|
Ancient Jewish history a complete sham?! (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| josh4 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sevas Stra
That is trully a pointless reply...:rolleyes: |
yes |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
The crucifiction staged...?
...7) In English translations of mark's gospel, Joseph asks Pilate for Jesus' body, which is accepted. However, in the original Greek version, Joseph asks for "soma" which is only used to describe a living body
So, how's that for a conspiracy theory eh?!
Why would Pilate give Jesus's body (dead or alive) to Joseph of Arimathea against all Roman protocol? |
In Strongs Concordance the word soma is number 4983 meaning:
- the body both of men or animals
a) a dead body or corpse
b) the living body
1) of animals
- the bodies of planets and of stars (heavenly bodies)
- is used of a (large or small) number of men closely united into one society, or family as it were; a social, ethical, mystical body
a) so in the NT of the church
- that which casts a shadow as distinguished from the shadow itself
|
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
really? the jews had him executed. why would they care if jesus was buried or not? pilate believed jesus to be innocent. [quote]
All the more reason to help him then...
[quote]no, i meant that it was unreadable. unless the gospels of thomas and mary are in the bible, they are irrelevant to the discussion. |
That is absolutely ridiculous. If they are not in the Bible then not only is it relevent it makes it more relevant... |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
no, i meant that it was unreadable. unless the gospels of thomas and mary are in the bible, they are irrelevant to the discussion. |
They are very relevant to the discussion. The bible is very one sided on the issue, and many parts were intentionally thrown out at the council of Nicaea to amplify Jesus's god like nature and to make christianity more in line with major cults of the time. Those expelled parts are very important in helping us realize what really happened during that time period. If they are authentic, of course. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
Two words:
Flavius Josephus (c. A.D. 37-100).
Flavius Josephus was a contemporary of Jesus. He was also a Jew. His complete works are available online or in your local library/bookstore. You can find his works in the Judaica section. |
Well, supposedly the quote you mentioned is likely to be a somewhat edited version of the original text which is reconstructed as follows:
| quote: | | At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of the people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out. |
http://www.livius.org/jo-jz/josephus/josephus.htm
Besides, Flavius Josephus wasn't a real contemporary, he wrote his works about 50 years after Jesus had died. |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Besides, Flavius Josephus wasn't a real contemporary, he wrote his works about 50 years after Jesus had died. |
Your original argument was:
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
...If we examine roman historical records of the time, Jesus is not mentioned anywhere, which is quite odd considering that he was a pretty important figure in Judea at the time.... |
I closed that argument.
But you want to start another by arguing neither men were contemporaries of each other:
contemporary :
1. Belonging to the same period of time: a fact documented by two contemporary sources.
2. Of about the same age.
3. Current; modern: contemporary trends in design.
I said it before, Flavius Josephus was a contemporary of Jesus.
But just like in days ago, people now find anything to deny Christ ever existed just by saying he was never written about. And in that same sphere of nonsense they write garbage of him being married and surviving the crucifixion.
Also there are others that find the time to write VOLUMES about people that were hardly mentioned in the Bible. Like Enoch or Melchizedek. Little is known about these two people but seems like there are many millionaire writers wanting to tell you alot about them.
Then comes the multi-millionaires on how they have THE right prophecy book to sell.
All this just mars Christendom and only helps evil TRY to conquer truth by having people like you believe in all this.
And people swear their mind is their own. Go figure. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
Your original argument was:
I closed that argument.
But you want to start another by arguing neither men were contemporaries of each other:
contemporary :
1. Belonging to the same period of time: a fact documented by two contemporary sources.
2. Of about the same age.
3. Current; modern: contemporary trends in design.
I said it before, Flavius Josephus was a contemporary of Jesus.
But just like in days ago, people now find anything to deny Christ ever existed just by saying he was never written about. And in that same sphere of nonsense they write garbage of him being married and surviving the crucifixion.
Also there are others that find the time to write VOLUMES about people that were hardly mentioned in the Bible. Like Enoch or Melchizedek. Little is known about these two people but seems like there are many millionaire writers wanting to tell you alot about them.
Then comes the multi-millionaires on how they have THE right prophecy book to sell.
All this just mars Christendom and only helps evil TRY to conquer truth by having people like you believe in all this.
And people swear their mind is their own. Go figure. |
I dont think anyone here is denying Jesus existed, just that what we see in the Bible is not an accurate description of the events that actually took place in Jesus' life...
And it's a little rich telling us that our minds are not our own coming from a Christian who's argument boils down to mere 'faith' and blind belief in what the Roman Church decided was right... |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
And it's a little rich telling us that our minds are not our own coming from a Christian who's argument boils down to mere 'faith' and blind belief in what the Roman Church decided was right... |
No one ever said that Christianity is spoken for by the catholic sect. That's like saying all muslims are wahabis. I've never been catholic but that is besides the point to your labeling me. By your labeling me that could only mean one thing: that you're either an ex-catholic or ex-christian. Maybe you lost a loved one and blamed God or your church. Maybe you were molested by a catholic priest and feel anger against the church. I never said I was catholic but by your grouping me and the catholic church in a discussion that wasn't meant for you, made me think that you are one of those that where hurt by your priest or church.
I could never understand what is is to be molested. But I can tell you that God had nothing to do with your de-flowering. You should not go blaming anyone including yourself. Just pick up what's left of your life and move on and ask God to help you. If you don't want God than that's OK. He never went against your free will at any time.
It's like the story of Adam and Eve. Eve was given a choice to eat from the fruit from the Tree of Life or eat from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge.
Guess which one she and countless others choose:
The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
Your original argument was:
I closed that argument.
But you want to start another by arguing neither men were contemporaries of each other:
contemporary :
1. Belonging to the same period of time: a fact documented by two contemporary sources.
2. Of about the same age.
3. Current; modern: contemporary trends in design.
I said it before, Flavius Josephus was a contemporary of Jesus. |
Well, if you take the term contemporary in its broader sense, meaning that they belong to the same period of time, then Caesar was a contemporary of Diocletian and I'm a contemporary of Churchill. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
No one ever said that Christianity is spoken for by the catholic sect. That's like saying all muslims are wahabis. I've never been catholic but that is besides the point to your labeling me. By your labeling me that could only mean one thing: that you're either an ex-catholic or ex-christian. Maybe you lost a loved one and blamed God or your church. Maybe you were molested by a catholic priest and feel anger against the church. I never said I was catholic but by your grouping me and the catholic church in a discussion that wasn't meant for you, made me think that you are one of those that where hurt by your priest or church.
I could never understand what is is to be molested. But I can tell you that God had nothing to do with your de-flowering. You should not go blaming anyone including yourself. Just pick up what's left of your life and move on and ask God to help you. If you don't want God than that's OK. He never went against your free will at any time.
It's like the story of Adam and Eve. Eve was given a choice to eat from the fruit from the Tree of Life or eat from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge.
Guess which one she and countless others choose:
The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. |
Riiiiight...anyway...
I never said you were Catholic I was merely pointing out that it was the Roman Catholic Church who decided what was included and what was excluded in the Bible and as far as I am aware it is that Bible that all the rest of em are based on so it matters not what brand of xtian you are
As for Eve and the tree of knowledge, early xtian/jewish sects believed that knowledge is god and that the serpent must have been 'good' for recommending the apple to Eve, but those sects were wiped out by the Catholic Church, so again, we have an example of how the Church played a part in rewriting history to suit its perticular opinions and needs
And if you are after more examples of how your Bible has been doctored and editied by humans 100s of years after the death of Jesus I will be only too happy to provide them |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
John 8:42-45
Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word.
8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
8:45 And because I tell [you] the truth, ye believe me not. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
John 8:42-45
Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word.
8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
8:45 And because I tell [you] the truth, ye believe me not. |
Erm...any chance of explaining your post?? I don't know what point you are trying to make |
|
|
|
|
