Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed The Bible

  • Thread starter Codebreaker@bigsecret.com
  • Start date
>> I don't think people doubt the existence of Moses.
> Yes, they indeed do. Modern archaeology discoveries discount the whole
> of the Exodus episode. There was no evidence. And that can be summed
> up in one word -- ****. Three million people would leave a lot of it
> after rambling around the desert for 40 years. And no bones and no
> pottery shards, and no garbage. Josiah's scribes made most of the
> Torah up perhaps from oral legends and perhaps from whole cloth to lend
> credence to their right to control and kill the inhabitants of the
> territories they adopted after King Darius sent them back with his
> blessings and musclemen.

Interesting .. do you have some more information on that .. links perhaps?
 
> ===>LIAR!
> There's no "MESSIAH/CHRIST" in the Qur'an! -- L.

There is in the translation I've read.. it occurs several times.

3:45 (And remember) when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah giveth thee glad
tidings of a word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary,
illustrious in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near
(unto Allah).

4:156 And because of their disbelief and of their speaking against Mary a
tremendous calumny;
4:157 And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary,
Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so
unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof;
they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him
not for certain.

4:171 O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor
utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary,
was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and
a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not
"Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One God. Far is it
removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all
that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient
as Defender.
4:172 The Messiah will never scorn to be a slave unto Allah, nor will the
favoured angels. Whoso scorneth His service and is proud, all such will He
assemble unto Him;

5:17 They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of
Mary. Say: Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy
the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone on earth ? Allah's is
the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them.
He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things.

5:72 They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary.
The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and
your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath
forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no
helpers.

5:75 The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers
(the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly
woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the
revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!
 
codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote:

> On Feb 18, 7:09 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> wrote:
>
>>Christopher A.Lee wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:57:58 +1100, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>Given the fact Jesus TRIAL is mentioned in the Talmuld a book
>>>>>by Jesus enemies.
>>
>>>>Can you please quote the reference to it.
>>
>>>It seems to be a later response to what Christians said. But all I
>>>know of this comes from a book by Frank Zindler, The Jesus the Jews
>>>Never Knew.
>>
>>===>The Jews have known THOUSANDS of "Yeshuas".
>>But nobody knew the IESOUS of Gospel fiction,
>>since he never existed. -- L.
>
>
>
> You did not do your RESEARCH. Were all those thousand
> IESOUS born of Maries?
>
===>No, but many were born to MIRIAMS,
mothers who did not violate their betrothal
thus committing adultery,
for a false promise that their son would be
given the throne of King David! -- L.
 
codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote:

> On Feb 18, 7:07 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> wrote:
>
>>Tohu.B...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Feb 16, 7:26 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>Jeckyl wrote:
>>
>>>>>>You are such a prentious little asshole...
>>
>>>>>Charming.
>>
>>>>>>The same way people are trained to explain the American
>>>>>>Constitution, the same way there were people in Israel
>>>>>>trained to read the Law of Moses and interprete it.
>>>>>>You are not ONE of them, so why should I care about
>>>>>>your PRIVATE OPINION.
>>
>>>>>So are you saying that the Jewish faith recognises Jesus as the messiah ?
>>
>>>>>>You are not a good Historian either
>>
>>>>>You ceratinly aren't .. you've not given one single bit of historial
>>>>>evidence. Only hearsay from people who never new jesus when he was
>>>>>supposedly alive.
>>
>>>>>>Go back to first Century Jerusalem and quote a Scribe or
>>>>>>a doctor of the Mosaic Law who ever said that Deuteronomy
>>>>>>18:15 never was about a Messiah/Christ
>>
>>>>>Whether or not the Jews where expecting a promised messiah is beside the
>>>>>point. The issue is whether jesus was that messiah. The old testament and
>>>>>jewish scripture do not say that.
>>
>>>>>>Do you think that being historian mean reading the works
>>>>>>by some Historians?
>>>>>>Being historian means being able to investigate and find the cause
>>>>>>and effect.
>>
>>>>>Exactly .. obviosuly not something you have done, otherwise you would cite
>>>>>the credible contemporary evidence of Jesus existence.
>>
>>>>>>Hey it looks like History does not support your viewpoint.
>>
>>>>>It certainly does not support yours.
>>
>>>>>>JESUS IS THE CHRIST, NO JESUS, NO CHRIST
>>
>>>>>Shame that.
>>
>>>>===>In fact the Gospel writers invented "Jesus" to strengthen
>>>>the Pauline claims about "Christ".
>>
>>>It is easy to claim it, now you must prove it.
>>>Given the fact that you believe that Rabbi Akkiba accepted
>>>Bar Khobba as the Messiah of Israel.
>>>Given the fact that any Jewish claim about the Messiah is always
>>>based on Deuteronomy 18:14-19.
>>
>>===>No claim is based on Deut. 18:14-19,
>>only YOURS. -- L.
>
>
>
> You are not even honest with the text

===>It is YOU who is being dishonest
even with yourself. -- L.
 
Jeckyl wrote:

>>===>LIAR!
>>There's no "MESSIAH/CHRIST" in the Qur'an! -- L.
>
>
> There is in the translation I've read.. it occurs several times.

===>Are you insane or just dishonest?
You post all these verses from the Qur'an,
yet NOWHERE does "Messiah/Christ" show up! -- L.
>
> 3:45 (And remember) when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah giveth thee glad
> tidings of a word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary,
> illustrious in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near
> (unto Allah).
>
> 4:156 And because of their disbelief and of their speaking against Mary a
> tremendous calumny;
> 4:157 And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary,
> Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so
> unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof;
> they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him
> not for certain.
>
> 4:171 O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor
> utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary,
> was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and
> a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not
> "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One God. Far is it
> removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all
> that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient
> as Defender.
> 4:172 The Messiah will never scorn to be a slave unto Allah, nor will the
> favoured angels. Whoso scorneth His service and is proud, all such will He
> assemble unto Him;
>
> 5:17 They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of
> Mary. Say: Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy
> the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone on earth ? Allah's is
> the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them.
> He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things.
>
> 5:72 They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary.
> The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and
> your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath
> forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no
> helpers.
>
> 5:75 The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers
> (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly
> woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the
> revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!
>
>
 
After serious contemplation, on or about Sunday 18 February 2007 7:43 pm
Jeckyl perhaps from noone@nowhere.com wrote:

>>> I don't think people doubt the existence of Moses.
>> Yes, they indeed do. Modern archaeology discoveries discount the
>> whole
>> of the Exodus episode. There was no evidence. And that can be
>> summed
>> up in one word -- ****. Three million people would leave a lot of it
>> after rambling around the desert for 40 years. And no bones and no
>> pottery shards, and no garbage. Josiah's scribes made most of the
>> Torah up perhaps from oral legends and perhaps from whole cloth to
>> lend credence to their right to control and kill the inhabitants of
>> the territories they adopted after King Darius sent them back with
>> his blessings and musclemen.
>
> Interesting .. do you have some more information on that .. links
> perhaps?

A good beginning might be
http://www.ciao.co.uk/The_Bible_Unearthed_Archaeology_Israel_Finkelstein__Review_5472706

--
Later,
Darrell Stec darstec@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages
 
"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
>>> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
>>>>> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I assume that you have a more probable theory.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do.
>>>>> Jesus never existed.
>>>>> I assume by your reply that you have ZERO EVIDENCE
>>>>> for your outrageous estimate of probability??
>>>>> Yes, I thought so.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am interested to hear
>>>>>>your proof that Paul did not exist,
>>>>>
>>>>> Non sequitur!!!
>>>>> Read what I wrote.
>>>>> I was referring to Jesus, as were you!
>>>>>
>>>>>>and if Christianity did not start with
>>>>>>Paul, who started it, and when did it begin?
>>>>>
>>>>> You are conflating my personally not being able to
>>>>> name the con-men that started the scam, with proof
>>>>> that Jesus and Paul really existed!!
>>>>> Where did your brain go on holiday too?
>>>>>
>>>>> **** me, you are as bad as the worst theist kooks.
>>>>
>>>>In other words: You have no credible theory.
>>>
>>> I don't believe it!
>>> Are you deliberately acting stupid?
>>>
>>> You plainly did not read what I wrote.
>>>
>>> I have the very plausible theory that most of the Christian
>>> fairy tale was invented by humans with a vested interest in
>>> power.
>>>
>>> That is far more credible than anything that delusional
>>> apologists have arrived at, and far exceeds the non-existent
>>> plausiblility of your baseless guesses on the subject.
>>>
>>> You never did answer me as to where you brain is currently
>>> holidaying.
>>
>> So you have a conspiracy theory. Those are easy to make
>> up, and sound convincing, but are less than worthless.
>
> Once again, you do not appear to have read what I wrote.

I have read everything you wrote. You have been sarcastic and insulting
with such comments as:
"Where did your brain go on holiday too?"
"**** me, you are as bad as the worst theist kooks."
"Are you deliberately acting stupid?"
"You never did answer me as to where you brain is
currently holidaying."

Now you add more insults.

--Wax

> I see that I made a mistake in assuming that a conversation
> with you might be of some productive value, but I see that I
> am wasting my time.
>
> By your pathetic "logic", anyone who claims that Sherlock
> Holmes is not real is indulging in a conspiracy theory??
>
> Gimme a break.
>
> Get real or get plonked.
 
>>>===>LIAR!
>>>There's no "MESSIAH/CHRIST" in the Qur'an! -- L.
>> There is in the translation I've read.. it occurs several times.
> ===>Are you insane or just dishonest?
> You post all these verses from the Qur'an,
> yet NOWHERE does "Messiah/Christ" show up! -- L.

It shows in those verse I quoted

The ones I quoted originally were from the transaltion of the Quran that I
had infront of me at the time at
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.htm . And it is certainly
there.

The translation at http://www.muslim.org/english-quran/quran.htm also refers
to Messiah. You'd think that they would know at that site.

Also there is the authorized English version at
http://www.submission.org/Q-T.html .. it says "messiah" as well

I looked up another,
http://www.wright-house.com/religions/islam/Quran/4-women.html, and another
here http://www.oneummah.net/quran/03.htm and they both refer to Christ
(rather than Messiah).

I've been looking, and cannot as yet find an English translation that does
not include eitehr the word 'messiah' or 'christ'

Can you provide a link to one that doesn't?
 
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 02:02:36 GMT, "weatherwax"
<weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
- Refer: <0z7Ch.89699$2m6.66826@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
>
>"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
>> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
>>>> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>>"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
>>>>>> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I assume that you have a more probable theory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do.
>>>>>> Jesus never existed.
>>>>>> I assume by your reply that you have ZERO EVIDENCE
>>>>>> for your outrageous estimate of probability??
>>>>>> Yes, I thought so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am interested to hear
>>>>>>>your proof that Paul did not exist,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Non sequitur!!!
>>>>>> Read what I wrote.
>>>>>> I was referring to Jesus, as were you!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>and if Christianity did not start with
>>>>>>>Paul, who started it, and when did it begin?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are conflating my personally not being able to
>>>>>> name the con-men that started the scam, with proof
>>>>>> that Jesus and Paul really existed!!
>>>>>> Where did your brain go on holiday too?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **** me, you are as bad as the worst theist kooks.
>>>>>
>>>>>In other words: You have no credible theory.
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe it!
>>>> Are you deliberately acting stupid?
>>>>
>>>> You plainly did not read what I wrote.
>>>>
>>>> I have the very plausible theory that most of the Christian
>>>> fairy tale was invented by humans with a vested interest in
>>>> power.
>>>>
>>>> That is far more credible than anything that delusional
>>>> apologists have arrived at, and far exceeds the non-existent
>>>> plausiblility of your baseless guesses on the subject.
>>>>
>>>> You never did answer me as to where you brain is currently
>>>> holidaying.
>>>
>>> So you have a conspiracy theory. Those are easy to make
>>> up, and sound convincing, but are less than worthless.
>>
>> Once again, you do not appear to have read what I wrote.
>
>I have read everything you wrote. You have been sarcastic and insulting
>with such comments as:
> "Where did your brain go on holiday too?"
> "**** me, you are as bad as the worst theist kooks."
> "Are you deliberately acting stupid?"
> "You never did answer me as to where you brain is
> currently holidaying."
>
>Now you add more insults.
>
>--Wax
>
> > I see that I made a mistake in assuming that a conversation
>> with you might be of some productive value, but I see that I
>> am wasting my time.
>>
>> By your pathetic "logic", anyone who claims that Sherlock
>> Holmes is not real is indulging in a conspiracy theory??
>>
>> Gimme a break.
>>
>> Get real or get plonked.

Once again, not even a sniff of rational response to my points.

I have wasted enough time on you already.
Say hullo to the inside of my killfile.

--
 
On 18 Feb 2007 15:33:52 -0800, "Andres64" <andresc64@excite.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <1171841632.748539.276900@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
>On Feb 14, 8:02 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
><Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>> > On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:
>>
>> > >On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >http://www.jesusneverexisted.com
>> > > --
>> > >Try showing that site to an actual historian.
>> > >See how hard you get laughed at.
>>
>> > Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the
>> > Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic
>> > Jesus.
>>
>> There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah
>
>Right. And there wouldn't be Mithraists without Mithra. Moron.

And there wouldn't be a "codebreaker" without LSD and Methylated
Spirits.

--
 
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:18:58 -0500, Darrell Stec
<darrell_stec@webpagesorcery.com> claimed:


>>>> knew nothing of the Jesus of the gospels, which is a mish-mash of
>>>> stories about earlier hero figures. All there is, is
>>>> rationalisation.
>>>
>>>Yes . .there is a great deal in the story that is based on other myths
>>>and legends and has been constructed to appear to fulfil scriptures.
>>
>> It is the other way around.
>>
>>
>>>So is saying no such person exists. We have no conclusive proof
>>>either way .. but there is non-conclusive 'evidence' (in the bible and
>>>elsewhere).
>>
>> The science of textual criticism states that we accept
>> a text as true, until it is proved false. Especially one
>> that is historically accurate and the Bible texts are.
>>
>>
>
>It is obvious that you know nothing about higher biblical criticism.
>Your statement is false.

It is obvious that you are an idiot who abandons science
to promote your own bias, which you falsely label as,
"higher Biblical criticism", as if saying it, will make your
lies sound intelligent.


>A work that has such blatant examples of tall
>tales like walking on water,

Thank you stupid, for proving you're stupid and incapable
of reading.


>> See above. The fact is, that you don't question the existence
>> of many historical figures, even though their existence is
>> based on a copy of single text, by a third party much later.
>>
>> And it's not about "extraordinary claims requiring
>> extraordinary evidence", because Caesar claimed to be,
>> "God above all gods" and yet,
>
>Where did he do this?

ibid.

Your tone implies surprise and the admission that if it
can be shown that he did, that you would need to admit
that your belief that someone couldn't have existed if
they claimed to be divine, must be false.

But of course, you have two problems:

1) You are ignorant of history and yet, wish to make
the claim that you know what you're talking about.

2) You believe that various Caesars existed, even though
we have no personal writings that they themselves wrote
(see your next comment, below).

And btw, Caesars have not only claimed that, but some
also demanded to be worshipped above all gods, such
as Nero did.

But hey, what does history matter? After all, if it gets
in the way of your hatred of Christ, history doesn't
matter a bit, right? Of course not! :)


>Show us the writings of this Jesus.

It seems that this is a common questions amongst the
atheists, who aren't too bright to begin with. And what
is truly sad, is that they actually think this is some kind
of rebuttal against the existence of Jesus. <chuckle>

Since when is it required to have the personal writings
of anyone, in order to prove that they existed, or said
what they are quoted as saying? Oh, that's right, it does
in your world, but only when it's Jesus. That rule of yours
doesn't apply to any other character of history, of course.

Show us the writings of other historical characters that
you believe existed, for which we have no personal
writings from. Then you can flap your lips and not until.

Oh wait, that's right, that doesn't matter, because it
doesn't help you hate Jesus.

You're just not too bright, huh?

And btw, even the Jews, who would love nothing more
than to be able to claim He didn't exist, admit that He did.
That should tell you something, but of course, it wont,
because facts and truth don't matter to you. Only your
hatred does.

Now go ahead and tell us how it is the atheists who are
loving and tolerant of all, when in reality, they spew
the most venom.

Or better yet... why don't you change the subject,
because you know you just lost this argument and
tell us how Christians kill so many people, when in
reality, Christians who are more than just a label
wouldn't do that anyway and the fact is, that it is
atheistic nations who have killed more people than
all religions combined.

Now go ahead and demand that I prove that, because
you refuse to check it out, because it's not something
that helps you hate Jesus, which if it were, would have
you scrambling at the speed of light, to find it immediately!

<chuckle>

Goodbye, fool.

And don't bother misusing Matthew 5:22, as I know you
foolishly will. That passage is about brothers and you are
not my brother. The passage that applies to you, is...

"The fool has said in his heart; There is no God."
- Psalm 14:1


--

Hope for a physical kingdom is to deny Christ's words.
He dispelled that idea in Luke 17:20-21 and He never
said, "But later it will be", nor can Jesus be quoted
anywhere in Scripture saying that it will be physical.
Reading other passages that you think say it will be,
is not to refute this statement, but rather, it is to
pit the Bible against itself and an Apostle against
his Lord, since it would be a contradiction!

I would not want to be in that position!

The Bible is the inerrant word of the living God!
If you don't believe the Bible, don't tell me that
you are a Christian. I won't believe you. To make
that claim, is to be a heretic who does not know God.
 
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:12:07 +1100, "Jeckyl"
<noone@nowhere.com> claimed:


>>>Yes . .there is a great deal in the story that is based on other myths and
>>>legends and has been constructed to appear to fulfil scriptures.
>> It is the other way around.
>
>That doesn't seem to make sense .. those myths and legends existed before
>the bible stories were written. So they could not have been written to
>fullfil scripture.

You have been mislead into believing false
time lines. Pick up a book called, "The Gospel
and the Greeks", by Ronald H. Nash.


>>>So is saying no such person exists. We have no conclusive proof either
>>>way
>>>.. but there is non-conclusive 'evidence' (in the bible and elsewhere).
>> The science of textual criticism states that we accept
>> a text as true, until it is proved false. Especially one
>> that is historically accurate and the Bible texts are.
>
>They are not historically accurate ..

That is a claim, not proof and you should read more
than liberal, God hating claims.


>Regardless. the bible stories that are written as first-hand information
>about Jesus are not contemporary with Jesus, and those that are cloer to
>contmporary are not first hand (Paul never met Jesus) so both are
>inadmissable.

More claims. You read liberal claims and immediately
believe them and automatically reject anything else
out of hand.

You have a lot of claims to prove.


--

Hope for a physical kingdom is to deny Christ's words.
He dispelled that idea in Luke 17:20-21 and He never
said, "But later it will be", nor can Jesus be quoted
anywhere in Scripture saying that it will be physical.
Reading other passages that you think say it will be,
is not to refute this statement, but rather, it is to
pit the Bible against itself and an Apostle against
his Lord, since it would be a contradiction!

I would not want to be in that position!

The Bible is the inerrant word of the living God!
If you don't believe the Bible, don't tell me that
you are a Christian. I won't believe you. To make
that claim, is to be a heretic who does not know God.
 
>>That doesn't seem to make sense .. those myths and legends existed before
>>the bible stories were written. So they could not have been written to
>>fullfil scripture.
> You have been mislead into believing false time lines.

So are you saying that the greek, roman and egyptians myths and gods are
predated by Jesus (and the gospels)?

> Pick up a book called, "The Gospel
> and the Greeks", by Ronald H. Nash.

Have to see if I can find it .. its not one that is sitting on my bookshelf
:)

But can you explain what you mean, and what the true timeline is then?

>>They are not historically accurate ..
> That is a claim, not proof and you should read more
> than liberal, God hating claims.

Really, the onus is on proving the document is historically accurate and
credible as evidence. One cannot take an arbitrary document and use it as
historical evidence. We need to know when it was written, who wrote it,
what hidden agenda's and vested interests there were etc.

It is very difficult to find independant critical analysis of the proof.
Most people have an agenda. However, there does seem great validaity in the
criticism of the sources .. mostly due to the times they were written. And
that there are so very few that even mention jesus himself (rather than
christians) that are even within a hundred years of Jesus death.

I would love to see some historical credible evidence.

> More claims. You read liberal claims and immediately
> believe them and automatically reject anything else
> out of hand.

Not at all, I read them (whether 'liberal' or not) critically.

> You have a lot of claims to prove.

OK .. I'll show you my list of credible contemporary references to Jesus:

That was it.

That's exlcuding the list of contemporary source that do not mention Jesus
who one would expect to have included references if the event described in
the bible had happened as described.

Now its your turn.
 
"Darrell Stec" <darrell_stec@webpagesorcery.com> wrote
> weatherwax weatherwax@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>
>>
>> "Darrell Stec" <darrell_stec@webpagesorcery.com> wrote
>>> weatherwax weatherwax@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>>>> "Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
>>>>> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>"Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote
>>>>>>> "weatherwax" <weatherwax@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I assume that you have a more probable theory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do.
>>>>>>> Jesus never existed.
>>>>>>> I assume by your reply that you have ZERO
>>>>>>> EVIDENCE for your outrageous estimate of
>>>>>>> probability??
>>>>>>> Yes, I thought so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am interested to hear
>>>>>>>> your proof that Paul did not exist,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Non sequitur!!!
>>>>>>> Read what I wrote.
>>>>>>> I was referring to Jesus, as were you!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>and if Christianity did not start with
>>>>>>>>Paul, who started it, and when did it begin?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are conflating my personally not being able to
>>>>>>> name the con-men that started the scam, with proof
>>>>>>> that Jesus and Paul really existed!!
>>>>>>> Where did your brain go on holiday too?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **** me, you are as bad as the worst theist kooks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In other words: You have no credible theory.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't believe it!
>>>>> Are you deliberately acting stupid?
>>>>>
>>>>> You plainly did not read what I wrote.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have the very plausible theory that most of the Christian
>>>>> fairy tale was invented by humans with a vested interest in
>>>>> power.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is far more credible than anything that delusional
>>>>> apologists have arrived at, and far exceeds the non-
>>>>> existent plausiblility of your baseless guesses on the
>>>>> subject.
>>>>>
>>>>> You never did answer me as to where you brain is
>>>>> currently holidaying.
>>>>
>>>> So you have a conspiracy theory. Those are easy to make
>>>> up, and sound convincing, but are less than worthless.
>>>>
>>>> --Wax
>>>
>>> It doesn't have to be a conspiracy theory. As the adage
>>> says -- don't attribute to malice what can be accounted
>>> for by stupidity. For example ask almost anyone who got
>>> kicked out of the Garden of Eden and to a person they
>>> will say Adam and Eve even though some of them have
>>> read those scriptures more than a hundred times. Yet they
>>> would be wrong. The bible makes an explicit point to say
>>> the MAN (and only the MAN) was sent from Eden.
>>
>> Michael Gray said. "I have the very plausible theory that
>> most of the Christian fairy tale was invented by humans with
>> a vested interest in power." That's called a "conspiracy
>> theory."
>
> No it isn't. To be a conspiracy all of those writers would have
> had to act in unison.

Michael Gray also referred to "the con-men that started the scam." It
still looks to me as if he is saying that it was a conspiracy. It is hard
to imagine that they would all be working independently.

> That wasn't what happened.

Of course it isn't what happened. Conspiracy theories are rarely true.


> And outside the scribes that were in a conspiracy to concoct
> the Torah "discovered" by King Josiah, there is no evidence
> any of the other biblical writers actually knew each other
> especially when considering almost all of scripture was
> written anonymously.

Not quite true, but the compilation of the Old Testament cannot be compared
to the compilation of the New Testament. They are completely different
stories.

> It was more in the nature of knowing a good story and running
> with it and changing some of it to fit one's own
> theology/philosophy.

The messianic expectation of the first century was for a king (messiah) who
would sit on the throne of David and restore the kingdom of Israel.

Josephus lists seven men who claimed to be the messiahs who came who rose
against Roman rule before Jesus was even born. What differentiated Jesus
from the other messiah's is the fact that Jesus was non-militant. When he
led his followers to the Mount of Olives (Mat 26:30.) He was expecting God
to appear and battle the armies of the world as foretold in Zechariah 14.
God did not appear, Jesus was arrested, tried, and crucified.

Following the death of Jesus, his followers turned to the next man in line
of succession. That was the brother of Jesus, James the Just (Acts 15.)

The book of "Acts" was written by Luke, who was a follower of Paul. "Acts"
attempts to give the impression that the apostels in Jerusalem and Paul were
close in beliefs and objectives. The letters of Paul indicates that there
were numerous differences between Paul and the apostels.

Your "good story" was invented by Paul. Mark and Luke were both followers
of Paul. "Matthew" was written by an anonymous author who used "Mark" as
a source. "John" may or may not have by written by an apostle named John,
but there are so many additions and re-arranging that it makes no
difference. The story of the resurrection is not in "Mark", and the
"Matthew" version differs significantly from both "Luke" and "John". Nor
is it present in "Q".

According to Matthew 2:23, Jesus was called a "Nazarene". We know from
early Christian writers that there was a Jewish sect called the Nazarenes
which claimed decent from the church in Jerusalem. This sect is either
closely related to, or the same as, the Jewish sect of Ebionites. The
Nazarenes and Ebionites both reject the godhead of Jesus, and recognized
Jesus and then James as the legitimate kings of Israel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites


--Wax
 
"codebreaker@bigsecret.com" <Codebreaker@bigsecret.com> wrote in message
news:1171737854.615196.321550@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 16, 7:02 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> wrote:
>> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
>> > On Feb 15, 1:57 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
>> > wrote:
>> >>codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
>> >>>On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> >>>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:
>> >>>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>> ....I went back 2000 years in time and quoted what
>>> Paul said about Deuteronomy 18:15 and how it applied to
>>> Jesus,

>> ===>So, what?
>> Rabbi Akiba declared it was Bar Kochba!

> Rabbi Akiba declared based on this text that Bar Khobah
> was the Messiah????

No, and it's obvious that he didn't believe Deuteronomy 18:15
referred to anyone else as Messiah either.

>> ===>In fact Muslims claim that passage refers to MOHAMMED!
>> "From amongst their brethren" refers to the Ishmaelites.

> I already went through this with you sometime ago. I refer
> you to my post but apparently you never read it therefore
> you can get rid of your misconceptions.
> The text indeed refers to Mohammad, but Mohammad
> as used in the Qur'an is a euphemism for Messiah/Christ
> So If you want to know more about it Check this post:
> The Making of the Arabian Messiah, A Prophet like Moses

"Mohammad" couldn't be a euphemism for Jesus,
their personalities are totally different!

Deut. 18 is an attempt by Moses
to prepare the people for an independent national life in Canaan.
Verses 14-15, paraphrased, say:
The other nations turn to soothsayers
and such when they need advice
but you, when you need advice,
I shall send you a prophet.
The Bible mentions many people
who are called or seem to be, 'prophets'.
This is inarguable.
These verses seem to be referring to them,
not to one special prophet in the distant future,
about whose mission nothing is said.
There is nothing in the entire chapter
to indicate that it's talking about a
particular event, a particular time period.
Is verse 14 talking about a particular time period?
Verse 15 isn't either.
That's why they're juxtaposed.

The 'singular' is no problem, as I have paraphrased above,
using the singular, as the Bible does.
There are many cases of singular meaning plural,
and plural meaning singular, in the Bible.
And, to top it off, I have
an explanation for this use of singular:
"It may be a hint to the fact that in prophets,
'many' doesn't mean anything,
450 prophets of the Baal lose to one Elijah.".

The "like Moses" doesn't mean just like Moses,
We know that from Deut 34:10-12,
and also from Numbers 12:6-8.
The phrase 'from amongst their brothers, like you'
means 'a born Jew, like Moses'.

Why is 'Moses' used here,
where it seems to be redundant?
It may be a hint that a prophet must have
the moral characteristics of Moses, God-fearing etc...
but this is not a formal requirement
because it's too difficult for human beings
to define and judge.

>> > Apparently If you were a good historian you should do the same.
>> > Go back to first Century Jerusalem and quote a Scribe or
>> > a doctor of the Mosaic Law who ever said that Deuteronomy
>> > 18:15 never was about a Messiah/Christ, therefore the Apostle
>> > cheated.
>>
>> ===>That is very easy.
>> "The traditional Jewish interpretation is that
>> While, on the surface, Deuteronomy 18:9-22 might appear to be speaking
>> about a prophet, in reality it concerns the establishment of the Office
>> of the Prophet, a position filled by 50 Jewish prophets after Moses.
>> The Office of the Prophet is established via the expression "all that I
>> shall command him". If, for the sake of argument, one were to assume
>> that the prophet being described here is to be only one special future
>> prophet, then it follows that all prophets who came after Moses, except
>> for Moses and this particular prophet, were false prophets. And, one
>> must not ignore the warning found in Deuteronomy 18:20 concerning the
>> fate of a false prophet. This is, of course, absurd - a false
>> conclusion that would result from a false assumption.
>
> OK, let us post the text itself and see If you make sense. Here is
> Deut 18:14-19
> 14 The nations you will dispossess listen to those who
> practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD
> your God has not permitted you to do so.
> 15 The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet
> like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him.
> 16 For this is what you asked of the LORD your God
> at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said,
> "Let us not hear the voice of the LORD our God nor
> see this great fire anymore, or we will die."
> 17 The LORD said to me: "What they say is good.
> 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from
> among their brothers; I will put my words in his
> mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.
> 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet
> speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account.
>
> This is what we will end up with following your kind of Nonsense:
> 14 The nations you will dispossess listen to those who
> practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD
> your God has not permitted you to do so.
> 15 The LORD your God will raise up for you an OFFICE
> OF 50 prophets
> like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to HIM.
> 16 For this is what you asked of the LORD your God
> at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said,
> "Let us not hear the voice of the LORD our God nor
> see this great fire anymore, or we will die."
> 17 The LORD said to me: "What they say is good.
> 18 I will raise up for them an OFFICE OF 50 prophets like you from
> among their brothers; I will put my words in HIS
> mouth, and HE will tell them everything I command HIM.
> 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the OFFICE OF 50
> prophets
> speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account.
>
> Hmmmmmmmmmm...
> I am sure you don't believe in this craps of your own...
> You know it makes nosense. You have to ignore even the rule
> of grammar just to believe that.
> The trouble with your interpretation is that the word Him
> indicates that it is not plural and it is not the office either
> otherwise He would have said,"You must listen to it" that
> is to say the office.Yet, he said, I will put my words in HIS mouth
> and not in ITS MOUTH as IN the mouth of the office nor did he
> say I will put my words in THEIR MOUTHS as to suggest many
> prophets, but Him that is to say One prophet and that prophet will
> be in the likeness of Moses.

Your knowledge of Hebrew is weak, to say the least.

> If you say to the Prophet Daniel that he was in the likeness
> of Moses, he would order you be stoned for blasphem.
> Now here is my interpretation and I will let the readers
> decide who makes more sense.
>
> 14 The nations you will dispossess listen to those who
> practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD
> your God has not permitted you to do so.
> 15 The LORD your God will raise up for you The Messiah/Christ,
> a prophet like me from among your own brothers.
> You must listen to him.
> 16 For this is what you asked of the LORD your God
> at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said,
> "Let us not hear the voice of the LORD our God nor
> see this great fire anymore, or we will die."
> 17 The LORD said to me: "What they say is good.
> 18 I will raise up for them Christ/Messiah,a prophet like you Moses
> from among their brothers; I will put my words in his/Messiah
> mouth, and he/CRIST will tell them everything I command him.
> 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the Messiah, the prophet
> speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account.
> Again when Jesus said to the crowd," If you believe
> Moses, you would believe me for He wrote about me."
> this is the text He was alluding to.
>
> The same Deut 18:15 is commented in the Qur'an as
> a text fortelling the advend of the Messiah/Christ.
> The Author of the Qur'an went even further by suggesting
> that accepting the Messiah/Christ was a covenant binding between
> the Children of Israel and God. Here is the text;
> Behold! Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets,
> saying: "I give you a Book and Wisdom; then comes
> to you a Messenger/Christ, confirming what is with you;
> do you believe him and render him help." Allah said:
> "Do ye agree, and take this my Covenant as binding on you?"
> They said: "We agree." He said:
> "Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses." 3:81.

You may as well finish the job and convert to Islam.
You've got the blinkered mentality that religion demands.
You'd be a natural fit.

> You are displaying a demoniac spirit which pushes you to denial,but
> you are not opposing me, you are opposing Jesus himself, because
> Whetever comes from his mouth is infailible, and this indeed comes
> from his mouth ...
> YOU ARE WASTING AWAY YOUR TIME and your life.
>
> But you know what? This text has already hit
> its target. This is not something in the distant
> past that you can not verify like the evolving of
> a monkey into a human, this is indeed current
> event. You always will have time to verify it. So let us say
> What is going on there in Jerusalem between the
> Jews and the Arabs is grounded on this text Deut 18:15
> and on the Mosaic pronouncement that he would make
> the children of Israel jealous through a stupid nation.
> And indeed Israel is jealous to the point of building a wall
> of separation because it finds itself living
> in the same land with nation that it used to call its
> people snakes. But this was done in purpose so that Israel
> may reread his own text. In the text of its
> enemies, the Arabs, Jesus is referred to as the
> Christ/Messiah...the fulfillement of Moses
> BE CAREFUL JERK

Just as God hardened the heart of Pharaoh
and enabled to Jews to successfully flee Egypt,
He is hardening the hearts of Arabs as a fulfillment of prophecy.

Zev
 
On Feb 18, 7:20 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
wrote:
>

> >>>> did not invent.
>
> >>> ===>FALSE ASSertion,
> >>> FALSE CONCLUSION. -- L.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> You are not ashamed of yourself yet?
> >> A fictional character invented by Paul would not
> >> be applied to Bar Khobba.
>
> ===>What kind of dishonest nitwit are you?
> NO ONE appleis ANYTHING of Saul/Paul to Bar Kokhba.

What do you think Bar KHobbah was claiming?
Bar Khobba was claiming that he was the Messiah of
Israel that is to say the Christ and Savior of Israel.
What were you thinking? That he was claiming this
out of the blue? No sir, He was claiming this on the basis
of the Jewish Scriptures. Hence him being anointed
by Rabbi Akiva.
How could Paul invent
a fictional personage claimed by others?
You are drowning in the SEA of our knowledge.


>
> Yet Bar Kobba and
>
> >> his Rabbi thought he was the Messiah/Christ.
>
> ===>Why do you keep on LYING, falsely combining
> "Messiah" with "Christ"?
> How dishonest can you get?


Messiah is the English transliteration of the Hebraic word Mashiach
which is translated in GREEK as Christ also translated
in Arabic as Al-Massih.
Sir I went already through this with you many a time.


>
> therefore Paul did not invent him.
>
> ===>You're NUTS!
> Saul/Paul invented the god CHRISTOS
> for his new savior cult.
> NOTHING to do with the Jewish "Messiah".

Again Christ is Greek for Messiah which is a transliteration
of the Hebraic word Moshiac or Al-Massih in Arabic.
Stop lying to yourself


>
> >> Rabbi Paul and Rabbi Akiva are reading the same
> >> source, the Torah of Moses. AS SIMPLE AS THAT
>
> ===>For a simple-minded nitwit like YOU
> it looks that "simple".

Rabbi Paul and Rabbi Akiva are reading the same Book
the Torah of Moses. What is a Rabbi for anyway?
What is the origin and the definiton of the word Rabbi
If not the teacher or doctor of the Law of Moses?
Don't blame us for your failure to connect the DOTS.


>
> Oh, well.........
>
> THINKING CAN BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR FAITH,


mY faith is stronger than EVER. I did not find all this out from
a school but from Jesus own mouth right here near Peachtree Road
Buckhead, Atlanta. There is nothing I can fear, nothing
from you.

>
> so, don't even try it. -- L.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
 
On Feb 18, 7:09 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
wrote:
> Christopher A.Lee wrote:


> > Never Knew.
>
> ===>The Jews have known THOUSANDS of "Yeshuas".
> But nobody knew the IESOUS of Gospel fiction,
> since he never existed. -- L.

For your knowledge, the Jews knew the Jesus of the Gospel
This is the only Jesus born of Mary who was accused
by the same Jews of having an affair with a Roman
soldier named Pantera. This does not look like
a fictional character.
And the author of the Qur'an blasted them for their
mischeaf.
"They did not believe in JESUS and invented against Mary
a calumnious LIE." Qur'an.
Fictional character is only in your mind.
Our faith is based on History with evidence everywhere.
You just failed to connect the dots
 
On Feb 18, 7:12 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
wrote:
> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
> > On Feb 17, 5:04 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> > wrote:
>
> >>Tohu.B...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >>>On Feb 16, 7:26 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> >>>wrote:
>
> >>>>Jeckyl wrote:
>
> >>>>>>You are such a prentious little asshole...
>
> >>>>>Charming.
>
> >>>>>>The same way people are trained to explain the American
> >>>>>>Constitution, the same way there were people in Israel
> >>>>>>trained to read the Law of Moses and interprete it.
> >>>>>>You are not ONE of them, so why should I care about
> >>>>>>your PRIVATE OPINION.
>
> >>>>>So are you saying that the Jewish faith recognises Jesus as the messiah ?
>
> >>>>>>You are not a good Historian either
>
> >>>>>You ceratinly aren't .. you've not given one single bit of historial
> >>>>>evidence. Only hearsay from people who never new jesus when he was
> >>>>>supposedly alive.
>
> >>>>>>Go back to first Century Jerusalem and quote a Scribe or
> >>>>>>a doctor of the Mosaic Law who ever said that Deuteronomy
> >>>>>>18:15 never was about a Messiah/Christ
>
> >>>>>Whether or not the Jews where expecting a promised messiah is beside the
> >>>>>point. The issue is whether jesus was that messiah. The old testament and
> >>>>>jewish scripture do not say that.
>
> >>>>>>Do you think that being historian mean reading the works
> >>>>>>by some Historians?
> >>>>>>Being historian means being able to investigate and find the cause
> >>>>>>and effect.
>
> >>>>>Exactly .. obviosuly not something you have done, otherwise you would cite
> >>>>>the credible contemporary evidence of Jesus existence.
>
> >>>>>>Hey it looks like History does not support your viewpoint.
>
> >>>>>It certainly does not support yours.
>
> >>>>>>JESUS IS THE CHRIST, NO JESUS, NO CHRIST
>
> >>>>>Shame that.
>
> >>>>===>In fact the Gospel writers invented "Jesus" to strengthen
> >>>>the Pauline claims about "Christ".
>
> >>>It is easy to claim it, now you must prove it.
> >>>Given the fact that you believe that Rabbi Akkiba accepted
> >>>Bar Khobba as the Messiah of Israel.
>
> >>===>I don't "believe" it.
> >>I KNOW it.
>
> >>>Given the fact that any Jewish claim about the Messiah is always
> >>>based on Deuteronomy 18:14-19.
>
> >>===>FALSE ASSertiom you keep repeating.
>
> > Did not you say that Rabbi Akiva believe Bar-Khobba
> > was the Messiah/Christ.
>
> ===>He PROCLAIMED Bar Kokhba as the Messiah.
>
> > We are reading the same source about Bar-Khobbah's
> > claim, so If you can't connect the DOTS
> > we can help you connect them. But before anything let me
> > ask you some:
> > Bar-Khobbah claimed that he was the Messiah. Where
> > do you think that he based his claim on?
>
> ===>Definitely NOT on Deuteronomy!
> Only YOU keep ASSSerting that it has to do with
> "the Messiah". -- L.- Hide quoted text -


Countless of Rabbis already did. You are the one coming
up with a novelty, but thanks goodness you are not
a Rabbi, therefore your opinion is not authoritative.
You are clueless as how the Law of Moses works in the real
life

>
> - Show quoted text -
 
On Feb 18, 8:17 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
wrote:
> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:


> >>>based on Deuteronomy 18:14-19.
>
> >>===>No claim is based on Deut. 18:14-19,
> >>only YOURS. -- L.

You don't even understand the Jewish Culture
Nothing a jew can undertake without finding a justification
in the Scriptures. Their life is not like that of the pagans.
They are the people of the books. Now If you think
that a jew would act without the Scriptures, then you are displaying
your lack of understanding.
When the Maccabbees fought against Antiochus, it was done
on the basis of their Scriptures, the Torah of Moses.
Your failure to connect the dots is damaging your claim.
You are a failure



> > You are not even honest with the text
>
> ===>It is YOU who is being dishonest
> even with yourself. -- L.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
 

Similar threads

DaMan
What I know about the iPad 3
Replies
0
Views
123
DaMan
DaMan
DaMan
A month with the iPhone 4S
Replies
0
Views
126
DaMan
DaMan
timesjoke
Birds of a feather
Replies
0
Views
161
timesjoke
timesjoke
DaMan
Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 review
Replies
0
Views
212
DaMan
DaMan
R
Do Many Jews Believe They Collectively Are The Messiah?
Replies
3
Views
18
Carl
C
Back
Top