aa5874

You are dumping a lot of BS on your thread.

No non-apologetic source of antiquity identified a character called Jesus of Nazareth and no non-apologetic writer ever claimed to have actually and personally encountered Jesus of Nazareth.

Jewish and Roman authors mentioned Apollo. Surely that does NOT mean Apollo did exist.

Jesus of Nazareth is a Mythological character.

Jesus of Nazareth had ZERO theological value before the Fall of the Jewish.

Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of a God was INVENTED AFTER c 70 CE to blame the Jews for their own calamities and the Fall of the Temple.

Aristides' ApologyJustin's Dialogue with Trypho
Hippolytus "Treatise Against the Jews Well, at this point, I think, only a fool would argue that the Jesus of Nazareth story was known in the 1st century before c 70 CE WITHOUT a shred of actual evidence.

At this point, I think, only a fool would argue that there was a Jesus cult of Christians in the 1st century before c 70 CE WITHOUT a shred of actual evidence.

No--Nil--None--Zero recovered manuscript dated to the 1st century and before c 70 CE mentions any character called Jesus of Nazareth, his disciples and Paul.

Now, even Apologetic sources ADMITTED that the very Jews DENIED that there was a character called Jesus Christ that was already come.

1. Justin's Dialogue with Trypho2. Hippolytus' Refutation Against All Heresies 9

Littlejohn

"..ταυτα τα ονοματα των ανδρων ους απεστειλεν Μωυσης κατασκεψασθαι την γην και επωνομασεν Μωυσης τον Αυση υιον Ναυη Iησουν.."

All this goes to show, beyond any doubt, how confused are your ideas on exegetical matter! ... What does the Old Testament has to do with the name of the Nazarene more famous of story? ...

In order to understand who really was Jesus of Nazareth, we must investigate the facts that happened in the first century of our era. Quote a passage from Numbers for demonstrate that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, is something that, in my opinion, borders on lunacy, as well as the absolute inability to follow an exegetical 'path' likely to have even a small chance to get the historical truth!

"..Pray tell Littlejohn, (or anyone else) who is this Iησουν? .."

Hallucinating!....

Numbers 13 - Bible Septuagint

16. ταυτα τα ονοματα των ανδρων ους απεστειλεν Μωυσης κατασκεψασθαι την γην και επωνομασεν Μωυσης τον Αυση υιον Ναυη Iησουν

Numbers 13 - Bible Vulgata

17. haec sunt nomina virorum quos misit Moses ad considerandam terram vocavitque Osee filium Nun Iosue

Numbers 13 - English Standard Version

16 These were the names of the men whom Moses sent to spy out the land. And Moses called Hoshea the son of Nun Joshua.

Iησουν is a pseudo greek name which has NOTHING to do with the Jewish name YEHOSHUAH! ..

This subject has already been treated in the past and the fact that you childishly repropose it means that you do not understand anything! ... If you think I'm making this up, try to ask to Toto ...

Iesoun (Iησουν), or Iesous, is the ionic version of the attic term Iasoun/Iasous, whose meaning is HEALER. An authoritative confirmation of this, admitted that I find your 'erudite' consent, comes from Eusebius of Caesarea and Cyril of Jerusalem, which both confirm that Iesous is a Greek term which means 'healer'.

Jerome, in his Vulgate, transliterated the hebraic Yehoshuah with Iosue, not with Iesous, because Jerome knew what even knew Eusebius and Cyril (and, of course, many other fathers and doctors of the church). In the English version we find JOSHUA, a term which transliterates the latin term Iosue, not Iesous!

Iasoun/Iasous was an attribute that was applied to ancient Greek Asclepius, the god of healing and the father of IASO, the goddess of healing. Since the Roman provinces of Ionian Greece (Asia, Ephesus) the figure of Jesus, there appealed 'Iesous'(*), was closely coupled to that of Asclepius, and since this god was also called SOTER, that is savior, even Jesus was approached by the figure of the SAVIOR.

After all, Jesus already enjoyed of this title, ir 'Saviour', although only in the palestinian gnostic environment of the johannine gnostic sect. In fact, Jesus had reached the state of 'Saviour' at the end of his initiation Gnostic, which sanctioned his RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD, where the 'dead' others were not that the followers, and all outside the Johannine sect, which still did not know the GNOSTIC TRUTH (a 'truth' that proceeded directly from God through the JUST Enoch/Enosh)


IMPORTANT NOTE: If it is true that the 'Septuagint' is the Hebrew Bible transliterated in greek by experts Jewish scholars (70, according to the tradition / legend, hence the name 'Septuagint'), even people with little common sense should be able to understand (see the transliteration of Jerome) that the term [b] Iησουν [/ b] ABSOLUTELY could not be part of the original Septuagint and if today it appears in this work is more than evident sign that the 'long arms' of the counterfeiter scribes to service of the Catholic clergy, produced such a change. Ditto for what concerns the attribute PETRUS/PETER....Ma that's another story which I'll discuss later.




_____________________________


(*) - the figure of Jesus 'healing' emerges CLEARLY by the evangelic context.


Littlejohn S

.

Sheshbazzar

.




← I beg to differ, And long decades before I ever heard of you, or before this subject ever came up on this Forum.
As may be seen, it is a very personal subject to me, one near and dear to my heart, that has been much studied and often meditated upon for over 40 years.

ישי 'Yeshay' or 'Jesse' IS NOT the name יהושע nor does it have the same meaning.




Thankfully, I have never had to depend upon you or upon your opinions for any of my Hebrew or Greek lessons

You still have not answered the simple question I asked;

You missed commenting on this particular quotation (and many more similar ones can be provided);
The writers that wrote this text seem to have held a bit more respect for the form Ἰησοῦν than you do.
Interesting, Are you asserting that these writers changed the very name they testified to, claimed to believe in, and to baptize men into?

In short are you claiming that the form of the name Ἰησοῦν occuring throughout the NT is false?
perhaps an an interpolation? or a scribal error? That has been present in the Gospels since the beginning? :constern01: but actually more of a :devil1: :hysterical:

And even the Angel of the Lord that spoke these words and THIS name to Joseph;
didn't know what he was talking about. :hysterical:

Must be that those inspired NT writers didn't know what name it was they were writing, or just forgot to spell it your way . :hysterical:

Lordy Lordy Lordy!
Damn, but they really need to come up with a knee slapping hillarious icon



.

Littlejohn

"..You are dumping a lot of BS on your thread..."

What's 'BS'?....Bullshit?

I'm afraid that the 'Bullshit' you and Sheshbazzar you have it to place of the 'gray matter'

As the saying goes, "there are none so deaf as those who will not hear"

Every year, around the world, thousands of books about Jesus of Nazareth are published. The vast majority of their authors are 'historicist', ie scholars who do not put in any way cast doubt on the historicity of Jesus. These authors even fill their books of 'Bullshit', or, according to you, does it only Littlejohn in this forum? ..

Before closing this useless debate between a rationalist and a dogmatic mythicist like you, I wonder if, at least, know how to give a reasonable explanation about the fact that, in the second century AD, over 70 jesuan gnostic sects were formed: an absurd thing even for people with little common sense, if Jesus of Nazareth never existed! ..

".. No non-apologetic source of antiquity identified a character called Jesus of Nazareth..."

So, if I understand correctly, the rabbinic and mandaean sources would be for you 'apologetic sources'?..... You, as Sheshbazzar, always pretend to ignore that the Jews of the diaspora were fiercely persecuted by the Inquisition Catholic (over 30,000 victims), for what the rabbis had written in their holy book, the Talmud, about Jesus and his mother.

Your case is like that of Sheshbazzar. At you NOT interested in demonstrating that the Catholic religion is a resounding historical false, born because sponsored by the secular power (Senate Emperor); at you only interest prove that Jesus never existed (*). If you would be able to convince the erudites that make up the official erudition, then you may be crowned as 'genes' of the exegetical art! ... Wishes ..


____________________________________

(*) - it is the same, identical strategy of the inhabitants of the 'satanic dome', namely make sure that in the Web, or in other places, we are talking about a Jesus never existed, rather than a truly historic Jesus, but with ABSOLUTELY different characteristics - and VERY embarrassing also - than the so-called 'Jesus of faith'. This is absolutely logical, since the greater is the number of the people who believe in what I believe, and higher is the risk that the inconfessable truth, held maniacally and bloodily hidden for more than 19 centuries, comes, at the end, to the light, with everything that follows.


Littlejohn S

.

Littlejohn

Your ideas seem very clear ... Surely will do many proselytes



Littlejohn S

.

Sheshbazzar

Hey go back to post #193 ! Cause ya shore done missed some of the fun

Sheshbazzar

You sure don't seem to know jack shit about what I have written in other threads.

For example today, in 'WHO decided on a NT Christian Canon?!'

Which certainly demonstrates that your allegation against me is both baseless and false.

Did you not hear, did you not understand, that the whole world would receive a strong delusion that they might believe in a lie?
Well there you have it. The lie and the delusion that -was deliberately set in place- is the writings of the so called 'New Testament', and its imaginary false god Jebus, and the works that have followed them who have believed in it testify of from what manner of father they really are.



.

aa5874

The existence of Jesus of Nazareth is not at all related to the quantity of books written.

Please, tell me how much books were written about Romulus and Remus, Apollo, Zeus, Jupiter, the God of Moses, Allah, Perseus, Danae, Satan, the Angel Gabriel, the angel Moroni, Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel??

Now, tell me how much books of all antiquity and up to today which claimed Jesus was the Son of a Ghost?? Is it not in the thousands???

Please, get familiar with the thousands of books that casts doubt on the historicity of Jesus.

Your statement is wholly absurd. It is like claiming that God in Genesis must have existed because there are human beings in existence.

You seem to have NO idea that there were many Myth Gods and Sons of Gods in antiquity and many cults that had Nothing whatsoever to do with any stories about Jesus.

Now, now, now, did I not already tell you that the Jesus story and cult originated in the 2nd century??

Is it not absurd for people with little common sense to argue that Jesus existed 100 years before there were cults in his name??

Is it not absurd for people with little common sense to argue that Jesus was a human being in the 1st century and cannot present even one Apologetic writer who met him or became a member of the cult after having met Jesus??

Again, you will NOT ever find any Jesus story or cult in the 1st century before c 70 CE.

Even, the Bible claimed it was a Ghost that started the Jesus cult on the day of Pentecost--See Acts 2

Have you read the Talmud?? Well, tell me the page, or paragraph, or verse, or chapter where Jesus of Nazareth is identified??

Please identify a rabbinic and mandean source which mentioned Jesus of Nazareth???

Jesus of Nazareth was Fathered by a Ghost and was God the Creator in the NT so please show me a credible non-apologetic source that ackowledged a character called Jesus of Nazareth.

Sheshbazzar

Which only goes to demonstrate that the whole world, including you, has been taken in by Rome's religious lies, and now sucks up to the false name, and to the lying legend of its stupid man made brass god. Just as it was foreseen 2000 years ago.

Sticks are bound together †for the fire, and † icons of brass, silver, and gold shall be melted down upon it.

What was lifted up in the wilderness, shall surely be cast down and into the fire to be burned.

There shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, when the children of the kingdom are cast out.
Christ-insanities days are numbered, and what was given shall soon be taken.




.

Littlejohn

"..Which only goes to demonstrate that the whole world, including you, has been taken in by Rome's religious lies..."


You must have fallen out of bed when you were a little baby!


Littlejohn S

.