aa5874

But, NO AUTHOR of the Canon quoted Hosea 6.1-2 as prophecy that Jesus died four our sins, was Buried and was resurrected on the Third day.

Your absurd claim that Hosea 6.1-2 refers to 1 Cor.15 has been shown to utterly erroneous.

Again, WHAT DOES THE TARGUM SAY??

Hosea 6. 1.-2 refers to 2000 years of WORLD desolation according to Rabbi ABAYI.

Look at the very link that you provided

See http://philologos.org/__eb-lat/appen09.htm

Please, TedM, your are not making much sense. You have presented a source that have devasted your argument.

Iskander

THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS - Chapter 9 - Verse 33

The verse Romans 33:9 is not a prophecy. It is a composite reference to Hebrew literature designed to sell the character being advertised. It means that Paul was identifying Jesus with desirable symbols and uplifting images.
It is not the fulfilment of a prophecy: it is only a marketing gimmick..

TedM

Interesting, but not enough for me to inquire further than I already have, some of which you didn't answer. I do know that some religious notions involve a somewhat extreme desire to perfectly interpret everything, so without further study the issue remains unlikely to me.

TedM

Abayi wasn't a Christian so your comment is irrelevant. As long as Christians could say that the passage was Messianic, they could contort it any way they want. Of course in this case, very little contortion is necessary when compared with the other -- nondebatable passages that no one argues were used by Christians.



That's quite ridiculous. Everyone knows Paul was using it to support the idea that Jesus was foretold in Isaiah. Your source even says he was talking about the Messiah. THAT'S PROPHECY Iskander. Isn't white ever white or black ever black? We're done.

aa5874

Your statement is utterly erroneous and disturbing. You very well know that you have not ever identified any Christian of antiquity that claimed Hosea 6.1-2 refered to 1 Cor.15.

You very well know that the term "Messianic" does NOT imply or mean that Jesus died for our Sins.

You very well know that a Messianic passage in Hebrew Scripture may merely refer to the coming of the Messiah.

Please, do some research.

It is obvious that you do NOT even understand the term "Messianic".

Steve Weiss

You are an advocate for the arbitrary and the nonsensical, and you offer no evidence or argument and yet expect to be taken seriously. The supernatural exists for you because you want it to because reason and reality are too limiting and the sticking to the facts and logic is "dogmatic." So, you toss out the law of identity and elevate the supernatural to a position of certainty while denying certainty as such.

What is required is not an "open-mind" as you term it. What is essential, necessary and sufficient is having a critical mind, something you apparently lack.

Chili

That may be true, but that will only make one walk away from religion while the believer is meant to transcend what is already his by way of encounterit first hand by nature. This was Paul, and Kierkegaard (maybe), but Plato is full of it where he enters 'parousia in it's Being' (Sophists, 267 D.), and Aristotle calls it: "we actualize our condition neologically," for which a re-entering is required to see, which makes it an 'underground battle' (non-rational) according to them.

aa5874

My argument is that the Jesus story and cult originated in the 2nd century based on actual recovered dated manuscripts and compatible sources.

I will use every shred of logic and reason with the existing evidence to show that my argument cannot be overturned.

HJers argue that there was an actual Jesus of Nazareth based on gMark and an actual Pauline character.

1. If gMark is an actual historical account of Jesus and the Pauline writer was an actual persecutor of the Church then the Jesus story was known to Paul BEFORE he wrote letters to Churches.

It is therefore irrelevant whether Paul wrote his letters to Churches before the Gospels were composed because the story of the actual historical Jesus was ALREADY known.

Again, if Jesus actually lived then there must be stories about him whether true or false and SOME of those stories MUST PREDATE the Pauline letters.

All we need to find out is whether or not Pauline writer knew the Early stories or the Later stories.

1. The Pauline writer claimed Jesus DIED for Our Sins and was RAISED on the Third day.

That is from the Later stories. See gJohn

2. The Pauline writer claimed that it was revealed that the Ritual of the Eucharist should practised in "Remembrance of Me".

That is from the Later stories. See gLuke

3. The Pauline writer claimed the Resurrected Jesus visited the disciples.

That is from the Later stories. See the long gMark.

4. The Pauline writer claimed he spoke in tongues.

That is from the Later stories. See Acts of the Apostles.

5. The Pauline writer claimed that Jesus loved him and sacrificied himself.

That is from the Later stories. See gJohn

6. The Pauline writer claimed he was called to preach the Gospel.

That is from the Later stories. See the long gMark.

7. The author of Acts wrote Nothing about the Pauline letters up to c 59-62 CE.

The actual written statements found in the NT itself show that the Pauline letters were composed when the Pauline writer knew of the LATER stories of Jesus.

Now, based on non-Apologetic writings and actual recovered dated manuscripts the Jesus stories were not known until the 2nd century.

Even Apologetic writers do NOT acknowledge the Pauline writings at all but show full awareness of stories about Jesus.

The recovered dated NT manuscripts are completely compatible with non-Apologetic sources and Apologetics.

The Pauline letters were composed in the 2nd century or later.

There is no supporting evidence for early Pauline letters in the Canon.

All the actual recovered dated manuscripts DENY that the Jesus story and cult was known in the 1st century.

Sheshbazzar

Some read. Others learn by the doing.
Reading about washing one another's feet, or the yearly keeping of The Vigil of the fourteenth night of Abib will never substitute for the doing.

The one only enters the eye. And the eye lacks understanding.

The other is hands on participation, seen with opened eyes, heard with opened ears, experienced with all of the senses, learned and understood with the mind.

There are places that one cannot go, things that cannot be seen, voices that are never to be heard, matters never to be experienced, without getting up off of your rear end and going out and seeking and then doing.

Reading books and letters will profit you little if you are too lazy to get up off your rear end and put yourself into the experience of the learning.

I said; Go. Observe and KEEP The Passover of YHWH and The Feast of Unleavened yourself these next seven years.
Then come again, and tell me how much you don't know.

I do not tell you when, I do not tell you how, I do not tell you where. I have told you why.

What it is that you are ignorant of, you alone must seek. And what it is that you don't understand, you can only learn by the experience of the doing.

You will either do, and will learn, and get understanding, or you will not.

But if you will not, it is not my loss. Go then to that pit awaiting you in the measure of the ignorance that you choose.

Not that you should inquire of me one other word. Inquire of this of whom you call your Lord and your G-d.

אלה דברי הספר אשר כתבתי לך

Sheshbazzar the Hebrew.

Iskander

Paul was an educated Jew and in his writings one would expect to find references to his culture and times. Finding the evidence that would allow a reader to comment on the cultural background and times of a writer is not the same as finding a prophecy.

Barnes says that Paul directly associates Jesus-- Barnes uses “Messiah routinely as just another name for Jesus, another name is Saviour...-- with a rock, which seem to have been an important cultural cliché in Paul's time and place.

In my culture ,I might refer to someone as ‘one of the few’, an allusion to Churchill’s wartime praise of the RAF pilots in the battle of Britain in 1940, but this association is not a prophecy.

It is you who is misreading Barnes, not I.

It is you who is misreading the Hebrew literature, not Paul.

We are done, you say. I will say to you, have a blessed day and don’t stumble on the rock in the garden path,