judge

So when paul talks about the "churches of Judea that are in Christ." in Galatians, or "the church of God in Corinth" in 1 corinthians, what do you have in mind?


If you are going to use Galatians as a source, then you get no help for that conclusion. All we have there is Cephas eating with the gentiles at one point, and then at a later point drawing back and only eating with jews becasue he was afraid of what they might think.

So one must ask what else do you have to come to the conclusion you have above?

spin

Groups of messianists who meet in various places in Judea.

A group of of god fearers (those cared for by Paul) who meet in Corinth.

They aren't just any Jews, they are people from James, Cephas fearing those of the circumcision. James was clearly a staunch Jew who upheld the torah, Cephas not so much, but caved in to torah practice. It is interesting how deftly Paul deals with the people who had been stirring up the Galatians, those who caused trouble during his meeting with the pillars, separating them from the pillars and calling them "false brothers" (ψευδαδελφοι)! These were people who advocated--like James--torah adherence, but Paul didn't submit to them, they who wanted to "enslave" the Galatians by forcing torah practice. It's very hard to see any significant difference between the ψευδαδελφοι and James's group.

Paul's discourse throughout Galatians contrasts his christ crucified with torah practice, which is the same as that supported by the James group. "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law" (3:13), yet James pursued a policy of torah practice which had Cephas toe the line. "You that want to be justified by the law cut yourselves off from christ." (5:4).


spin

aa5874

It was rather easy to have deduced that Jesus of the NT was MYTH. It was mostly time consuming but in the end there was really nothing to Jesus of the NT but MYTH.

To demonstrate that it was an absolute piece of cake to PROVE or Consider that Jesus the Messiah was MYTH I will ask the following question.

Was there an EMPEROR of ROME named JESUS when PILATE was governor of Judaea c 26-36 CE?

Well, I would expect that in a matter of minutes NUMEROUS lists of the EMPERORS of Rome for the 1st century would have been produced and it would be SEEN that no list would show an EMPEROR of ROME named JESUS.

An EMPEROR of ROME is an EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT and MOST POWERFUL person in the ROMAN EMPIRE. It is VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE for there to have been a ROMAN EMPEROR named JESUS and not found in ROMAN HISTORY.

Well, now I ask the next question.

Was there a JEWISH MESSIAH and SAVIOR of the Jews during the time when PILATE was GOVERNOR of Judaea c 26-36?

I expect within a FEW SECONDS that I will get NUMEROUS BLANK LISTS.

There was NO JEWISH MESSIAH and SAVIOR of the Jews during the 1ST century.

The JEWISH MESSIAH and SAVIOR of the NT was ALL MYTH.

A JEWISH MESSIAH was a MOST SIGNIFICANT EXPECTED and POWERFUL CHARACTER for the Jews. A JEWISH MESSIAH IS PROPHECY FULFILLED and the WORD of the LORD COME TRUE. It WAS virtually IMPOSSIBLE for Josephus, a Pharisee, to have written ONLY about the brother of a JEWISH MESSIAH and SAVIOR of JEWS and that PHILO would have COMPLETELY forgotten to even mention his name.

Jesus of the NT, the Jewish Messiah, was MYTH.

Now, it ONLY TAKES A few SECONDS. I don't have time to waste.

I have the LIST of ALL the JEWISH MESSIAH in the 1st century from the governorship of PILATE to reign of Domitian c26-96 CE.

Jesus the JEWISH MESSIAH is NOT on the list.

Have a look at the list of Jewish Messiah from c 26-96 CE.

..........................

...........................

Jesus Of the NT is NOT on the LIST.

Well, Jesus was MYTH.

angelo

Let's see at what stage we are in regarding the Jesus of history.
All references to him as found in the N/T are at best questionable. What remains unanswered is the identity of the followers, the quality of their memories, and the materials they may have used in fashioning the Jesus tradition.
The evidence points strongly towards borrowing from contemporary Jewish and other sources, and beliefs held by the earliest believers in the story of Jesus.
The many quests starting from [and before] Albert Schweitzer onwards have shed little light on the HJ. We are no closer to proving beyond reasonable doubt that there ever was a HJ. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, which there's a lack of in proving a HJ.
Occam's Razor shaves away the improbable until we are left with the probable which is that the whole mythical Jesus is just that.
A figure such as this man who all sorts of claims were made for, would surly have left us more evidence than we have at present, which is zilch.
If I told you all that I posses a star ship capable of reaching Alpha Centaur in less than a week, how many would actually believe it without sighting this ship?
We are asked to believe in a man that even more unbelievable claims were made for existed, but not as claimed.
That's like saying you believe in my star ship, but not it's claims to reach another star in a week.
As dejuror keeps saying, the whole myth is built around a child of a holy ghost, the creator of all that there is, and worst still, this child of the holy ghost by the time the author of John has finished, is one and the same as this holy ghost.
It's quite laughable that it's even contemplated that behind this fairy tale could lurk a real life HJ.

angelo

aa5874 claims that Paul's writings are beyond the first century are not agreed to by the vast majority of bablical scholars. Some regard Luke as been written at the very earliest 60 C.E.

Kapyong

Gday,

Yup, I think now it belongs in a higher heaven after all.

Meanwhile, for anyone who is interested I have put together a post (in the Air Beneath The Moon thread) about The Heavenly Jerusalem - partly to try and get a handle on where it is.
http://www.freeratio.org/showthread....51#post6648351


Kapyong

judge

Apologies here I attributed a quote to you that was not yours * However your answer helps as you had touched upon the same general topic
I think.

So what gospel was he peddling?

Not so much? According to the source (Galatians) he lived as a gentile, but on this one occaision we hear he drew back and ate with only jews.

He temporarily ate only with jews.


How do you know this happned during the meeting?

What evidence do you have they were directly connected to the "pillars" in any way?

For who? Jews in Galatia interested in this teaching?



yes

Having small pieces of information and not seeing a difference is not the same as concluding they are the same though.

true.

When paul went to Jerusalem Titus,his companion, a greek, was not compelled to be circumcised (which would be torah observance).

So my questions would be.

1.Did the Jerusalem group want only jewish messainists to follow the torah, or greek as well?

2.Did those "false brothers" who infiltrated the Galatian church want only jewish followers circumcised or greeks as well?

* would a mod be able to correct my wrongly attributing that quote to Spin..thanks.

avi

Thank you for expressing this sentiment, I hope it can be extended to the second century also....

Thank you Andrew, good clarification. My point was simply that the existence of reference to an historical ruler, in this example, King Aretas, does not confirm a date of origin for the particular document, save in the context of affirming that the text could not have emerged PRIOR to the life of King Aretas. We cannot, in my opinion, assign a date for Paul's epistle II Corinthians, based upon reference to King Aretas, any more than we can suggest that san(1) guo(2) yan(3) yi(4) (Romance of the Three Kingdoms), was written 2200 years ago, based upon the accounts found therein of genuine Han dynasty historical figures (e.g. Cao(2)Cao(1)).

Well, not like fiction. How's that? 2 Thessalonians 2: 1-7 contains zero historical data, as far as I can determine.

ok, good. Then, we can use those two sources for study of history. The question however, is the date of Paul's epistles, not an analysis of Josephus and Philo.

Even assuming that the passage from Paul, above, reflects a tortured and cryptic description of the same events described by Philo and Josephus, how does such a finding support the conclusion that Paul's letter must therefore have originated PRIOR to Josephus' late first century account of the historical events?

Well, do you agree with me that it cannot have been written BEFORE King Aretas? Then, it follows that it must have been written, no earlier than the lifetime of the king. I have not insisted that the letter must have been written as "late fiction." I am insisting that it cannot be assumed that Paul's letter had been written contemporaneously with the life of Aretas--> it is far more likely to have been written well after the life of Aretas. Tolstoy's portrait of Napolean was created half a century after demise of the ruler.

Here's a question: If Paul's work was so especially well known, in the first century, then, why didn't either Philo or Josephus mention him? This guy claimed to have been an apostle of JC, yet no one describes him? Is there a first century author who acknowledges the existence of Paul?

Contrarily, if Paul had lived and worked in the first century, were his accomplishments so insignificant that no one knew about him, until "Irenaeus", supposedly writing at the end of the second century?

avi

judge

So you have Paul as the earliest source, for the Jesus cult? Just when do you place the letters of Paul?

Are you thinking the Aretas story is a later interpolation?

aa5874

As I have last posted my search for the historical Jesus is virtually over as soon as it was brought to my attention that a JEWISH MESSIAH was the MOST SIGNIFICANT EXPECTED character for the Jews, that JEWS BELIEVED their Holy Scriptures did PREDICT a JEWISH MESSIAH and that the JEWISH WAR c 70 was also based on supposed PROPHECIES of a JEWISH MESSIAH.

It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE for a JEWISH MESSIAH and SAVIOR as supposedly preached in the PAULINE writings to have been KNOWN in Judea and that NO Jewish writers, Philo and Josephus, to have written about such a MOST SIGNIFICANT EVENT.

The PAULINE writings should have caused MAJOR THEOLOGICAL DISPUTES in the Jewish Community.

"Paul" a supposed PHARISEE was preaching ALL OVER the Roman Empire and even Jerusalem that a JEWISH MESSIAH and SAVIOR had virtually ABOLISHED, BROUGHT to an END, the LAWS of the JEWS.

And, not even a word about such a Jewish MESSIAH and SAVIOR in the writings of PHILO and JOSEPHUS. We have a MOST MASSIVE BLACK HOLE about the ARRIVAL of the MOST SIGNIFICANT and PROPHESIED character of ALL JEWS.

Anyone who claims that JESUS was the EMPEROR of ROME in the 1st century would be REGARDED as a IDIOT of the History of Antiquity.

Anyone who claims JESUS was a GOVERNOR of JUDEA in the 1st century would be REGARDED as a CLOWN of historical proportions.

The claim that JESUS of the NT was a JEWISH MESSIAH and SAVIOR of the JEWS in the 1st century is a MOST ABSURD and ILLOGICAL claim and should be DISMISSED as TOTAL NONSENSE.

I have NO MORE time to waste on this matter.

The evidence that I have seen so far indicates that JESUS of the NT was a HOAX that was eventually BELIEVED to be true.