FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-04-2010, 05:57 PM   #21
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post

So rotting papers are the evidence for Jesus? This is incredibly fascinating.
No, some people are ignorant that there is no existing paper from the time and place of Jesus. (Or Socrates, etc.) They foolishly ask for pieces of paper from the time and place of Jesus

Glad to help clarify that.
Well, that rotting paper evidence still does not make sense. You mean only the papers with information about Jesus rotted away?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick van Vliet
And the majority of secular agnostic Biblical Scholars say part of the Jesus/James stuff in Josephus is genuine.
I asked you for EVIDENCE not your supposed consensus. A consensus has NO VALUE as EVIDENCE. What is the consensus of the all the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church on Jesus or Paul?

Now, how is it the "Josephus papers" and the "Philo papers" did not rot or were copied before they rotted away?

And again, if Jesus was just a man and had a human father in Josephus then it must be blatantly obvious that the Josephus Jesus was not the Jesus of the NT CANON, the offspring of the Holy Ghost, Creator of heaven and earth.

And by the way, Papias, an apologetic source, claimed James, the supposed bishop of Jerusalem, was the son of the sister of Mary the mother of the offspring of the Holy Ghost called Jesus.

Jesus called Christ had no brother called James, perhaps a cousin.

It is virtually certain that the Jesus in Josephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" 20.9.1 was NOT the Jesus in the NT Canon.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 05-04-2010, 07:05 PM   #22
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southeast
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post
...
No, some people are ignorant that there is no existing paper from the time and place of Jesus. (Or Socrates, etc.) They foolishly ask for pieces of paper from the time and place of Jesus
Everyone here knows that there are no pieces of paper (or papyrus) dating to the first century. But there are works written in the first century that have been preserved through scribal copies. None of these mention Jesus.
Such as. You forgot that part. Produce them. I say they don't exist and you just made it up.

All is silence.

Virtually the only thing we have of the time and place of Jesus, other than things about Jesus, is Josephus, and he mentions him. Talmud wouldn't be exected to, and written down long after. Philo ain't there.
Rick Van Vliet is offline  
Old 05-04-2010, 07:06 PM   #23
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southeast
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayrok View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post
After Paul slaughtering all the local followers, where the only ones preaching were abroad, he had to go abroad to finish them off. Went to the High Priest for the authority, etc.
Do what now?:constern01:
It's in Acts. I've posted it several times on this thread.
Rick Van Vliet is offline  
Old 05-04-2010, 07:12 PM   #24
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southeast
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post

No, some people are ignorant that there is no existing paper from the time and place of Jesus. (Or Socrates, etc.) They foolishly ask for pieces of paper from the time and place of Jesus

Glad to help clarify that.
Well, that rotting paper evidence still does not make sense. You mean only the papers with information about Jesus rotted away?
Incomprehensible huh? Totally mystifying. No doubt.

Virtually all paper rots away. No Josephus within 1000 years of when he lived. No Plato within 1000 years of when he lived. But there's Jesus within 100 years.

It's usually people completely ignorant of the fact that paper rots, and there's virtually no paper from the time of anyone back then. Just repeating what someone else said, who knows better and is deliberately lying.

Well, you know now, are are at least exposed to it. You want to carry on an intelligent conversation with informed people, you need to drop the no paper from that time thing. You embarrass yourself.
Rick Van Vliet is offline  
Old 05-04-2010, 07:29 PM   #25
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post

Everyone here knows that there are no pieces of paper (or papyrus) dating to the first century. But there are works written in the first century that have been preserved through scribal copies. None of these mention Jesus.
Such as. You forgot that part. Produce them. I say they don't exist and you just made it up.

All is silence.

Virtually the only thing we have of the time and place of Jesus, other than things about Jesus, is Josephus, and he mentions him. Talmud wouldn't be exected to, and written down long after. Philo ain't there.
Silence of Contemporary Writers contains a list of writers from the first century who show no personal or second hand knowledge of Jesus Christ. Some of them are debatable, but Josephus was not the only writer who has survived.
Toto is offline  
Old 05-04-2010, 07:57 PM   #26
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southeast
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post

Such as. You forgot that part. Produce them. I say they don't exist and you just made it up.

All is silence.

Virtually the only thing we have of the time and place of Jesus, other than things about Jesus, is Josephus, and he mentions him. Talmud wouldn't be exected to, and written down long after. Philo ain't there.
Silence of Contemporary Writers contains a list of writers from the first century who show no personal or second hand knowledge of Jesus Christ. Some of them are debatable, but Josephus was not the only writer who has survived.
Suppose you produce one from the time and place of Jesus. Forget that part?
Rick Van Vliet is offline  
Old 05-04-2010, 07:58 PM   #27
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southeast
Posts: 249
Default

All is silence.
Rick Van Vliet is offline  
Old 05-04-2010, 08:01 PM   #28
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southeast
Posts: 249
Default

The only real example is Josephus, and no physical scraps exist within 1000 years of his life, and all copies passed through the Christian Church of the Dark Ages.

We have physical scraps about Jesus, that never passed through the hands of the Christians, from within about 150 years of the life of Jesus, probably written originally in the middle of the first century. (Gospel of Thomas)

Which one is history?
Rick Van Vliet is offline  
Old 05-05-2010, 04:55 AM   #29
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post
The only real example is Josephus, and no physical scraps exist within 1000 years of his life, and all copies passed through the Christian Church of the Dark Ages.

We have physical scraps about Jesus, that never passed through the hands of the Christians, from within about 150 years of the life of Jesus, probably written originally in the middle of the first century. (Gospel of Thomas)

Which one is history?
Well why do you use Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings as history with respect to Paul.

Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are from the hands of the Church yet you use them as PROOF or EVIDENCE that Paul SLAUGHTERED Jews when you yourself have discredited the writings of the Church.

How can you now claim that writings which have passed through the hands of the Church are genuine?

Why is the Pauline writings genuine and none about Jesus genuine when all passed through the hands of the Church?

Jesus could not have been the offspring of the Holy Ghost if he was human yet the Gospels, books passing through the hands of the Church, claimed Jesus was the offspring of the Holy Ghost and still human.

It is certain that virtually everything about Jesus in the NT Canon is fiction and the NT Canon was a product of the HANDS of the Church.

Now, it must be or can be reasonably deduced that the NT Canon does not contain the truth about Paul. The character called Paul talked about Jesus over 200 times but Jesus did not exist as written in the Gospels that passed through the HANDS of the Church.

Saul/Paul most likely slaughtered no-one. Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are from the HANDS of the Church.

You have destroyed your own credibility.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 05-05-2010, 06:56 AM   #30
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 471
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Van Vliet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayrok View Post

Do what now?:constern01:
It's in Acts. I've posted it several times on this thread.
Oh I read what you posted. Paul slaughtered all the disciples and preachers? oof.
Jayrok is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:51 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.