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: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-14-2005, 04:09 PM   #51
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enda80
...since third person narration says that Moses was appointed as leader of the Israelites by Yahweh and that Yahweh helped the Israelites, this must be true for the Bible to be infallible.
This is only true if the primary purpose is historical documentation. If the purpose is to tell a story with a "moral", then the existence of the events in the story is more or less irrelevant.
Wallener is offline  
Old 04-15-2005, 02:58 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: -World Forum (Int'l)-
Posts: 712
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
Again that is your assumption that he fulfilled this prophecy through Christ. Jews don't believe that Christ fulfilled this function.
The Jews do not know what Christ did for them. Torah Talkers, etc.



Quote:
Yes Jesus as the Christ (Greco Roman name of God) is claiming that he is greater than Abraham. He is saying he is Abraham's daddy. So Christianity to claim Abrahamic status is ridiculous. So that one statement alone by Christ himself, shows that Christ thought himself to be greater than Abraham and that Abraham was born through him, not the other way around.

Again I proposed, why not name the "Abrahamic" religions Christianity, since Christ claims to be their, ahem, daddy?
Basically. Yes Your tone is quite different than God's tone in the Bible.

You're not reading the Scripture correctly. For me to go into a metaphysical explanation would be a concept hard to explain. You have already have the incorrect attitude when one reads Scripture or learns the Bible.Thus you perception of the said Scripture will become distorted by the likes of atheist principles. You have to read with a changed attitude in order to even move one inch forward.
Visionary7 is offline  
Old 04-15-2005, 06:24 AM   #53
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: 352
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Visionary7

You're not reading the Scripture correctly. For me to go into a metaphysical explanation would be a concept hard to explain. You have already have the incorrect attitude when one reads Scripture or learns the Bible.Thus you perception of the said Scripture will become distorted by the likes of atheist principles. You have to read with a changed attitude in order to even move one inch forward.
Ah yes, ye olde "you must believe first before deriving the correct meaning"...an attitude to be discussed in GRD, not BC&H!
Vicki is offline  
Old 04-15-2005, 08:49 AM   #54
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: U.S.
Posts: 1,398
Default

I found this interesting article on how Jesus wasn't called the Christ initially and that the cult of Christ (a solar cult) is in fact a small time Greco-Roman cult pre-existing Jesus. It would seem that they were both (Jesus and Christians)considered a threat to the stability of the Roman empire and perhaps the Jesus followers (whom Jews hated and thus threatening stability in that land) and Christians united, with Jesus' death marking the beginning of Jesus as the Christ, these followers of the Sun cult of Christ and the semi/Quasi Judaic cult of Jesus into one religion known as Christianity, with Jesus becoming the Christ figure and the symbolic head of rebellion against the Roman empire.

Quote:

http://www.plim.org/92didu.html



... WHETHER THE MESSIAH'S FOLLOWERS WERE CALLED CHRISTIANS?

By Dr. Lee Warren, B.A., D.D.

(c) 1992 PLIM REPORT

Feel free to copy and circulate this article for non-commercial purposes provided the Web site and author are mentioned.

See Related Articles: True Names of the Creator and His Son

What were the disciples and followers of the Messiah called after His death, burial and resurrection? Were they called Christians, as the Bible translators state in Acts 11:26 "And when he (Barnabas) had found him (the Apostle Paul), he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." Other logical questions to ask are: Was the organization of the disciples called Christianity? Did the Messiah call himself Christ (a Greek name, meaning the Lord’s anointed)?

Was The Messiah Hebrew or Greek?

The Messiah, His disciples, and followers were Jews or Israelites. The Jews are descendants of the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to whom Yahweh made the promise. Jacob was the father of twelve Hebrew sons. His name was changed to Israel after he wrestled an angel in a vision until he blessed him (Gen. 32:24-28). The name Israel, that is Hebrew, not Greek, means "Having power with Elohim (God)." Israel called his twelve sons or tribes Israelites, a Hebrew name within which is the Messiah’s divine title, Elohim. The law and prophets (Old Testament) prophesied that the Messiah would be born of a virgin and be called Immanuel that means El with us. (Isa. 7:14). Immanuel’s name is Yahshua, as Gabriel told Joseph in a dream. " ... Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Yahshua (Jesus): for he shall save his people from their sins. (Matt. 1:20-21; see also 22nd - 23rd verse)."

Now the Messiah was of the Hebrew lineage (Matt. 2:1; Heb. 7:14; Rev. 5:5), so it follows that He must have a Hebrew name and title, as prophesied by the law and prophets. Generally the name of a baby born to a certain race and culture reflects the father’s name in that culture. For example, a Chinese baby born of Chinese parents would be given the father’s Chinese name; a Russian baby born of Russian parents would be given the father’s Russian name; and so forth. The intelligent question to ask is, how could the Messiah, born a Hebrew, have the Greek name and title of Jesus Christ? The Messiah spoke of this in John 5:43. "I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive."

Can Followers of a Hebrew Come in a Greek Name?

And since the twelve Apostles and followers of the Messiah were Hebrew, wouldn’t they come in His name, Yahshua, and not the Greek title Christ? The Messiah told them at His ascension to preach in His name in Matt. 28:19 -20: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father (Yahweh), and of the Son (Elohim), and of the Holy Ghost (Yahshua - Jn. 14:26): Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."

Now historical documents show and prove that the followers of the Messiah didn’t call themselves Christians. The Greek word Christian appears in the so-called New Testament three times Acts 11:26, 26:28; and 1 Pet. 4:16. Christian is a title and not a proper name. Originally Romans or Gentiles gave the followers of the Messiah the name Christians and Mystery Babylon accepted it as the title the followers of the Messiah used for themselves.

Did Followers of the Messiah Call Themselves Christians?

Now the Dictionary of the Bible by James Hastings (1963 Charles Scribners’s Sons), pg. 138, states under the caption, "3. The Spread of the Name. - Since ‘Christian’ was not originally a self-designation of the followers of Jesus, it is not surprising that it is rarely found in the New Testament." Hastings Dictionary of the Bible further states that Roman authorities gave the Messiah’s followers the name ‘Christians’ but the word itself to the pagans is associated with heinous crimes and vices. In this section "4. The Meaning of the Name.- The Roman authorities, who first designated the disciples of Jesus as Christians, attempted thereby to characterize them as a political group or party, held together by their loyalty to the party head, Christos. While originally the title was given for juridical convenience without implying a derogatory sense, the pagan mob must at a very early time have associated it with heinous crimes and vices ... Not too much emphasis should be placed, therefore upon the etymology of christos. Though literally meaning the ‘Anointed One," i.e. the Messiah, the title soon lost its original denotation and became a personal name in the Greek-speaking church."

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 4, (copyright 1982), pg. 460 states under the caption Christianity: "The concept of "Christianity" (Christianismos), which denotes what is "essence," does not appear in the New Testament writings. Not until the time of the Apostolic Fathers (i.e., The Christian thinkers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries) was it used as a Christian parallel to the concept "Judaism" (Ioudaismos), which the Apostle Paul had used in his letter to the Galitians, chapter 1, verse 13 to characterize the Jewish way of faith and Life. The term Christianianity was first used in such a manner by Ignatius the Bishop of Antioch (died c. AD 110), in his Letter to the Magnesians."

Does 'Christian' Come from 'Christos' Which Means Anointed?

It must be understood by students of the scriptures that the Greek word Christian is derived from the Greek word Christos, which means anointed. The word 'Christos 'was in existence long before the birth of the Messiah. It is important to understand the context in which this word was used in everyday life prior to it being associated with the Messiah.

The Roman Catholic book The Names and Titles of Jesus, by Leopold Sabourin, S.J.; Imprimatur, by Terence J. Cooke, D.D., V.G., (copyright 1967, by The Macmillian Co.), pg. 5; states: "Strictly speaking, the term Messiah is equivalent to "Christ" because the Hebrew word Mashiah or "Anointed [of the Lord}" is translated by the Greek Khristos."

The Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology (H.W. Wilson) under Christ, pg. 169 states: " ... borrowed from Latin Christus, from Greek Christos, noun use of christos anointed, from chriein anoint ... The Greek is a translation of the Hebrew Mashiah anointed (of the Lord), MESSIAH ... "

Does 'Christos' Mean 'Messiah'?

''Both of the preceding quotes said that the Greek word 'Christos' is equivalent to the Greek word Messiah, that is a translation of the Hebrew word Mashiah. This is not true. 'Mashiah' is a Hebrew word that means the "Anointed of Yah" and not the "Anointed of the Lord." In Hebrew the iah in the word Messiah is Yah, the short form of Yahweh. Most biblical scholars make a great mistake and error in equating the Greek word 'Christos' with the Hebrew word Messiah. The Greeks have no word or equivalent to mean Yah or Yahweh which means: "He who brings into existence whatever exists." For example in English there is no equivalent word for Bethlehem, the Hebrew word which means 'house of bread.' So, the word has to be translated and pronounced as it is in the original tongue or language. As most translators know all proper nouns of cities, places, and names are pronounced and transliterated as they are in their own language when translated to another language.

[Note: We have to keep in mind that various languages have phonemes (i.e. the smallest unit of sound in a language) which have the same spelling, but a different pronunciation in that language. See e-mail below. For example in Arabic, there is no "p" sound and Arabs cannot pronounce "Peter." In German, "Warren" is pronounced with a "V." The principle here is that although the pronunciation or spelling may change, the word will retain the same contextual meaning. Bethlehem is a Hebrew word and may be pronounced and spelled differently in German or France, but the contextual meaning "House of Bread" remains the same in all languages.]

[The following explanation is a result of an e-mail we received from Robert Craig Harman En France, appelez 01 34 80 04 83 pour BYU Chemical Engineering recevoir un Livre de Mormon gratuit...Master's Candidate LDS France Paris Mission http://www.et.byu.edu/~harmanc/paris/

(1) Neither toponyms (the etymological study of place names for regions or languages) nor personal names necessarily retain their form when translated from one language to another, e.g.:

London (English) --> Londres (French)

Dover (English) --> Douvres (French)

Braunschweig (German) --> Brunswick (English)

Koeln (German) --> Cologne (English)

Muenchen (German) --> Munich (English) --> Monaco (Italian)

Marseille (French) --> Marseilles (English)

Lyon (French) --> Lyons (English)

Reims (French) --> Rheims (English)

Moskva (Russian) --> Moscow (English)

Plzen (Czech) --> Pilsen (German)

Praha (Czech) --> Prag (German) --> Prague (English)

Den Haag (Dutch) --> The Hague (English)

And the list goes on and on....

(2) Paris (English) is not pronounced at all the same as Paris (French).

The French "P" has no aspiration. The French "a" is between the sounds of the "a" in the English "cat" and the "a" in "father". The French "r" is made by friction on the uvula in the back of the mouth -- the English "r" is in the middle of the mouth. The English "i" is short; the French "i" is halfway between an English short "i" and long "e". The French "s" is silent.]

We will show documented proof that Biblical scholars know that the disciples and followers of the Messiah didn’t call themselves by the Greek title "Christian."

Now the Gentile translators aren’t responsible for this error of substituting titles for Yahweh or Yah. The Jewish scholars, scribes were responsible for substituting Adonia that means My Lord. We will deal with this in our next issue of the "PLIM REPORT."

Did Non-Followers of the Messiah Call His Apostles Christians?

Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary states: "The designation of the early followers of Christ as Christians was initiated by the non-Christian population of Antioch. Originally it may have been a term of derision. Eventually, however, Christians used it of themselves as a name of honor, not of shame. Prior to their adoption of the name, the Christians called themselves believers <Acts 5:14>, brothers <Acts 6:3>, or saints <Acts 9:13>, names which also continued to be used ... (From Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary) (Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)."

The Cambridge Bible Commentary on New English Bible, by J. W. Packer, Cambridge University Press, pg. 92 states: "Christians: probably a name given by the people of Antioch to distinguish them from the Jews, through there is no indication that the name was given at this time..." This is also confirmed in "Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles", by R. C. Lenkski, Ausburg Publishing House, pg. 457 "... This is an interesting fact. It is at once evident that the disciples did not invent this name for themselves. Since the name was derived from "Christ" the Greek word for "Messiah," it is certain that the disciples got this name in Antioch and not from the Jews who would never have connected the Messiah with the disciples either in a derogatory or in any other way. The Greeks invented this name ... In the days of the Roman persecutions the very name was certainly enough to condemn a man. The question is debated as to whether already in Antioch "Christians" or "Chrestians" was intended as a vicious title or was used only to distinguish the disciples of Christ from the Jews."

The New Testament Commentaries; by I. Howard Marshall; Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., pg. 203 states: "... in all probability that "Christian" was a nickname given by the populace of Antioch, and thus ‘Christ’ could well have been understood as a proper name by them, even if at this stage the Christians themselves still used it as a title; ..."

Finally Ellcott’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 1; Zondervan Publishing House (copyright 1971), states the following about the word Christians: "In its Latin form the name was essentially Latin. It would seem to have grown out of the contact of the new society with the Romans stationed at Antioch, who, learning that its members acknowledged the Christos as their head, gave them the name Christiani. As used in the New Testament, we note: (1) That the disciples never use it of themselves. ...(2) That the hostile Jews use the more scornful term of "Nazerenes." (3) That the term Christianus is used as a neutral and sufficiently respectful word by Agrippa (26:28), ..."

Most Bible commentaries confirm that the name Christian was not invented by the disciples or followers of the Messiah. I hope this sheds some light on the word Christian and its historical development.


Dharma is offline  
Old 04-15-2005, 12:03 PM   #55
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 6,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Visionary7
You're not reading the Scripture correctly. For me to go into a metaphysical explanation would be a concept hard to explain. You have already have the incorrect attitude when one reads Scripture or learns the Bible.Thus you perception of the said Scripture will become distorted by the likes of atheist principles. You have to read with a changed attitude in order to even move one inch forward.
While I won't go so far as to say I'm prepared to change my attitude, I would like to give your take to my fundamentalist acquaintances, who say the bible's claim that one day the sun stood still is exactly what it is--a literally true statement.

A metaphysical explanation of that passage may be difficult, but I'll listen attentively to your exegesis. If possible, keep it simple enough for these true believers to fully understand your explanation.
John A. Broussard is offline  
Old 04-15-2005, 01:09 PM   #56
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: U.S.
Posts: 1,398
Default

Further evidence that the Christ cult is in fact a Roman sun cult is the origin of the word Mary, many times incorrectly corresponding to Miriam (which means bitter in Hebrew). The cult of the Roman virgin Goddess Mary (Mari literally means young woman), you have the Black Mary and White Mary Goddess cult, then was for some reason overlapped onto Jesus' mother, supposedly named Miriam.


Quote:
1297, from O.Fr. marier, from L. maritare "to wed, marry, give in marriage," from maritus "married man, husband," of uncertain origin, perhaps ult. from "provided with a *mari," a young woman, from PIE base *meri- "young wife," akin to *meryo- "young man" (cf. Skt. marya- "young man, suitor").
So again, Christianity should be kicked out of the Abrahamic religions forum.

so now the question is, who was trying to religiously screw up whom? We know the Romans were trying to integrate the Jews into following Roman religions. We know some Jews rebelled against the Romans, but some Jews of course didn't mind at all. We know Jesus, who's father was unknown, was liked by the Romans but hated by the Jews who called the Jesus followers Nazarenes, was Jesus a sorry Roman stooge or did Jesus want a big peice of the Roman pie in Jerusalem? Was Jesus pretending to be Jewish but trying to slowly lure Jews into a small Roman sun cult of Christ?

Were the Jesus followers, mostly Jews, trying to screw up the Romans by integrating Roman religion with a far out version of neo-Judaism in Jesus' interpretation? Or were the Romans trying to screw the Jews by forcing elements of Roman religion into Judaism and saying the Greco-Roman God Christ is Abraham's daddy?
Dharma is offline  
Old 04-16-2005, 02:01 AM   #57
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
Further evidence that the Christ cult is in fact a Roman sun cult is the origin of the word Mary, many times incorrectly corresponding to Miriam (which means bitter in Hebrew). The cult of the Roman virgin Goddess Mary (Mari literally means young woman), you have the Black Mary and White Mary Goddess cult, then was for some reason overlapped onto Jesus' mother, supposedly named Miriam.
I can see you're becoming desperate for this idea with such desperate arguments. Mary might be the English name, but that ultimately derives from the Greek name Maria, which is derived from the LXX name Mariam (used for the Hebrew Miriam), though the problem with Mariam was that it was undeclinable, which was not a useful situation for Greek so it lost the final /m/ and so it could act like any other feminine name.

Perhaps with the little piece of etymology that you cited you could also try to connect Mary with the Syria city of Mari.

(Incidentally, "maritus" the Latin word for husband is derived from the genitive "maris" of the noun "mas" from the same source as the English "man".)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
So again, Christianity should be kicked out of the Abrahamic religions forum.
Real useful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
so now the question is, who was trying to religiously screw up whom? We know the Romans were trying to integrate the Jews into following Roman religions.
Various religions jockeyed for supremacy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
We know some Jews rebelled against the Romans, but some Jews of course didn't mind at all. We know Jesus, who's father was unknown,
This sort of statement merely shows that you are willing to be ahistorical when it suits you and take documents that you have little regard for as reflecting some sort of history that you can divine. However, you have no way of knowing whether Jesus existed or not, so you are merely playing to be nasty. If Jesus existed, he may have been the son of God -- who knows? who cares? You are just being incoherent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
was liked by the Romans but hated by the Jews who called the Jesus followers Nazarenes, was Jesus a sorry Roman stooge or did Jesus want a big peice of the Roman pie in Jerusalem? Was Jesus pretending to be Jewish but trying to slowly lure Jews into a small Roman sun cult of Christ?
Deep, Dharma, deep.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
Were the Jesus followers, mostly Jews,
Or then again literary figures?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
trying to screw up the Romans by integrating Roman religion with a far out version of neo-Judaism in Jesus' interpretation? Or were the Romans trying to screw the Jews by forcing elements of Roman religion into Judaism and saying the Greco-Roman God Christ is Abraham's daddy?
Did Jesus exist, Dharma? How do you know? Because the nt tells you so? Why all these assumptions just to show you don't like christianity? But you lean towards another religion...


spin
spin is offline  
Old 04-17-2005, 11:09 AM   #58
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: -World Forum (Int'l)-
Posts: 712
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
Again that is your assumption that he fulfilled this prophecy through Christ. Jews don't believe that Christ fulfilled this function.
The Jews do not realize it yet.

Quote:
Yes Jesus as the Christ (Greco Roman name of God) is claiming that he is greater than Abraham. He is saying he is Abraham's daddy. So Christianity to claim Abrahamic status is ridiculous. So that one statement alone by Christ himself, shows that Christ thought himself to be greater than Abraham and that Abraham was born through him, not the other way around.
Jesus as the Christ had every reason to proclaim the statements He made.You read too far into the Scripture trying to be a skeptic. Jesus made that statement as a God, so therefore the Jews became angry and commenced His crucifixion, which was planned from the beginning. I get the gist of what you are saying in the skeptical sense. The Scriptural,Spiritual nature and Authority of Christ is what made the statement proper. Which is not the teaching of man,science, or the Kingdom of Heaven.

Quote:
Again I proposed, why not name the "Abrahamic" religions Christianity, since Christ claims to be their, ahem, daddy?
He is my Father. I gladly gave you the Scripture above to read again.

What other Scriptures are you skeptical of?
Visionary7 is offline  
Old 04-17-2005, 11:11 AM   #59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: -World Forum (Int'l)-
Posts: 712
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharma
Further evidence that the Christ cult is in fact a Roman sun cult is the origin of the word Mary, many times incorrectly corresponding to Miriam (which means bitter in Hebrew). The cult of the Roman virgin Goddess Mary (Mari literally means young woman), you have the Black Mary and White Mary Goddess cult, then was for some reason overlapped onto Jesus' mother, supposedly named Miriam.



So again, Christianity should be kicked out of the Abrahamic religions forum.

so now the question is, who was trying to religiously screw up whom? We know the Romans were trying to integrate the Jews into following Roman religions. We know some Jews rebelled against the Romans, but some Jews of course didn't mind at all. We know Jesus, who's father was unknown, was liked by the Romans but hated by the Jews who called the Jesus followers Nazarenes, was Jesus a sorry Roman stooge or did Jesus want a big peice of the Roman pie in Jerusalem? Was Jesus pretending to be Jewish but trying to slowly lure Jews into a small Roman sun cult of Christ?

Were the Jesus followers, mostly Jews, trying to screw up the Romans by integrating Roman religion with a far out version of neo-Judaism in Jesus' interpretation? Or were the Romans trying to screw the Jews by forcing elements of Roman religion into Judaism and saying the Greco-Roman God Christ is Abraham's daddy?

Read Spin's post again for me. Kthanx
Visionary7 is offline  
Old 04-17-2005, 02:48 PM   #60
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 6,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Visionary7
The Jews do not realize it yet.

Jesus made that statement as a God, so therefore the Jews became angry and commenced His crucifixion, which was planned from the beginning.
This where I flounder. If this was all planned from the beginning, how could the Jews do anything but become angry and commence the crucifixion? Don't they actually deserve a lot of credit for having carried out god's will?

Please enlighten me.
John A. Broussard is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:17 PM.

Top

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