Amedeo

http://www.bartleby.com/65/ol/OldTesta.html

====================================

http://www.westarinstitute.org/Poleb...ocomplete.html

Lugubert

Addressing the academic point of view, I have had "Bible Science" (probably a poor translation) at first and second semester university level, each BS part supposed to need five weeks of 40 hours of study (one semester = 20 weeks). There was no direct mentioning of an OT-NT link, but indirectly, from for example the fact that the OT prof was one of the Govt appointed experts for our non-denominational "Bibel 2000" and reading it with comments, I think that the consensus in this part of the world is that the NT writers stole OT parts to support their claims, or even to create those claims. (For example, already in our 1917 translation, Isaiah 7:15 had "The young woman".)

Amedeo

There could be no STEALING: the early Christians -- the Gentiles who had converted to Judaism through the apostles of Jesus -- LOGICALLY adopted the Bible as their own. (As a matter of fact, were not for the Christians, today the Bible would not be around in the Gentile Western World; it would be studied by Gentile ethnologists the way archeologists studied the Iliad and found the ancient Troy [or many of them], or I learn about what people of the Agricultural/Metallurgical Age knew and how they thought.)

Furthermore, the synoptic Gospels (undoubtedly after a Proto-Gospel) were written down in the zeroth century [4 B.C.- 96 A.D. or so], at a time when the Greek Christians were little versed with the Bible; they knew the Bible theology: God the creator is El, Jesus's divine father, who is also Adonai (the Lord), the rabbinical name that substituted the divine name [Yahweh].[And to this day, the divine name is transladed by "Lord" in the various European languages.] So, it's unlike the the Gospel writer or writers supplied Scriptural justifications, the so-called fulfilments of prophecies.

As I explained in some posts, Jesus (well versed in the Scriptures since his adolescence) preached his own autobiography, his being the Messias the way the Scriptures describe the messiah-to-be. It's like you playing the Messiah on a stage and explaining to the audience, "I am as the Scriptures described me." So, the whole biography of Jesus Christ, Jesus-the-messiah, that we read in the Gospels is NOT a combinations of empirical reports + Scriptural justifications; it is the report of what Jesus imagined to be. Accordingly, he must have been born in Bethlehem on the occasion of the census (whereas Jesus-the-King was born before Herod's death, that is before 4 B.C by our calendar); he must have been born of a maiden [unwed mother] (whereas Jesus-the King was the biological son of Joseph in the Davidic bloodline); and so on and so forth. // Jesus's disciples and Apostles were not Scripture-learned men enough to pull off the hoax that Jesus was the expected Messiah.

Today we would say that Jesus was a bright and learned man with a God-complex, for his stories are that he performed miracles, raised people from the dead, and would raise himself from the dead -- which he did... right!? As his brother told him once: If you really do the things THAT YOU SAY you do, go and do them in front of everybody at the Passover in Jerusalem, and they will believe you. Jesus never took up the challenge: he always insisted on faith in him without the need of evidence... and faith would save them. Blessed are those who believe, he said to the doubting Thomas... in HIS STORY about himself and Thomas, for nobody ever saw him rising from his tomb. It was an angel -- one of those dream realiaties -- that informed the Marys that Jesus was no longer there....

A joke has been made on the Latin version of the episode.
The angel said, "Resurrexit, non est hic" [= he has risen; he is not here]. Version, "Resurrexit non, est hic" [= he has not risen; he is here]. But the angel also told them to go and tell everybody. // The angel was believed just as much Joseph believed his dream-angel that Mary was expecting a child fathered by God. (Whether it was Joseph that told everybody of his dream or not, nobody knows.) Jesus-the-messiah is a well constructed fable that is believed by those who believe in Jesus. After all, he saw himself as being what he proclaimed himself to be, "I am the truth."
----
Don't imagine for a moment that that was something unique in Jesus's "theory" of truth. For the mythic or myth-making mind of any man, the truth of a proposition is constituted (made real) by the authority of its speaker. If God says that there was darkness before he created light, it was a fact that there was darkness; truth lies in the proposition being enunciated by God. In the aletheic or disclosing mind (the Gentile mind since the 7th century B.C.), the truth of a proposition is constittuted by the existence of what is enunciated. This is "a posteriori" or contingent truth: it depends on fact. The mythic mind invents facts and, therefore, he who seeks "evidence" automatically doubts the autority of the speaker/promulgator. // All the Biblical prophets enunciated propositions as coming from or as being authored by God; so, they were "a priori" truths. They are not subject to doubt or CONTESTATION. For example, to contest the Jewish holocaust is "to offend the memory of the victims of " the proclaimed holocaust -- which means contesting divine authority. This is a sin or heresy for the believers, and a criminal civil offense for the non-believers. In fact, the offence is recognized as being criminal by an "anti-defamation law" that was created in the U.S. and in other Gentilistic countries. The anti-defamation leaguers of a foreign world have politically instituted the mythic theory of truth in the progressed Gentilistic countries. Heretics of any breed are liable to burn at the stake or maybe today ... jailing [as in Europe] or social lynching [as in America].

I have discovered you, leaguers! There is an old Gentile proverb: Veritas fila temporis [literally: truth is the daughter of time]. THE UNVEILING OR DISCLOSURE IS JUST A MATTER OF TIME.