This is when we realised that there was morality, shame, pain, suffering, and the option purposefully not to do what God told us. But eating this fruit was also the condemning action. It is our fall from grace. Eating the fruit did no harm, as the Bible said, the fruit was good to eat. However, the action of disobeying God was the condemning element.

 

Is it a metaphor or euphemism...maybe, I don't know. I have no doubt that the texts have been changed over time. But the basic laws, rules, and the forgiveness and love are what really matter. However, a God of forgiveness and love to his people, would understand that we tried to follow him as best as we could (finger's crossed he'd see that).

[Quarter bull 240]

Truther your just another conspiracy theorist against the elite, an fair play, but they've got you on the atheism thing jmo

 

Everyone entitled to have there own beleifs, so here are a few records saying you like them so much....NON BIBLICAL RECORDS....you get that. NON BIBLICAL RECORDS just for you....

Hostile Non-Biblical Pagan Accounts

There are a number of ancient classical accounts of Jesus from pagan, non-Christian sources. These accounts are generally hostile to Christianity; some ancient authors denied the miraculous nature of Jesus and the events surrounding His life:

 

Thallus (52AD)

Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings dont even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus crucifixion:

 

On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

 

If only more of Thallus record could be found, we might find more confirmation of Jesus crucifixion. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, He was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of His crucifixion.

 

Tacitus (56-120AD)

Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his Annals of 116AD, he describes Emperor Neros response to the great fire in Rome and Neros claim that the Christians were to blame:

 

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.

 

In this account, Tacitus confirms several historical elements of the Biblical narrative: Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

 

Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)

Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the Wise King:

 

What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these menThe wise kingLived on in the teachings he enacted.

 

From this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus: He was a wise and influential man who died for His beliefs. The Jewish leadership was somehow responsible for Jesus death. Jesus followers adopted His beliefs and lived their lives accordingly.

 

Phlegon (-140AD)

In a manner similar to Thallus, Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:

 

Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour. (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

 

Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):

 

Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions. (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)

 

And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33)

 

Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails. (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)

 

From these accounts, we can add something to our understanding: Jesus had the ability to accurately predict the future, was crucified under the reign of Tiberius Caesar and demonstrated His wounds after he was resurrected.

 

Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)

Early Christians were also described in early, non-Christian history. Pliny the Younger, in a letter to the Roman emperor Trajan, describes the lifestyles of early Christians:

 

They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of foodbut food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

 

This early description of the first Christians documents several facts: the first Christians believed Jesus was GOD, the first Christians upheld a high moral code, and these early followers met regularly to worship Jesus.

 

Suetonius (69-140AD)

Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):

 

Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome). (Life of Claudius, 25:4)

 

This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:

 

Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief. (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

 

There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this account, we know Jesus had an immediate impact on His followers: They were committed to their belief Jesus was God and withstood the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on His followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.

 

Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)

Lucian was a Greek satirist who spoke sarcastically of Christ and Christians, but in the process, he did affirm they were real people and never referred to them as fictional characters:

 

The Christians, you know, worship a man to this daythe distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account.You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property. (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13)

 

From this account we can add to our description of Jesus: He taught about repentance and about the family of God. These teachings were quickly adopted by Jesus followers and exhibited to the world around them.

 

Celsus (175AD)

This is the last hostile, non-Christian account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite antagonistic to the claims of the Gospels, but in his criticism he unknowingly affirmed and reinforced the Biblical authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century:

 

Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a b*****d. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.

 

Celsus admits Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea Jesus was the illegitimate son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm several important claims: Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God.

 

Hostile Non-Biblical Jewish Accounts

In addition to classical pagan sources chronicling the life of Jesus and His followers, there are also a number of ancient hostile Jewish sources describing Jesus. These are written by Jewish theologians, historians and leaders who were definitely not sympathetic to the Christian cause. Their writings are often very harsh, critical and even demeaning to Jesus. But there is still much these writings confirm:

 

Josephus (37-101AD)

In more detail than any other non-biblical historian, Josephus writes about Jesus in his the Antiquities of the Jews in 93AD. Josephus was born just four years after the crucifixion. He was a consultant for Jewish rabbis at an early age, became a Galilean military commander by the age of sixteen, and he was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in the first century A.D. Under the rule of Roman emperor Vespasian, Josephus was allowed to write a history of the Jews. This history includes three passages about Christians, one in which he describes the death of John the Baptist, one in which he mentions the execution of James (and describes him as the brother of Jesus the Christ), and a final passage which describes Jesus as a wise man and the messiah. There is much legitimate controversy about the writing of Josephus, because the first discoveries of his writings are late enough to have been re-written by Christians who were accused of making additions to the text. So to be fair, well examine a scholarly reconstruction stripped of Christian embellishment:

 

Now around this time lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was a worker of amazing deeds and was a teacher of people who gladly accept the truth. He won over both many Jews and many Greeks. Pilate, when he heard him accused by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, (but) those who had first loved him did not cease (doing so). To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared (This neutral reconstruction follows closely the one proposed by John Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus: The Roots of the Problem and the Person).

 

Now there are many other ancient versions of Josephus writing which are even more explicit about the nature of Jesus miracles, life and his status as the Christ, but lets take this conservative version and see what we can learn. From this text, we can conclude: Jesus lived in Palestine, was a wise man and a teacher, worked amazing deeds, was accused by the Jews, crucified under Pilate and had followers called Christians.

[Quarter bull 240]

Here some more NON BIBLICAL RECORDS just for you truther....an your calaim the bible is taken from the Talmud lol completely wrong as you will find out below...it doesn't bother me how many don't like me or what I'm saying I'm sticking to the truth.

 

 

Jewish Talmud (400-700AD)

While the earliest Talmudic writings of Jewish Rabbis appear in the 5th century, the tradition of these Rabbinic authors indicates they are faithfully transmitting teachings from the early Tannaitic period of the 1st Century BC to the 2nd Century AD. Scholars believe there are a number of Talmudic writings referring to Jesus, and many of these writings are said to use code words to describe Jesus (such as Balaam or Ben Stada or a certain one). But for our purposes well be very conservative and limit our examination to the passages referring to Jesus in a more direct way:

 

Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b)

 

Rabbi Hisda (d. 309) said that Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said, What is that which is written, No evil will befall you, nor shall any plague come near your house? (Psalm 91:10) No evil will befall you (means) that evil dreams and evil thoughts will not tempt you; nor shall any plague come near your house (means) that you will not have a son or a disciple who burns his food like Jesus of Nazareth. (b. Sanhedrin 103a; cf. b. Berakhot 17b)

 

Our rabbis have taught that Jesus had five disciples: Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. They brought Matthai to (to trial). He said, Must Matthai be killed? For it is written, When (mathai) shall I come and appear before God? (Psalm 92:2) They said to him, Yes Matthai must be killed, for it is written, When (mathai) he dies his name will perish (Psalm 41:5). They brought Nakai. He said to them, Must Nakai be killed? For it is written, The innocent (naqi) and the righteous will not slay (Exodus 23:7). They said to him, Yes, Nakai must be kille, for it is written, In secret places he slays the innocent (naqi) (Psalm 10:. (b. Sanhedrin 43a; the passage continues in a similar way for Nezer, Buni and Todah)

 

And this, perhaps the most famous of Talmudic passages about Jesus:

 

It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him. But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover. (b. Sanhedrin 43a)

 

From just these passages mentioning Jesus by name, we can conclude the following: Jesus had magical powers, led the Jews away from their beliefs, had disciples who were martyred for their faith (one of whom was named Matthai), and was executed on the day before the Passover.

 

The Toledot Yeshu (1000AD)

The Toledot Yeshu is a medieval Jewish retelling of the life of Jesus. It is completely anti-Christian, to be sure. There are many versions of these retellings, and as part of the transmitted oral and written tradition of the Jews, we can presume their original place in antiquity, dating back to the time of Jesus first appearance as an influential leader who was drawing Jews away from their faith in the Law. The Toledot Yeshu contains a determined effort to explain away the miracles of Jesus and to deny the virgin birth. In some places, the text is quite vicious, but it does confirm many elements of the New Testament writings. Lets take a look at a portion of the text (Jesus is called Yehoshua):

 

In the year 3671 (in Jewish reckonging, it being ca 90 B.C.) in the days of King Jannaeus, a great misfortune befell Israel, when there arose a certain disreputable man of the tribe of Judah, whose name was Joseph Pandera. He lived at Bethlehem, in Judah. Near his house dwelt a widow and her lovely and chaste daughter named Miriam. Miriam was betrothed to Yohanan, of the royal house of David, a man learned in the Torah and God-fearing. At the close of a certain Sabbath, Joseph Pandera, attractive and like a warrior in appearance, having gazed lustfully upon Miriam, knocked upon the door of her room and betrayed her by pretending that he was her betrothed husband, Yohanan. Even so, she was amazed at this improper conduct and submitted only against her will. Thereafter, when Yohanan came to her, Miriam expressed astonishment at behavior so foreign to his character. It was thus that they both came to know the crime of Joseph Pandera and the terrible mistake on the part of Miriam Miriam gave birth to a son and named him Yehoshua, after her brother. This name later deteriorated to Yeshu (Yeshu is the Jewish name for Jesus. It means May His Name Be Blotted Out). On the eighth day he was circumcised. When he was old enough the lad was taken by Miriam to the house of study to be instructed in the Jewish tradition. One day Yeshu walked in front of the Sages with his head uncovered, showing shameful disrespect. At this, the discussion arose as to whether this behavior did not truly indicate that Yeshu was an illegitimate child and the son of a niddah. Moreover, the story tells that while the rabbis were discussing the Tractate Nezikin, he gave his own impudent interpretation of the law and in an ensuing debate he held that Moses could not be the greatest of the prophets if he had to receive counsel from Jethro. This led to further inquiry as to the antecedents of Yeshu, and it was discovered through Rabban Shimeon ben Shetah that he was the illegitimate son of Joseph Pandera. Miriam admitted it. After this became known, it was necessary for Yeshu to flee to Upper Galilee. After King Jannaeus, his wife Helene ruled over all Israel. In the Temple was to be found the Foundation Stone on which were engraven the letters of Gods Ineffable Name. Whoever learned the secret of the Name and its use would be able to do whatever he wished. Therefore, the Sages took measures so that no one should gain this knowledge. Lions of brass were bound to two iron pillars at the gate of the place of burnt offerings. Should anyone enter and learn the Name, when he left the lions would roar at him and immediately the valuable secret would be forgotten. Yeshu came and learned the letters of the Name; he wrote them upon the parchment which he placed in an open cut on his thigh and then drew the flesh over the parchment. As he left, the lions roared and he forgot the secret. But when he came to his house he reopened the cut in his flesh with a knife an lifted out the writing. Then he remembered and obtained the use of the letters. He gathered about himself three hundred and ten young men of Israel and accused those who spoke ill of his birth of being people who desired greatness and power for themselves. Yeshu proclaimed, I am the Messiah; and concerning me Isaiah prophesied and said, Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. He quoted other messianic texts, insisting, David my ancestor prophesied concerning me: The Lord said to me, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee. The insurgents with him replied that if Yeshu was the Messiah he should give them a convincing sign. They therefore, brought to him a lame man, who had never walked. Yeshu spoke over the man the letters of the Ineffable Name, and the leper was healed. Thereupon, they worshipped him as the Messiah, Son of the Highest. When word of these happenings came to Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin decided to bring about the capture of Yeshu. They sent messengers, Annanui and Ahaziah, who, pretending to be his disciples, said that they brought him an invitation from the leaders of Jerusalem to visit them. Yeshu consented on condition the members of the Sanhedrin receive him as a lord. He started out toward Jerusalem and, arriving at Knob, acquired an ass on which he rode into Jerusalem, as a fulfillment of the prophecy of Zechariah. The Sages bound him and led him before Queen Helene, with the accusation: This man is a sorcerer and entices everyone. Yeshu replied, The prophets long ago prophesied my coming: And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and I am he; but as for them, Scripture says Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly. Queen Helene asked the Sages: What he says, is it in your Torah? They replied: It is in our Torah, but it is not applicable to him, for it is in Scripture: And that prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. He has not fulfilled the signs and conditions of the Messiah. Yeshu spoke up: Madam, I am the Messiah and I revive the dead. A dead body was brought in; he pronounced the letters of the Ineffable Name and the corpse came to life. The Queen was greatly moved and said: This is a true sign. She reprimanded the Sages and sent them humiliated from her presence. Yeshus dissident followers increased and there was controversy in Israel. Yeshu went to Upper Galilee. the Sages came before the Queen, complaining that Yeshu practiced sorcery and was leading everyone astray. Therefore she sent Annanui and Ahaziah to fetch him. The found him in Upper Galilee, proclaiming himself the Son of God. When they tried to take him there was a struggle, but Yeshu said to the men of Upper Galilee: Wage no battle. He would prove himself by the power which came to him from his Father in heaven. He spoke the Ineffable Name over the birds of clay and they flew into the air. He spoke the same letters over a millstone that had been placed upon the waters. He sat in it and it floated like a boat. When they saw this the people marveled. At the behest of Yeshu, the emissaries departed and reported these wonders to the Queen. She trembled with astonishment. Then the Sages selected a man named Judah Iskarioto and brought him to the Sanctuary where he learned the letters of the Ineffable Name as Yeshu had done. When Yeshu was summoned before the queen, this time there were present also the Sages and Judah Iskarioto. Yeshu said: It is spoken of me, I will ascend into heaven. He lifted his arms like the wings of an eagle and he flew between heaven and earth, to the amazement of everyoneYeshu was seized. His head was covered with a garment and he was smitten with pomegranate staves; but he could do nothing, for he no longer had the Ineffable Name. Yeshu was taken prisoner to the synagogue of Tiberias, and they bound him to a pillar. To allay his thirst they gave him vinegar to drink. On his head they set a crown of thorns. There was strife and wrangling between the elders and the unrestrained followers of Yeshu, as a result of which the followers escaped with Yeshu to the region of Antioch; there Yeshu remained until the eve of the Passover. Yeshu then resolved to go the Temple to acquire again the secret of the Name. That year the Passover came on a Sabbath day. On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu, accompanied by his disciples, came to Jerusalem riding upon an ass. Many bowed down before him. He entered the Temple with his three hundred and ten followers. One of them, Judah Iskarioto apprised the Sages that Yeshu was to be found in the Temple, that the disciples had taken a vow by the Ten Commandments not to reveal his identity but that he would point him out by bowing to him. So it was done and Yeshu was seized. Asked his name, he replied to the question by several times giving the names Mattai, Nakki, Buni, Netzer, each time with a verse quoted by him and a counter-verse by the Sages. Yeshu was put to death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath. When they tried to hang him on a tree it broke, for when he had possessed the power he had pronounced by the Ineffable Name that no tree should hold him. He had failed to pronounce the prohibition over the carob-stalk, for it was a plant more than a tree, and on it he was hanged until the hour for afternoon prayer, for it is written in Scripture, His body shall not remain all night upon the tree. They buried him outside the city. On the first day of the week his bold followers came to Queen Helene with the report that he who was slain was truly the Messiah and that he was not in his grave; he had ascended to heaven as he prophesied. Diligent search was made and he was not found in the grave where he had been buried. A gardener had taken him from the grave and had brought him into his garden and buried him in the sand over which the waters flowed into the garden. Queen Helene demanded, on threat of a severe penalty, that the body of Yeshu be shown to her within a period of three days. There was a great distress. When the keeper of the garden saw Rabbi Tanhuma walking in the field and lamenting over the ultimatum of the Queen, the gardener related what he had done, in order that Yeshus followers should not steal the body and then claim that he had ascended into heaven. The Sages removed the body, tied it to the tail of a horse and transported it to the Queen, with the words, This is Yeshu who is said to have ascended to heaven. Realizing that Yeshu was a false prophet who enticed the people and led them astray, she mocked the followers but praised the Sages.

 

Now in spite of the fact that the ancient Jews who wrote this did their best to argue for another interpretation of the life of Christ, they did make several claims here about Jesus. This passage, along with several others from the Toledot tradition, confirm: Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, healed the lame, said Isaiah foretold of His life, was worshipped as God, arrested by the Jews, beaten with rods, given vinegar to drink, wore a crown of thorns, rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, was betrayed by a man named Judah Iskarioto, and had followers who claimed He was resurrected and ascended, leaving an empty tomb.

 

Lets review what weve learned from hostile pagan and Jewish sources describing Jesus. Well do our best to discount the anti-Christian bias we see in the sources, just as we discounted the pro-Christian bias we think might exist in some versions of the writing of Josephus. Many elements of the Biblical record are confirmed by these hostile accounts, in spite of the fact they deny the supernatural power of Jesus:

 

Jesus was born and lived in Palestine. He was born, supposedly, to a virgin and had an earthly father who was a carpenter. He was a teacher who taught that through repentance and belief, all followers would become brothers and sisters. He led the Jews away from their beliefs. He was a wise man who claimed to be God and the Messiah. He had unusual magical powers and performed miraculous deeds. He healed the lame. He accurately predicted the future. He was persecuted by the Jews for what He said, betrayed by Judah Iskarioto. He was beaten with rods, forced to drink vinegar and wear a crown of thorns. He was crucified on the eve of the Passover and this crucifixion occurred under the direction of Pontius Pilate, during the time of Tiberius. On the day of His crucifixion, the sky grew dark and there was an earthquake. Afterward, He was buried in a tomb and the tomb was later found to be empty. He appeared to His disciples resurrected from the grave and showed them His wounds. These disciples then told others Jesus was resurrected and ascended into heaven. Jesus disciples and followers upheld a high moral code. One of them was named Matthai. The disciples were also persecuted for their faith but were martyred without changing their claims. They met regularly to worship Jesus, even after His death.

 

Not bad, given this information is coming from ancient accounts hostile to the Biblical record. While these non-Christian sources interpret the claims of Christianity differently, they affirm the initial, evidential claims of the Biblical authors (much like those who interpret the evidence related to Kennedys assassination and the Twin Tower attacks come to different conclusions but affirm the basic facts of the historical events). Is there any evidence for Jesus outside the Bible? Yes, and the ancient non-Christian interpretations (and critical commentaries) of the Gospel accounts serve to strengthen the core claims of the New Testame

[gnasher16 30,121]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've seen some terrible things, a baby suffering beyond the ken of most of you, as we read this others suffer horribly. So if there was a god and they sat and watched this then anyone who supports them is so much worse than any Nazi that stood by Hitler without questioning his actions.

 

 

If i decided to drop a new born baby off of a 20 storey tower block guess what..........God couldnt stop me !...........So does that mean people shouldnt " support " him.

 

given hes god then why would you, if you buy an electric drill and it don't drill then would you recommend it and hold it in esteem?

 

oh i get it now......if God doesnt benefit me i shouldnt " support " him.............thats like saying if that drill i bought into didnt work i,ll just pretend drills dont exist !

 

put it another way, why would he sit back over centuries and watch innocents slaughtered in his name? simplistically if its good v evil then all good does is watch whilst evil rampages in the name of good. makes no sense

 

Probably about as much sense as thinking something that doesnt even exist can sit back and watch at all !....Is it even possible to make judgement of something that doesnt exist ....maybe i,ll ask him for world peace tonight and if he doesnt go for it i,ll elbow him and become an atheist.

 

ask him for anything, even a box of matches and i will bet he don't give it to you but some man might in his name

 

Blame the player not the game ...................Ive been beaten senseless in the name of following football but i still love the game.....and certainly dont deny its existence

 

a football club is a physical thing you can see it, touch it, smell it but again without being told by a man that you can, then you can not say that about a God

 

I was about to reply to this but having looked at the 2 pages that have come after it ive just lost all desire to live let alone reply

[MoChara 1,632]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've seen some terrible things, a baby suffering beyond the ken of most of you, as we read this others suffer horribly. So if there was a god and they sat and watched this then anyone who supports them is so much worse than any Nazi that stood by Hitler without questioning his actions.

 

If i decided to drop a new born baby off of a 20 storey tower block guess what..........God couldnt stop me !...........So does that mean people shouldnt " support " him.

given hes god then why would you, if you buy an electric drill and it don't drill then would you recommend it and hold it in esteem?

oh i get it now......if God doesnt benefit me i shouldnt " support " him.............thats like saying if that drill i bought into didnt work i,ll just pretend drills dont exist !

put it another way, why would he sit back over centuries and watch innocents slaughtered in his name? simplistically if its good v evil then all good does is watch whilst evil rampages in the name of good. makes no sense

Probably about as much sense as thinking something that doesnt even exist can sit back and watch at all !....Is it even possible to make judgement of something that doesnt exist ....maybe i,ll ask him for world peace tonight and if he doesnt go for it i,ll elbow him and become an atheist.

ask him for anything, even a box of matches and i will bet he don't give it to you but some man might in his name

Blame the player not the game ...................Ive been beaten senseless in the name of following football but i still love the game.....and certainly dont deny its existence

a football club is a physical thing you can see it, touch it, smell it but again without being told by a man that you can, then you can not say that about a God

I was about to reply to this but having looked at the 2 pages that have come after it ive just lost all desire to live let alone reply

great minds think alike

[Truther 1,579]

"Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings dont even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus crucifixion:"

 

So Thallus is probably the earliest non christian to mention jesus, so ancient his writings don't even exist, then Africanus quotes him 170 years later, and you think that holds water?

None of the authors lived during the time of jesus from what i can see, some missing him by just a few decades fair enough, but every single one relying on other peoples accounts, funny that somebody as remarkable as jesus was never written about by a contemporary non christian? And its not always what's put in the stories mate, the stuff that's left out is telling, last count i think its over 30 "jesus" characters living and preaching around the same area/time as you're jesus, not to mention nearly every culture on Earth having a jesus character? Krishna is probably the best known, but the N. American natives had a jesus character, the Chinese jesus fell to Earth from the skies and became the first emporer Its a well used formula QB, the idea is to separate these individuals from mortal men, to make them something special, and above ordinary people, even our jokers now think they can trace their bloodlines back to jesus, and so god, its a complete rubbish mate. One of these people had the whole bible translated, and as you said, "it was checked and checked again and again" i bet it was mate, so it gave the exact impression he wanted it to, not to mention it was done 1600 years after the event, and with documents dating no earlier than 400 years before that? With a whole lot left out, that is documented Maybe in 400 years time people will think Harry Potter is true?

[sandymere 8,263]

Genesis 4:14-17 KJV

 

Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.

 

And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

 

And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

 

And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

 

So we all know the creation fable in the Bible. Adam is made by God from dirt. Then God takes one on Adams ribs and makes Eve. Then the talking snake gets them tossed out of Eden for telling them that knowledge is a good thing and they agree. They have a a couple of kids (maybe more, it’s a little open ended) named Cain and Able. Cain gets crap from God because his sacrifice wasn’t blood like Able’s, so he gets pissed and kills Able….because….well just because. God then sends him away and he goes to live with people in the Land of Nod where he has a wife and a kid named Enoch.

 

The only problem here is where the %$#% did this people in the Land of Nod come from? There wasn’t anyone else around. That’s the story. But out of nowhere this whole big place comes up where a brother murder can go and find chicks to shack up with.

 

Heck there was enough people here they needed a whole city. It’s a pretty big jump no matter how you cut it.

 

The other thing about this that is pretty silly is that God marked Cain so that anyone who found him should kill him. Well, that apparently didn’t work too well. He’s out having kids and building cities and just having a fine time and no one lifts a finger to stop him. You’d think that if an all-powerful being wanted you dead, you’d damn well be dead.

Edited March 25, 2015 by sandymere

[Ideation 8,216]

I did.

[sandymere 8,263]

NO No NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, not harry potter, it will be the Disc world books by Terry Pratchett, he's dead so his books must be real, you all live on a disc carried on the back of a giant turtle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[paulus 26]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've seen some terrible things, a baby suffering beyond the ken of most of you, as we read this others suffer horribly. So if there was a god and they sat and watched this then anyone who supports them is so much worse than any Nazi that stood by Hitler without questioning his actions.

 

 

If i decided to drop a new born baby off of a 20 storey tower block guess what..........God couldnt stop me !...........So does that mean people shouldnt " support " him.

 

given hes god then why would you, if you buy an electric drill and it don't drill then would you recommend it and hold it in esteem?

 

oh i get it now......if God doesnt benefit me i shouldnt " support " him.............thats like saying if that drill i bought into didnt work i,ll just pretend drills dont exist !

 

put it another way, why would he sit back over centuries and watch innocents slaughtered in his name? simplistically if its good v evil then all good does is watch whilst evil rampages in the name of good. makes no sense

 

Probably about as much sense as thinking something that doesnt even exist can sit back and watch at all !....Is it even possible to make judgement of something that doesnt exist ....maybe i,ll ask him for world peace tonight and if he doesnt go for it i,ll elbow him and become an atheist.

 

ask him for anything, even a box of matches and i will bet he don't give it to you but some man might in his name

 

Blame the player not the game ...................Ive been beaten senseless in the name of following football but i still love the game.....and certainly dont deny its existence

 

a football club is a physical thing you can see it, touch it, smell it but again without being told by a man that you can, then you can not say that about a God

 

I was about to reply to this but having looked at the 2 pages that have come after it ive just lost all desire to live let alone reply

 

x2