whichphilosophy

That's correct. When the Romans took over Christianity, of course many elements of Judahism were replaced by Roman culture.

Jeffrey Gibson

Could you tell me exactly where Armstrong says what you attribute to her?

His? Sophia is a woman's name.

And these sources are?

This is not an answer to the question I raised -- which was whether or not you had actually read the "final reports" of the JS or any of the discussion of the Gospel material that forms the basis of the conclusions reached in these works that appeared in the JS journal Forum.

So I'll ask it again in the hope that you won't again avoid answering it as you did above:

Have you or have you not read the "final reports" of the JS -- i.e., The Five Gospels: What Did Jesus Really Say? The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus and The Acts of Jesus : The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus or any of the discussion of the Gospel material that forms the basis of the conclusions reached in these works that appeared in the JS journal Forum?

And while I'm asking questions let me ask one about another claim of yours, namely, "The Jesus character is a typical example of a Pharisee at that time."

Would you do me the kindness of letting me know the nature and extent of your grounding in both the primary source material stemming from the Pharisees, as well as the scholarly discussions about them, that allows you not only to present yourself, as you do, as an authority on 1st century Pharisaic practice and belief, but to make -- and to expect us to take as true -- the global and apodictic claim that you do about what typified a first century Pharisee? Why should we take your claim seriously?

Jeffrey

Roger Pearse

Are you quite sure that even the Jesus Seminar -- an anti-Christian project in conception and execution, as we all know -- were denying the existence of Jesus of Nazareth? They are fringe to NT scholarship, not least because some of the participants were not scholars; but certainly less fringe than the 'no-Jesus' people.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Jeffrey Gibson

Umm .. have you read, or done any work in the critical commentaries on, Mk. 12:1-13?

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson

Could you provide some documentation for this claim, please? And could you document that this obsession, if factual, was prevalent among the particular strata of the "Roman" populace (were all 1st and second century "pagan" converts to Christianity "Roman"?) who converted? Moreover, were most of the "Roman" converts to Christianity from the Roman elite?

Jeffrey

Steven Carr

The Jesus Seminar are claiming that if you went to Bethlehem in 4 BC, you would see the Jesus of the Gospels being born?

If the Jesus of the Gospels was not born, then how could the Jesus of the Gospels exist?

Please produce the evidence the Jesus Seminar give for a Jesus who came from Nazareth, let alone the Jesus of the Gospels.

stuart shepherd

Christianity may have served the Roman purposes.
Colossians 3:22 (King James Version)
Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God;

1 Peter 2:18-20 (King James Version)
Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.

For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.

For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.

1 Timothy 6:1-2 (King James Version)
Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed

The Romans kept many slaves. Scirptures like the above could be counted on to keep their Christian slaves docile.
"Love your enemies" could also work for the Romans.

Stuart Shepherd

Dirge

The Xians were claiming an actual person existed, not an invisible God.

Steven Carr

Mark 12 says God will destroy the Jews???

Wow!

Lógos Sokratikós

The Romans were even more superstitious than the Christians. The astrology, divination, etc of today are only a pale shadow of all the BS around in Roman times. Romans would believe in anything, illiteracy was rampant and rationalism wasn't possible. The few epicurean and aristotelian voices were a drop of water in a very large lake.

Today we have science, which gives people hope. In Roman times, even if you could see the contradictions of the religions of the age, it was better than nothing, nothing to give hope and meaning. They "diserved" the middle ages: it all became corrupt, destitute and superstitious. There could be no other way, it had to be... a snowball of the worst kind and a lesson to us all today.