Sheshbazzar

Littlejohn's third reference to masturbation in this thread.
He really ought to seek some professional counseling and treatment for his paranoid fantasies and masturbation obsessions.


Sad, I offered some constructive criticisim, stating that I know he is capable of better scholarship, and encouraged him to engage in providing the kinds of contemporary historical proofs that would make his work stand up to scholarly scrutiny, all of which would be to his own advantage and profit......
And this is the type of nutzo stuff that he comes back with.

Sheshbazzar

Returning again to the subject of the OP
Littlejohn, where does your information that 6 AD was 'the true year of Jesus birth' come from?
All of these other Biblical scholars and researchers have discussed all of the known relevant materials extensively, and yet have reached no such consensus or certainty.
In light of this fact, the natural question would be, what is it that makes you so certain of your date?

1. Do you claim to have books and sources that are unavailable to these other Biblical scholars and researchers?

Can you identify the location of, the names of, and means of access to these 'unavailable' references, so that other Biblical scholars and researchers may also examine them to confirm your findings?
NOTE. I am NOT asking you to reveal any of them here. Only to make a statement as to whether they are available to other Biblical scholars and researchers, OR are unavailable to other Biblical scholars and researchers.

Of course upon the publishing of your proposed book, they should be revealed.

Or

2. Is it your claim that you are the only one who has been able to correctly interpret the contents of these books and sources that are available to other Biblical scholars and researchers?

Littlejohn

".. to try to make it impossible to reconstruct the actual descendants of Jesus and his carnal brothers.."

This was also because of the fact that the Jews of the time were telling 'strange' things about Jesus and his family of origin, as well as about its ancestry and its real and 'illegitimate' birth (see Celsus, the Talmud and the Toledoth Yeshu ).

Same thing the pagans did in the various parts of the empire (especially in Rome), where the catholic christianity began to spread, thanks to the vital support of the imperial power, which had sponsored the establishment of the catholic-christian cult. Of course, the pagans were informed by the Jews of the diaspora, which, in turn, were informed by the Jews of the Palestine, as well as they leave imagine the writings of Justin Martyr.

This was also one of the reasons why Jesus, outside of Palestine, prefered to remain on condition of anonymity, about his true origins, resulting in what is now visible to all: namely the apparent lack of historical quotations, on the part of historical and pagan writers of the time, about the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth, who, as I have often affirmed, was not at all called Iesous, since this was merely an attribute that was applied to him in the Ionian Greece (now Turkey West), where many Gnostic sects flourished, from those who initially founded the same Jesus


Littlejohn

.

Littlejohn

At the point where I arrived, I could compose my messages directly in English. However, I prefer do it in Italian and then translate. I appreciate the English language for the sonority of its phonetic, but its grammar, in my opinion, leaves something to be desired: at least for we Italians.

Many mistakenly think that the apparent simplicity of English grammar is an advantage and it is easier to compose and understand the sentences: nothing more wrong! .. It is just this simplicity that makes it difficult, at least for us, fully express the concepts, with all the dialectical 'nuances' which make the speech more understandable.

Concerning the no longer used 'thou' pronoun, because of which 'Hard-head' accused me of using the King James' British language, I must point out that in the British literature of the nineteenth century is normal come across in the 'thou' pronoun!... A sign that 'Hard-head' have never read any of these books, despite the fact that he has the hilarious arrogance to rise on 'cathedra'! (chair)

However, the fact that in my messages it appears the 'thou' pronoun, it has nothing to do with 'the machine translator' of Google, since it was a my initiative. In fact, I noticed that Google encounters problems when it has to translate the pronoun 'you' in the singular or plural, or directly it has often translated incorrectly in the impersonal pronoun (or reflective) which in Italian takes the form of 'si'. By placing the pronoun 'thou' instead of 'you', everything becomes normal.

I would have liked to know the one 'testa d'uovo' ('brainiac') who first had the 'brilliant' idea to send retire the 'thou' pronoun, causing a hallucinating anomaly that is not found in any European language different than English!


Littlejohn

.

Sheshbazzar

Returning again to the subject of the OP.

Question Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar
This thread was opened on 10/16/10 supposedly to provide "Answers to Questions by Sheshbazzar"

Sheshbazzar is still waiting for answers to his questions.
.



Sheshbazzar

Sheshbazzar

Greetings Littlejohn!

Just a friendly reminder,
I know how busy you are, and how difficult it must be for you to keep track of so many things.

Perhaps it slipped your memory that we were engaged in a discussion some time back?
As you have -still- not submitted that reply, and you have not 'said',
it is difficult for me- to understand what you mean to say.

It is now 11/14/10 and I am -still- patiently waiting for your reply to Answers to Questions by Sheshbazzar


If your post was "ready from 4 days ago" on 11/5/10, that would indicate that it was 'ready' on 11/1/10.

It is to be noted that you somehow manage to 'translate' and place other posts in these forums almost daily.

Sheshbazzar

Sheshbazzar

.
I promised you that you will have your answer and you'll get . I'm a little 'back with translations (I have about 60 messages that I have not again translated! ..) As soon as I'll try to do it ...

"..it is difficult for me- to understand what you mean to say..."

But I have not yet figured out if you can not 'decipher' my English syntax, or you can not 'digest' what I expose inasmuch, of course, you do not have all the informations I have available in order to make a more deep evaluation ... Let me know about this ..


Greetings


Littlejohn

Sheshbazzar

Littlejohn
I have had no trouble at all reading or understanding any of your previous posts,
I have no trouble deciphering your English syntax.
I understand what you have written very well.

YOU wrote;

But I cannot be expected to be able to 'understand what you mean to say...'
In some -future- post, when you have not yet got around to saying it.


Sheshbazzar

Waiting.......waiting......waiting.....

Sheshbazzar

Quote:
I return to my first specific question to Littlejohn regarding his real 'history' of 'Jesus of Nazareth';

What year was he born ?

Before going into examining Littlejohn's reply, I wish to point out that most who are reading this know that this question has been examined extensively by countless Biblical scholars down through the ages.
The views of these thousands of erudite Biblical scholars are readily accessible to anyone who cares to examine the details of all of the various dates and their supporting arguments.
This subject of an actual date for 'Jesus birth' has also been extensively and repeatedly discussed within these forums since their inception.

As anyone might detect, I posed Littlejohn with what is a 'loaded' question, one to which -as was expected-
he replied to with an assertion of the year of birth being 6 AD.

Now, given all of the volumes of discussion and learned opinions that have been offered as to the correct, the 'possible', or the 'impossible' dates for Jesus birth, (well over a hundred have been presented)

Doesn't it make sense then to ask Littlejohn exactly what incontrovertible evidence, or what infallible sources he was able to employ to arrive at his asserted and otherwise unproven date for the real birth of his real 'historical' Jesus?
Books or information that no other scholar has access to?

Is it too much to ask that one asserting a thing as being the real 'history', (contradictory to what has been generally accepted as 'history') back up that claim with some real contemporary historical evidence?
So far Littlejohn has presented nothing of the sort.

Littlejohn, where does your information that 6 AD was 'the true year of Jesus birth' come from?
All of these other Biblical scholars and researchers have discussed all of the known relevant materials extensively, and yet have reached no such consensus or certainty.
In light of this fact, the natural question would be, what is it that makes you so certain of your date?

1. Do you claim to have books and sources that are unavailable to these other Biblical scholars and researchers?

Can you identify the location of, the names of, and means of access to these 'unavailable' references, so that other Biblical scholars and researchers may also examine them to confirm your findings?

NOTE. I am NOT asking you to reveal any of them here.
Only to make a statement as to whether they are available to other Biblical scholars and researchers, OR are unavailable to other Biblical scholars and researchers.

Of course upon the publishing of your proposed book, they should be revealed.

Or

2. Is it your claim that you are the only one who has been able to correctly interpret the contents of these books and sources that are available to other Biblical scholars and researchers?


This thread was opened on 10/16/10 supposedly to provide "Answers to Questions by Sheshbazzar"

Sheshbazzar is still waiting for answers to his questions.