Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed The Bible

  • Thread starter Codebreaker@bigsecret.com
  • Start date
On Feb 15, 11:55 am, "landson" <landson2...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Feb 13, 6:05 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
>
> > Again OUR BOOK was written by believers and for believers, not for
> > Atheists. The first Generation of believers did not have a book of New
> > Testament, yet they all had faith in one Savior that Moses foretold.
> > The point being that even If the whole New Testament turn out to be
> > nothing but a junk, Christianity would not die out. Sola Scriptura of
> > course will die out and not Christianity. **** YOU AAALLLLLL
> >And how dishonest the author of the Qur'an too because it is shown
> >that he developped in his book this Mosaic pronouncement at lengh.
> >**** YOU AND PLONK AGAIN
>
> Dear Mr Codebreaker,
>
> I don't go to church. I don't pray. I don't believe in any gods.
> And I
> don't use vulgar obscenities in polite discussions.
>
> So, who is the better person, You or I ?
>
> Tim

Of course Darwin, eternal damnation be upon him,
was not a better person.
And anything you heard about him is a second hand testimonies
from people since you never talked to Darwin in person.
Why do you think it is ok for you but it is not
ok for me to rely on what Peter or Luke or Paul
have to say about Jesus?
 
On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
wrote:
> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>
> >>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>>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
>
> >>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in
> >>Christ/Messiah myth.
>
> >>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
> >>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.
>
> >>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus
> >>outside of the bible or the religion.
>
> > I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking
> > If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the
> > Origin of the species by Darwin...
> > Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.
>
> ===>That is STUPID!
>
> We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,
> even pictures of his father and sister.
>
> The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction
> written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -


Let us wait 2000 years later and see If his books, his sisters, father
existence would not be questioned.
When Jesus was preached around the world nobody
ever questioned his existence, I mean nobody
until a bunch of good for nothing like you come up
with a questionable scholarship and methodology
of investigating


>
> - Show quoted text -
 
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:
>
> >>>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
> > And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
> > would be born,
>
> ===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.
>
> then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

I will believe that If the Jewish Council Of Jamnia claimed it.
They are the gardiens and authority on this Jewish Scriptures.
And since their goal was to stop the spread of Christianity,
the system of belief grounded on Christ/Messiah, since their
agenda was to stop it, "Moses never said such thing"
would have been easier for them.
Or they should have hired you on their advisory board.
Son of the bitch you are.


>
>
>
> > No Jesus, No Christ
> > Simple logic. As simple as that. You think any chronicler
> > is an historian, you are wrong.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
 
"codebreaker@bigsecret.com" <Codebreaker@bigsecret.com> wrote in
news:1171569101.502952.315290@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> wrote:
>> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
>> > On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote
>> >>innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >>>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
>>
>> >>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a
>> >>BELIEF in Christ/Messiah myth.
>>
>> >>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
>> >>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.
>>
>> >>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic
>> >>Jesus outside of the bible or the religion.
>>
>> > I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking
>> > If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the
>> > Origin of the species by Darwin...
>> > Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.
>>
>> ===>That is STUPID!
>>
>> We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,
>> even pictures of his father and sister.
>>
>> The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction
>> written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -
>
>
> Let us wait 2000 years later and see If his books, his sisters, father
> existence would not be questioned.
> When Jesus was preached around the world nobody
> ever questioned his existence, I mean nobody
> until a bunch of good for nothing like you come up
> with a questionable scholarship and methodology
> of investigating
>

Given the choice between Jesus and getting hit with a big rock, I'd have
chosen the jesus too.

--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Convicted by Earthquack
Plonked by Fester
 
>> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus.
>
> It could be that there is no contemporary evidence of Jesus

None has been found

> but it could also be that there is evidence but you lack the
> knowledge to evaluate it on its own merit.

It could be you lack the skills to recognise what is proof of Jesus and what
isn't

> It could also be that the title Christ means nothing to you

I know exactly what it means. Do you?

> you may be thinking that Christ is Jesus last name.

How silly. What would make you suggest that I am that foolish.

> So for you there can be Christ without Jesus.

Of course there can .. there is nothing that says the messiah has to be
called jesus.

> You just need to tell us who that Christ is

There may not yet have been an anointed one. The jews are still waiting for
the messiah .. and they should know, as it is to them that the messiah that
was promised.

But we are not talking about the concept of a Christ / Messiah .. but of the
existence of Jesus .. the man about who the Gospel stories are about.

> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus seems to be a rewording
> of no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, this kind of
> nonsense we are everyday.

Its not nosense .. there is no credible evidence outside the bible .. (the
bible is not contemporary with Jesus, and so therefore is not historical
evidence).

If you think there IS historical evidence of Jesus living, then please
present it .. the world will be anxious to here of it.

> So let me lump you all together in the same box full of jerks
> who take their ignorance as bliss.

No thanks .. I don't want to be part of your group. I don't qualify as a
jerk.

> Allows me to remind you all, O blissful fools that the New Testament
> was compiled by Christians for Christians

Yes .. and that is relevant how?

> that you may be looking for evidence of Jesus in the wrong place?

So where is this 'right place' that provides the proof?

> Why don't you just accept the blame?

I have nothing to be blamed for. Why not accept the (lack of) evidence ..
is it ignorance or arrogance?

> As far as we are concerned, we everyday come across evidence
> of Jesus ouside the bible.

Where?

> The very fact that the New TESTAMENT was written by Jesus disciples
> is by itself an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible.

It was not written by the disciples .. they were all dead (or at least very
old) when it was written. The stories were written in the name of those
disciples (not that there were disciples amongst the twelve called Mark or
Luke).

Matthew was written by an unknown author near the end of the first century,
not by the Disciple Matthew
Mark was written earlier by a disciple of Peter
Luke was written by an unknown author, but probably someone who knew Paul,
and the same author wrote Acts, and at the end of the first or beginning of
the second century
John was written by an unkown author, also around the end of the first or
beginning of the second century, not by the Disciple John.

There is, of course, historical evidence of (at least some of) the disciples
/ apostles .. but that does not mean there is evidence of a Jesus.

If there were any writings from the people who had physically seen Jesus,
that would be historical evidence. I would love to see it.

> The very fact that there were Christians in
> Thessalonica around year 10 AD
> is an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, the Bible being compiled
> 200 years later.

How could there be christians when Jesus was only 10. he hadn't started his
ministry at that time. If anything, that would be evidence Jesus was not
the presonal inspiration of Christianity.

Perhaps that date was a typo or error on you part.

Regardless, that is just evidence of Christanity .. Noone says Christanity
dose not exist. It still exists, so we don't need to prove it.

Also note that the christian community at Thesalonica was founded by Paul
around the year 50 , who had never met the man Jesus.

> Unless you want to tell me that the Christians in Thessalonica
> were followers of another CHRIST who was not Jesus or
> Unless you want to tell me that you know nothing about
> investigating History.

You are only showing the existence of the religion. That's like showing
proof that the Greek and Romans worshiped their Gods as evidence that those
God's existed. It doesn't follow.

> The very fact that Nero burnt Rome

More proof of Chitianity and not Jesus

> The very fact that there were Christians in Ephesus
> in year 20 AD is another evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,

More evidence AGAINST Jesus existing, if that is the date you meant to type.
How could Christians exist before Jesus began his teachings if it is
actually Jesus that they are referring to

> unless you have a proof
> that Ephesian Christians were followers of Christ
> who could not be Jesus.

What you said above would have proved it for me .. unless you were lying or
mistaken.

[snip more inforamtion that only lends prove to the NON existence of Jesus
OR the existinece of Christianity]

Please .. if you're going to bget on your high horse and insinuate I am
historically illiterate .. at least present information that is relevant.
You've done nothing to show Jesus himself existed

> What more contemporary evidence do you need O Homme vain?

Well .. any contemporary historical evidence at all would be good. You
seem to be very good at proving the existence of christian groups, but not
of Jesus.
 
> There is evidence for John the baptist but not for Jesus

Yes .. you've got it in one.

> So evidence of John could not be evidence of Jesus.

No .. they are different people. There is no evidence other than the gospel
stories written much later, that John met Jesus or know of him

> We call this not a result of a sound scholarship but malice.

Just saying there is a story that person A and person B knew each other .
..therefore because person A exists, then that is evidence of person B. It
makes no logical sense

> Now to make sure I understand you correctly
> can you tell me how you did manage
> to find evidence for John?

Its called doing research. You shoul try it sometime. There is credible
written contemporary evidence of John the Baptist (outside of the bible
stories wiich were written later) .. there is no such credible evidence
about jesus. Look at jewish Antiquities for an account of John. nothing
about Jesus though.

>>>>>
"2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came
from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John,
that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and
commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one
another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the
washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not
in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for
the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly
purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds
about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his
words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people
might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they
seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting
him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself
into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it
would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's
suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there
put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army
was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God's displeasure to
him."
>>>>>

>> The lack of any third part evidence would be enough to relegate any
>> similar
>> figure into the realms of myth or story.
> Why do you think that the mention of Jesus in the
> talmud, a book written
> by Jesus enemies is not a third part evidence?

It is not clear that that refers to the Jesus of the bible (it was a common
name). It is thought it refers to a person of the same name from about a
century earlier (there have been several historial 'Jesus's at various
times). The Talmud was not written until the second century and later
(although based on some earlier writings), and so it not contemporary with
the biblical Jesus supposed lifetime.

> This book is not enough to be accepted as Darwin evidence

There is more evidence of Darwin than just his book. There is NO evidence
of jesus (not EVEN a book written by him).

So if you can claim darwin doesn't exist, despite large amounts of evidence
to that he does,. then you should reject jesus as existing, giving the
complete lack of evidence at all.

You are inconsistent.

> But the Church founded on him rose the first day into existence
> not many years after. THE BEST EVIDENCE OF AMONG ALL
> EVIDENCE

Its non-evidence among a void lacking any evidence at all. The existence of
the Christian church does not prove Jesus existed .. only that the church
existed.

If you really do have some evidence .. I would truly love to see it.
 
codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote:

> On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> wrote:
>
>>codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>>>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
>>
>>>>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in
>>>>Christ/Messiah myth.
>>
>>>>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
>>>>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.
>>
>>>>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus
>>>>outside of the bible or the religion.
>>
>>>I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking
>>>If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the
>>>Origin of the species by Darwin...
>>>Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.
>>
>>===>That is STUPID!
>>
>>We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,
>>even pictures of his father and sister.
>>
>>The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction
>>written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -
>
>
>
> Let us wait 2000 years later and see If his books, his sisters, father
> existence would not be questioned.

===>What an inane response!

> When Jesus was preached around the world nobody
> ever questioned his existence,

===>Really?
How do you know that? ;-) -- L.
 
codebreaker@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:
>>
>>>>>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
>>> And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
>>> would be born,
>>
>>===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.
>>
>>then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.
>
>
> I will believe that If the Jewish Council Of Jamnia claimed it.
> They are the gardiens and authority on this Jewish Scriptures.
> And since their goal was to stop the spread of Christianity,
> the system of belief grounded on Christ/Messiah, since their
> agenda was to stop it, "Moses never said such thing"
> would have been easier for them.

===>Is it that much easier for you to just LIE than to tell
us WHERE "it is prophecised that in this world Christ
would be born"? -- L.
 
On Feb 15, 1:41 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 15, 8:39 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 14, 4:17 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 14, 1:46 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 13, 6:36 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Summing up the last 150 years of research by the finest minds in
> > > > > archaeology, historical text research, and anthropology is a "rush to
> > > > > conclusion"?
>
> > > > 150 years of what??????????????????? Fine mind?
> > > > You make me laugh indeed
>
> > > That's because you're an ignorant, illiterate waste of humanity. Even
> > > if you were smart enough to read the evidence, you're too scared of
> > > what it might say.
>
> > Atheists are best known as braggarts.
>
> You know nothing of atheism or atheists, you insipid twat. And it's
> not "bragging" if you can deliver the goods.


You have not delivered anything yet. All what you come up
is fossils say such and such. Fossils do not talk for themselves.
They say what you want them to say... That ain't nothing

>
> > Putting down
> > is another form of bragging. Thank you for giving weight
> > to what we already know
>
> You know nothing, you putrid little pretender of a man. Every post
> attempting to defend your moronic mythology proves it.

I know that DARWIN, eternal damnation be upon, erred...

There is no worse mythology that a monkey turning into a human
yet you swallow this garbage because its make look like
you are above average joe. No you ain't. Darwin, eternal
Damnation be upon was no historian. He had no sense
of History


>
> > > Sooo...you simply laugh at it. You laugh to cover up your ignorance,
> > > and you laugh to cover up your fear. A pathetic excuse for a human
> > > being, cringing in fear of what you don't know.

There is no fear. My faith was born is a fournace. Its worse enemies
failed lamentably. You too will meet with the same fate.


>
> > > A fine advertisement of what the disease called religion does to
> > > someone.
>
> > Just because you think I am ignorant does not make me so...
>
> No, your lack of knowledge or understanding makes you so. Here, maybe
> this will help:
>
> Main Entry: ig
 
On Feb 14, 7:29 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> If you ar etalking about whetehr Darwin existed, there is plenty of
> contemporary evidence about him from the time he lived. Including the books
> he wrote.

Did you ever meet Darwin in person? No
Where you there when he was writing? No
Anything you know about Darwin has been handed down
to you from previous generations. You have no mean to confirm
or infirm it.
You just believe it because it is written, If you believe any garbage
just because it is written down, why don't you believe
that you are a ******* and you don't know your real father
as mother were in business to change men over night.
Now to come back to the case at hand. We trust
those eye witness who were sent to teach in the name of
Jesus the Savior, just the way you trust anything
written down about Darwin.
Somwhere at some point, you need to trust somebody.
We trust the Apostles just the way you trust Darwin propagandists


>
 
On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
wrote:
> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>
> >>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>>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
>
> >>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in
> >>Christ/Messiah myth.
>
> >>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
> >>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.
>
> >>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus
> >>outside of the bible or the religion.
>
> > I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking
> > If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the
> > Origin of the species by Darwin...
> > Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.
>
> ===>That is STUPID!
>
> We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,
> even pictures of his father and sister.

YOU KNOW IT FROM WHO? NOT FROM DARWIN HIMSELF.
You have his picture? How do you know If it is Darwin?
Did you meet him in person before.
You see again, somewhere you decide to trust someone who
reported who Darwin was and wrote. We all depend
on hearsay


>
> The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction
> written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -

Yep, we are not embarrassed about it.
The life of Jesus the Messiah was written by Christian and for
Christians. If you are clueless as how to read it
it is because you are not a Christian.
Ask me what does the word Christian means.
The answer, the one who follow Christ.
Again there would be no christian without Christ


>
> - Show quoted text -
 
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:
>
> >>>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
> > And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
> > would be born,
>
> ===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.
>
> then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

You are such a prentious little asshole...
Are you a Scibe versed in Moses Law? No
Are you a Doctor of the Law? No
Now you may think that anybody who can read and write
should give his opnion on what the Law of Moses says
and that opinion should become authoritative, it ain't so,
Otherwise the whole Israel should turn into the
land of lawyers and Scribes.
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.
You are not a good Historian either, otherwise you would
have baked your opinion up with something authorritative from the
distant
past. I went back 2000 years in time and quoted what
Paul said about Deuteronomy 18:15 and how it applied to
Jesus, I also quoted the Qur'an to support my opinion.
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. They were very close to the event
Common on now back your opinion up with historical fact, at least
you can quote the Council of Jamnia.
If you can't then Shut your ASS UP. YOU ARE NOTHING
BUT A CRACKPOT HISTORIAN.
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.
Hey it looks like History does not support your viewpoint.

JESUS IS THE CHRIST, NO JESUS, NO CHRIST



>
>
>
> > No Jesus, No Christ
> > Simple logic. As simple as that. You think any chronicler
> > is an historian, you are wrong.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
 
On Feb 15, 6:48 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus.
>
> > It could be that there is no contemporary evidence of Jesus
>
> None has been found


None has been find yet... And who is looking for that evidence?
Those who have a vested interest to make you blieve that
your ancestor turned into a human being from monkey sometime
over night, sometime 10 trillions years around and all other nonsense.
Hummmmm.... conflict of interest oblige



>
> > but it could also be that there is evidence but you lack the
> > knowledge to evaluate it on its own merit.
>
> It could be you lack the skills to recognise what is proof of Jesus and what
> isn't
>
> > It could also be that the title Christ means nothing to you
>
> I know exactly what it means. Do you?
>
> > you may be thinking that Christ is Jesus last name.
>
> How silly. What would make you suggest that I am that foolish.
>
> > So for you there can be Christ without Jesus.
>
> Of course there can .. there is nothing that says the messiah has to be
> called jesus.
>
> > You just need to tell us who that Christ is
>
> There may not yet have been an anointed one. The jews are still waiting for
> the messiah .. and they should know, as it is to them that the messiah that
> was promised.
>
> But we are not talking about the concept of a Christ / Messiah .. but of the
> existence of Jesus .. the man about who the Gospel stories are about.
>
> > There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus seems to be a rewording
> > of no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, this kind of
> > nonsense we are everyday.
>
> Its not nosense .. there is no credible evidence outside the bible .. (the
> bible is not contemporary with Jesus, and so therefore is not historical
> evidence).
>
> If you think there IS historical evidence of Jesus living, then please
> present it .. the world will be anxious to here of it.
>
> > So let me lump you all together in the same box full of jerks
> > who take their ignorance as bliss.
>
> No thanks .. I don't want to be part of your group. I don't qualify as a
> jerk.
>
> > Allows me to remind you all, O blissful fools that the New Testament
> > was compiled by Christians for Christians
>
> Yes .. and that is relevant how?
>
> > that you may be looking for evidence of Jesus in the wrong place?
>
> So where is this 'right place' that provides the proof?
>
> > Why don't you just accept the blame?
>
> I have nothing to be blamed for. Why not accept the (lack of) evidence ..
> is it ignorance or arrogance?
>
> > As far as we are concerned, we everyday come across evidence
> > of Jesus ouside the bible.
>
> Where?
>
> > The very fact that the New TESTAMENT was written by Jesus disciples
> > is by itself an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible.
>
> It was not written by the disciples .. they were all dead (or at least very
> old) when it was written. The stories were written in the name of those
> disciples (not that there were disciples amongst the twelve called Mark or
> Luke).
>
> Matthew was written by an unknown author near the end of the first century,
> not by the Disciple Matthew
> Mark was written earlier by a disciple of Peter
> Luke was written by an unknown author, but probably someone who knew Paul,
> and the same author wrote Acts, and at the end of the first or beginning of
> the second century
> John was written by an unkown author, also around the end of the first or
> beginning of the second century, not by the Disciple John.
>
> There is, of course, historical evidence of (at least some of) the disciples
> / apostles .. but that does not mean there is evidence of a Jesus.
>
> If there were any writings from the people who had physically seen Jesus,
> that would be historical evidence. I would love to see it.
>
> > The very fact that there were Christians in
> > Thessalonica around year 10 AD
> > is an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, the Bible being compiled
> > 200 years later.
>
> How could there be christians when Jesus was only 10. he hadn't started his
> ministry at that time. If anything, that would be evidence Jesus was not
> the presonal inspiration of Christianity.
>
> Perhaps that date was a typo or error on you part.
>
> Regardless, that is just evidence of Christanity .. Noone says Christanity
> dose not exist. It still exists, so we don't need to prove it.
>
> Also note that the christian community at Thesalonica was founded by Paul
> around the year 50 , who had never met the man Jesus.
>
> > Unless you want to tell me that the Christians in Thessalonica
> > were followers of another CHRIST who was not Jesus or
> > Unless you want to tell me that you know nothing about
> > investigating History.
>
> You are only showing the existence of the religion. That's like showing
> proof that the Greek and Romans worshiped their Gods as evidence that those
> God's existed. It doesn't follow.
>
> > The very fact that Nero burnt Rome
>
> More proof of Chitianity and not Jesus
>
> > The very fact that there were Christians in Ephesus
> > in year 20 AD is another evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,
>
> More evidence AGAINST Jesus existing, if that is the date you meant to type.
> How could Christians exist before Jesus began his teachings if it is
> actually Jesus that they are referring to
>
> > unless you have a proof
> > that Ephesian Christians were followers of Christ
> > who could not be Jesus.
>
> What you said above would have proved it for me .. unless you were lying or
> mistaken.
>
> [snip more inforamtion that only lends prove to the NON existence of Jesus
> OR the existinece of Christianity]
>
> Please .. if you're going to bget on your high horse and insinuate I am
> historically illiterate .. at least present information that is relevant.
> You've done nothing to show Jesus himself existed
>
> > What more contemporary evidence do you need O Homme vain?
>
> Well .. any contemporary historical evidence at all would be good. You
> seem to be very good at proving the existence of christian groups, but not
> of Jesus.
 
On Feb 15, 7:15 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > There is evidence for John the baptist but not for Jesus
>
> Yes .. you've got it in one.
>
> > So evidence of John could not be evidence of Jesus.
>
> No .. they are different people. There is no evidence other than the gospel
> stories written much later, that John met Jesus or know of him
>
> > We call this not a result of a sound scholarship but malice.
>
> Just saying there is a story that person A and person B knew each other .
> .therefore because person A exists, then that is evidence of person B. It
> makes no logical sense
>
> > Now to make sure I understand you correctly
> > can you tell me how you did manage
> > to find evidence for John?
>
> Its called doing research. You shoul try it sometime. There is credible
> written contemporary evidence of John the Baptist (outside of the bible


How do you decide this is credible and this is not?
Just because something meets your fantazy does not make it credible

> stories wiich were written later) .. there is no such credible evidence
> about jesus. Look at jewish Antiquities for an account of John. nothing
> about Jesus though.
>
>
>
> "2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came
> from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John,
> that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and

Who did he baptized and for what purpose did he baptize
 
On Feb 15, 8:42 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 1:41 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 15, 8:39 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 14, 4:17 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Feb 14, 1:46 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 13, 6:36 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > > > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Summing up the last 150 years of research by the finest minds in
> > > > > > archaeology, historical text research, and anthropology is a "rush to
> > > > > > conclusion"?
>
> > > > > 150 years of what??????????????????? Fine mind?
> > > > > You make me laugh indeed
>
> > > > That's because you're an ignorant, illiterate waste of humanity. Even
> > > > if you were smart enough to read the evidence, you're too scared of
> > > > what it might say.
>
> > > Atheists are best known as braggarts.
>
> > You know nothing of atheism or atheists, you insipid twat. And it's
> > not "bragging" if you can deliver the goods.
>
> You have not delivered anything yet. All what you come up
> is fossils say such and such.

WTF? Fossils prove Jesus never existed? What the hell are you smoking?
On the contrary, ancient texts prove if there was a historical Jesus,
he was as much a nobody as you are.

Fossils, OTOH, simply prove the Bible is not inerrant.

> Fossils do not talk for themselves.
> They say what you want them to say... That ain't nothing

Now that doesn't even make sense. Why don't you call your local
community college and see if they offer a night course in remedial
English.

> > > Putting down
> > > is another form of bragging. Thank you for giving weight
> > > to what we already know
>
> > You know nothing, you putrid little pretender of a man. Every post
> > attempting to defend your moronic mythology proves it.
>
> I know that DARWIN, eternal damnation be upon, erred...

Of course there were errors. The book was published over 100 years
ago, moron. There's plenty we've learned since then. Darwin simply
uncovered the mechanism.

BTW: There is no "eternal damnation", either. The man is dead.

> There is no worse mythology that a monkey turning into a human

Idiot. Monkeys are just as "new" as men. We don't "come from monkeys".
We share a common ancestor.

> yet you swallow this garbage because its make look like
> you are above average joe.

No, I can observe what happened by the changes found in the bones of
dead animals. It's obvious to someone without an agenda to advance.

And in other parts of the world with indoor plumbing, I am not an
"above average joe". Only here in the Land of Debris and Home of
Depraved is an ignorant man such as myself considered "educated".

> No you ain't. Darwin, eternal
> Damnation be upon was no historian.

That's right. He was a naturalist, moron.

> He had no sense
> of History

That's because he was not a historian, dumbass. He studied biology .

> > > > Sooo...you simply laugh at it. You laugh to cover up your ignorance,
> > > > and you laugh to cover up your fear. A pathetic excuse for a human
> > > > being, cringing in fear of what you don't know.
>
> There is no fear. My faith was born is a fournace. Its worse enemies
> failed lamentably.

Bullshit. The Christian mythology enslaved Europe for more than a
thousand years. Only after discarding it with the ashes of the Second
World War were the Europeans able to build a thriving society with its
nations at peace with one another.

Your faith? Yeah, keep it. We'll put you in the zoo as the last living
Christian, as your species goes extinct.

> You too will meet with the same fate.

Empty threats from an idiot who still clings to the dress of an Iron
Age fertility god. All you've done is prove is that Christianity is a
religion of hate. Beginning with hatred of those who don't believe
xian mythology, and ending with hatred of the self. Wretched,
tormented creatures, you are. You'd be easy to pity if your situation
had been imposed by others, but since you only have yourselves to
blame, sit down and shut up.

> > > > A fine advertisement of what the disease called religion does to
> > > > someone.
>
> > > Just because you think I am ignorant does not make me so...
>
> > No, your lack of knowledge or understanding makes you so. Here, maybe
> > this will help:
>
> > Main Entry: ig
 
On Feb 15, 8:12 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
wrote:
> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
> > On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>
> > wrote:
>
> >>codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:
>
> >>>On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>>>>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
>
> >>>>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in
> >>>>Christ/Messiah myth.
>
> >>>>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
> >>>>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.
>
> >>>>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus
> >>>>outside of the bible or the religion.
>
> >>>I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking
> >>>If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the
> >>>Origin of the species by Darwin...
> >>>Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.
>
> >>===>That is STUPID!
>
> >>We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,
> >>even pictures of his father and sister.
>
> >>The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction
> >>written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Let us wait 2000 years later and see If his books, his sisters, father
> > existence would not be questioned.
>
> ===>What an inane response!

Hey Historian, post your source from a first century Jerusalem
authority
who ever questioned Jesus existence.
The Talmud did not question it. It had interest in doing so.
The Jewish Council of Jamnia did not question it.
It had interst in doing so.
Our faith was born in fire and in fire it developped itself.
None of the Apostles contemporaries ever question Jesus existence.
Do you think you are the first enemy Jesus ever encountered
as the Christ/Messiah of Israel?


>
> > When Jesus was preached around the world nobody
> > ever questioned his existence,
>
> ===>Really?
> How do you know that? ;-) -- L.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
 
On Feb 15, 8:19 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:
>
> >>>>>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
> >>> And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ
> >>> would be born,
>
> >>===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.
>
> >>then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.
>
> > I will believe that If the Jewish Council Of Jamnia claimed it.
> > They are the gardiens and authority on this Jewish Scriptures.
> > And since their goal was to stop the spread of Christianity,
> > the system of belief grounded on Christ/Messiah, since their
> > agenda was to stop it, "Moses never said such thing"
> > would have been easier for them.
>
> ===>Is it that much easier for you to just LIE than to tell
> us WHERE "it is prophecised that in this world Christ
> would be born"? -- L.- Hide quoted text -

You are not a good historian. You take your opinion as history.
I quoted text from first century Christians. You quoted nothing
to support your view.
What is the official opinion of the children of Israel
on Jesus?
If you say he was a prophet. My question is this?
Why do you think they accepted a list of prophets
like a Isaiah, Jeremy, Daniel, Habbakuk, Zakkariah and j'en passe
and even compiled their books into a canonical writing, yet rejected
Jesus?
What rational explanation can you come up with?
The difference is that Jesus was not just a prophet, but the Messiah-
Prophet
foretold by Moses. You are such a jerk


>
> - Show quoted text -
 
On Feb 15, 9:29 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 15, 8:42 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 15, 1:41 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 15, 8:39 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 14, 4:17 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Feb 14, 1:46 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Feb 13, 6:36 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"
>
> > > > > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Summing up the last 150 years of research by the finest minds in
> > > > > > > archaeology, historical text research, and anthropology is a "rush to
> > > > > > > conclusion"?
>
> > > > > > 150 years of what??????????????????? Fine mind?
> > > > > > You make me laugh indeed
>
> > > > > That's because you're an ignorant, illiterate waste of humanity. Even
> > > > > if you were smart enough to read the evidence, you're too scared of
> > > > > what it might say.
>
> > > > Atheists are best known as braggarts.
>
> > > You know nothing of atheism or atheists, you insipid twat. And it's
> > > not "bragging" if you can deliver the goods.
>
> > You have not delivered anything yet. All what you come up
> > is fossils say such and such.
>
> WTF? Fossils prove Jesus never existed? What the hell are you smoking?
> On the contrary, ancient texts prove if there was a historical Jesus,
> he was as much a nobody as you are.
>
> Fossils, OTOH, simply prove the Bible is not inerrant.
>
> > Fossils do not talk for themselves.
> > They say what you want them to say... That ain't nothing
>
> Now that doesn't even make sense. Why don't you call your local
> community college and see if they offer a night course in remedial
> English.
>
> > > > Putting down
> > > > is another form of bragging. Thank you for giving weight
> > > > to what we already know
>
> > > You know nothing, you putrid little pretender of a man. Every post
> > > attempting to defend your moronic mythology proves it.
>
> > I know that DARWIN, eternal damnation be upon, erred...
>
> Of course there were errors. The book was published over 100 years
> ago, moron. There's plenty we've learned since then. Darwin simply
> uncovered the mechanism.
>
> BTW: There is no "eternal damnation", either. The man is dead.
>
> > There is no worse mythology that a monkey turning into a human
>
> Idiot. Monkeys are just as "new" as men. We don't "come from monkeys".
> We share a common ancestor.
>
> > yet you swallow this garbage because its make look like
> > you are above average joe.
>
> No, I can observe what happened by the changes found in the bones of
> dead animals. It's obvious to someone without an agenda to advance.
>
> And in other parts of the world with indoor plumbing, I am not an
> "above average joe". Only here in the Land of Debris and Home of
> Depraved is an ignorant man such as myself considered "educated".
>
> > No you ain't. Darwin, eternal
> > Damnation be upon was no historian.
>
> That's right. He was a naturalist, moron.
>
> > He had no sense
> > of History
>
> That's because he was not a historian, dumbass. He studied biology .
>
> > > > > Sooo...you simply laugh at it. You laugh to cover up your ignorance,
> > > > > and you laugh to cover up your fear. A pathetic excuse for a human
> > > > > being, cringing in fear of what you don't know.
>
> > There is no fear. My faith was born is a fournace. Its worse enemies
> > failed lamentably.
>
> Bullshit. The Christian mythology enslaved Europe for more than a
> thousand years. Only after discarding it with the ashes of the Second
> World War were the Europeans able to build a thriving society with its
> nations at peace with one another.
>
> Your faith? Yeah, keep it. We'll put you in the zoo as the last living
> Christian, as your species goes extinct.
>
> > You too will meet with the same fate.
>
> Empty threats from an idiot who still clings to the dress of an Iron
> Age fertility god. All you've done is prove is that Christianity is a
> religion of hate. Beginning with hatred of those who don't believe
> xian mythology, and ending with hatred of the self. Wretched,
> tormented creatures, you are. You'd be easy to pity if your situation
> had been imposed by others, but since you only have yourselves to
> blame, sit down and shut up.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > A fine advertisement of what the disease called religion does to
> > > > > someone.
>
> > > > Just because you think I am ignorant does not make me so...
>
> > > No, your lack of knowledge or understanding makes you so. Here, maybe
> > > this will help:
>
> > > Main Entry: ig
 
>Reply to article by: "Warhol" <molarh_tree@hotmail.com>
>Date written: 14 Feb 2007 21:27:13 -0800
>MsgID:<1171517233.280845.9400@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>

>> >> In the OT, God prophecized to Jeremiah that no one would be a descendant of Jeconiah (Coniah), yet
>> >> Jesus was, therefore that disqualifies Jesus from being the Messiah.
>> >> Apparently the same people who don't read their Bible are the same ones who believe in it.

>Why do you translate the word of "Jeconiah" to "coniah"...
>WHILE ITS "JACOB's Daughter" YOU BLOODY VERMIN...

"Coniah is an abbreviation of Jeconiah (1 Chronicles 3:16), which is another form of the name
Jehoiachin (2 Kings 24:6). Coniah was the last king of Judah in the direct line from King David.
When he was deported to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Chronicles 36:10), Coniah's uncle Zedekiah was
assigned to rule Judah for a brief reign, but he also was put down, and no later king was ever able
to regain the throne" (Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Defender's Study Bible, note for Jer. 22:24.).

If you had bothered to read the whole 22nd chapter of Jeremiah that I quoted from, you would have
read where the Jeremiah calls out the same exact person, geneologically speaking, as Matthew does,
leaving no doubt as to the equivalence of the two names...

"'As I live,' declares the LORD, 'even though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were a
signet ring on My right hand, yet I would pull you off" (Jer 22:24)

So there you have it: the Bible itself translates the word of "Jeconiah" to "Coniah".

Get a clue before posting next time!

The Sage

=============================================================
http://members.cox.net/the.sage/index.htm

"All those painted screens erected by man to shut out reality
-- history, religion, duty, social position --
all were illusions, mere opium fantasies"
John Fowles, The French Lieutenant's Woman
=============================================================
 
> Why do you think they accepted a list of prophets
> like a Isaiah, Jeremy, Daniel, Habbakuk, Zakkariah and j'en passe
> and even compiled their books into a canonical writing, yet rejected
> Jesus?
> What rational explanation can you come up with?

He didn't exist.

> The difference is that Jesus was not just a prophet, but the Messiah-
> Prophet
> foretold by Moses. You are such a jerk

The Jewish faith has never accepted Jesus as messiah/Christ.

Please quote a reference in accepted Jewish text that cites Jesus as the
messiah
 

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