Dawkin's Bogus Bible History- Goonerman's Farewell Thr

[observer]

Can't wait for the next one!

[Peter T]

observer,

I blame you.

[Legion]

and do you know exactly how many religeons with documented scrolls, that pre-date the birth of christ list a virgin birth of a son of god or have the same foundation stones as most of christianity, heres a few

 

Chang- ti (jesus)

When the young God, Chang- ti, was born, angels with music, and shepherds attended the birth.

 

Chrishna (jesus but born to Davaci (mary was house of david) and he would grow to free us of our sins)

The prophet Bala also predicted that a divine Savior would "become incarnate in the house of Yadu, and issue forth to mortal birth from the womb of Devaci, a virgin, and relieve the oppressed earth of its load of sin and sorrow.

 

Citlaltonac

?The god Citlaltonac sent an ambassador to see the virgin Chimalma?The god told her that she was to conceive a son, which she did soon after??

 

Hercules

The virgin mother of the mighty and the almighty God Hercules, Prudence "knew only Jove."

 

heres a good one

 

Hesus (sound familiar) OF THE DRUIDS !!

Mayence (hesus born to the virgin mayence...youve got to be kidding me if you dont see this connection) was virgin-mother of Hesus of the Druids Her body as being enveloped in light, and a crown (they even gave him a crown)of twelve stars upon her head. 12 I repeat 12 !!!

 

Huns

Eschylus, was the "Chaste Virgin," and her son "the Son of God."

 

Josa

"A virgin should conceive and bear a son, and a star would appear blazing at midday to signalize the occurrence. When you behold the star, follow it whithersoever it leads you. Adore the mysterious child, offering him gifts with profound humility. He is indeed the Almighty Word which created the heavens. He is indeed your Lord and everlasting King"

 

 

OMG, did they have cut and paste 1600 years ago when the new testament was written ? seems they did !!!

 

to be fare I'm pinching these from this website

 

http://www.bibleufo.com/worldgod4.htm

 

where theres loads more, so what your saying is that all these ancient religeons coincidentaly had the same story as stolen for the christian jesus.. even JK rowling stole less ideas from other books than the gospels.

[Peter T]

It must have been on Sky News or CBN.

Interesting though.

[Chris]

Jeeze G'man, no wonder you're behind in your studies. Short, concise & to the point pls.

 

BTW & FYI, I gave up a qtr way through.

[Legion]

and

 

so goonerman, we are to take the scripts literaly as documented fact, until the documented facts become nonsense, and then we can choose to take a metaphoric view....come on you cant have your cake and eat it.

 

 

for example your literal translations of jesus and the distinction between sun & son name are fact but the clouds are metaphore...

 

heres a metaphore to remember "I Am The Light"

much of the bible was translated not word for word, but interpretation, hense the saying "lost in translation"

[Mary]

Legion - you are fighting a battle that cannot be won - everyone has a different view on faith and everyone has their own interpretation of Holy Scripts. There is no point debating that which is not debatable.

[Legion]

Of course it is, I'm hoping to save goonermans soul !

[Peter T]

Too late for that. He's been to Warrington.

[observer]

Our soul?!

[Man in Black]

I turn my back for one moment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AND GOONERMAN COMES BACK AS SOMEONE ELSE !!!!!!!!! :angelwings:

[Goonerman]

I have a gap in which I can paste this stuff now, and do a little bit of hit and run before returning after the New York trip. So, in true Blue Peter tradition, here is something I prepared earlier:

 

THE BIBLE AND THE SUN

 

OK.

 

Quick language lesson.

 

ENGLISH Sun, Son (Two very different words, actually.)

 

LATIN Solis (Sun), Filius (Son)

 

GREEK Helios (Sun), Huios (Son)

 

HEBREW Shemesh (Sun), Ben (Son)

 

ARAMAIC Shamash (Sun), Bar (Son)

 

Aramaic was Jesus' first language.

 

So the words 'Sun' and 'Son' are NOT interchangeable.

 

It is also interesting to note that 'Shemesh' and 'Shamash' also mean 'servant'.

 

The God of the Bible is a Spirit who is uncreated and eternal. The Sun is a star, a created object giving light and heat to the Earth.

 

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Genesis 1:1.

 

"And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth. And it was so. God made two great lights- the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good." Genesis 1:14-18

 

The Plague of Darkness was YHWH's theological attack on the Egyptian sun-god Amun-Ra or Re.

 

Moses commanded:

 

"And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars- all the heavenly array- do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshipping things the LORD your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven." Deuteronomy 4:19

 

"On the day the LORD gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the LORD in the presence of Israel:

 

"O sun, stand still over Gibeon, O moon, over the Valley of Aijalon." So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself of its enemies, as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky, and delayed going down about a full day. There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the LORD listened to a man. Surely the LORD was fighting for Israel!" Joshua 10:12-14.

 

Jesus said,

 

"He [the Father in heaven] causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." Matthew 5:45

 

"The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was given power to scorch people with fire." Revelation 16:8

 

And again, with reference to the new heaven and the new earth and the New Jerusalem in the eternal state:

 

"There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light." Revelation 22:5a.

 

By contrast, with Jesus, Paul says this:

 

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created, things in heaven and earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." Colossians 1:15-17

 

The Sun therefore is nothing more nor less than a created physical object, invented by God to serve both Him and us, and the very Hebrew word for Sun also means 'Servant'.

 

PS The Bible also says,

 

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away." Jesus in Mt. 24:35.

 

And finally,

 

"Earth and sky fled from his presence; and there was no place for them." Rev. 20:11b

[Goonerman]

Here's a little something to tease Obbs with:

 

Just to go briefly to the original topic on this thread, see this:

 

 

 

Now for Legion's claims about Jesus being based on pagan gods. Be sure to have a glass of water and a bottle of aspirin handy! It's nicked from the woman in Revelation 12 who represents Israel.

 

As for He-Zeus, Well, the Greek reads Ho Zeos. 'He' is the FEMININE nominative singular definite article, ie, the feminine form of the word 'the'. Ho Zeos in Greek for Zeus and Ho Iesous in Greek for Jesus is what it should be. (That's because the Greeks had a habit of saying 'the Zeus did this' or 'the Jesus did that'. They used the definite article to precede names. But your ignorance of languages and what names mean has been obvious to me from square one. As that Esus site points out, and I read this in other sources too, "Zeus derives from the common Indo-European root dyeu-. So are many other IE names, such as "devah" in Sanskrit and "Asmodeus" in Avestan."

 

A later statement from you proves your ignorance of languages and names. You're the one who's got to be kidding, not me. Your attempt to match up Jesus with Esus falls flat on its face. This is EMBARRASSINGLY BAD STUFF, LEGION. There is nothing about Esus having a virgin birth.

 

As for his supposed mother, Mayence, that sounds like a corruption of Maya. Some of these claims seem to be mixing up different religions and other claims. Of course, Jesus' mother Mary was in her own language called Miriam, which is related to the word 'bitter' and of no connection with the names Maya, Mayence or Maia, MiRiam is very different. (Maya is either the architect of the demons and the female Maya is in Hinduism the magic illusion. What happened to the Y in Miriam? There never was one. That's the price you pay for being ignorant of languages and the meaning of names and their morphology. Plus you cannot read properly. You show your own incompetence with your own quotation. "and a crown (they even gave him a crown)of twelve stars upon her head. 12 I repeat 12 !!!" According to your wildly inaccurate reference, they gave HER a crown on HER head. So how could they give HIM acrown by putting it on HER head? Try to understand what you are reading!

 

The virgin birth of Esus is not mentioned ANYWHERE in the ancient literature- sorry, single solitary reference concerning Esus.

 

LEGION: Huns

Eschylus, was the "Chaste Virgin," and her son "the Son of God."

 

GUNNER: Aeschylus is a MASCULINE Greek name and is the name of the famous Athenian playwright who lived in the 5th century BC and is most famous for his Oresteian trilogy! What you and your UFO site cite cannot be traced. But for you to use this name as the name of a woman is absurd! There is no verification of any Huns or his mother Eschylus, the woman with the man's name.

 

LEGION: Josa

"A virgin should conceive and bear a son, and a star would appear blazing at midday to signalize the occurrence. When you behold the star, follow it whithersoever it leads you. Adore the mysterious child, offering him gifts with profound humility. He is indeed the Almighty Word which created the heavens. He is indeed your Lord and everlasting King""

 

GUNNER: That sounds suspiciously like a quote from a fanciful account of the Matthew Nativity story with a touch of John's Gospel thrown in for good measure. This comes from various sources, all of whom are practically identical, and can be traced to Graves' Sixteen Crucified Saviours. (Apart from the fact that crucifixion was so shameful that the pagans mocked and attacked the Christians for their uniuqe belief in a crucified God making Graves' claim absurd.) Basically the sources for Josa are really one unsubstantiated source, as infidels.org, your UFO site, all quote Graves almost verbatim, he in turn getting it from an earlier very sloppy 19th century source, and things hit a dead end after that. The sites' quotations of each other are suspiciously circular, practically identical, and there is no independent way of verifying this claim. There's nothing at all.

 

LEGION: OMG, did they have cut and paste 1600 years ago when the new testament was written ? seems they did !!!

 

GUNNER: Nope. Apart from the fact that you are mistaken in every single example, Jesus was a real historical person and therefore a different case from most of the others, especially as most of the others are myths. You need to establish to me that Jesus was fictional. (But He would never have been able to have visited Tibet and become a Buddhist, then!) And for you to say that sophisticated documents like the Gospels are simply cut and paste is laughable, given their chiastic structures and whatnot. The real connection the New Testament has, incidentally, is with the Old Testament, the Jewish Scriptures, the Tanakh, whatever you like to call it.

 

WAIT A MINUTE- WHAT IS THIS NONSENSE ABOUT THE NEW TESTAMENT BEING WRITTEN 1600 YEARS AGO?!

 

Am I to take the implications of that seriously? Let me guess- the Emperor Constantine made up the New Testament or something like that. This gets more and more absurd. Except you in your ignorance chose the following CENTURY by mistake! 1600 years ago was AD 407. Constantine was proclaimed Emperor in AD 306, became Western Emperor in AD 312, and Emperor overall in AD 324.

Considering there are papyri of the New Testament from the 2nd century, this is just hilarious!

 

And don't say I'm making this up. I've physically SEEN 2nd and 3rd century papyri of the New Testament with my own eyes, in the Chester Beatty Library in Dublin Castle, then there is the small matter of what's in the British Library. And I've been to the John Rylands University Library where the oldest scrap from the NT is, containing John's account of Jesus' Roman trial, and dating from AD 110.

 

Just a little word on Zoroaster or Zarathustra from JPH:

 

"Zoroaster was born of a virgin and "immaculate conception by a ray of divine reason." It's hard to quantify this one -- the Avesta (note again, a late source, later than Christianity) refers to a "kingly glory" that was handed onward from one ruler to the next; this glory resided in Zoro's mother for about 15 years, including during the time she was married to Zoro's dad, Pourushaspa. It seems that a human father was still needed for Zoro [Jack.ZP, 18, 24] and that this "ray" was merely for the infusion of Zoro's spirit, not his body. (A reader has added the point that it is not correct to use "Immaculate conception" to refer to Christ's virgin birth, as seems to be the implication here; rather it refers to the Roman Catholic doctrine that the Mary was born without original sin. It is only somewhat recently that some people have erroneously used it to refer to Christ's virgin birth.)"

 

LEGION: where theres loads more, so what your saying is that all these ancient religeons coincidentaly had the same story as stolen for the christian jesus.. even JK rowling stole less ideas from other books than the gospels.

 

GUNNER: No, what has happened is that you are dealing with bogus, hideously outdated 'scholarship', you and they have misinterpreted what the pagan myths actually DO say and fail to realise that a lot of the so-called virgin birth stories, which are mostly not really virgin birth stories at all, actually POST-DATE the Gospels, or at least post-date Isaiah's prophecy. It's ironically that in the Paganism thread there was an attempt to debunk the virgin birth story of Jesus, not least the Gospel of Matthew's interpretation of Isaiah by Man In Black, now getting the the opposite trick played to me now, that the virgin birth story was nicked from other religions. But as I have said before, Jesus was real. And since He really rose from the dead, had a virgin birth, given His Divine identity, and Him being the Real Deal, isn't so unreasonable. The rest are misinterpreted myths. And finally. Jesus wasn't a Christian! He was Jewish! And if Christianity is really such a michmash of paganism, why did Paul and Barnabas tear their clothes in grief when the people of Lystra tried to sacrifice bulls to them, after mistakenly thinking they were Hermes and Zeus? Why did they trash Greek religion in the speech they made to try to stop them from doing this?

 

[ 21.09.2007, 18:33: Message edited by: GUNNER ]

[Goonerman]

LEGION: so goonerman, we are to take the scripts literaly as documented fact, until the documented facts become nonsense, and then we can choose to take a metaphoric view....come on you cant have your cake and eat it.

 

GUNNER: Since your points have been refuted, I see no need to change my views.

 

LEGION: for example your literal translations of jesus and the distinction between sun & son name are fact but the clouds are metaphore...

 

GUNNER: The clouds in relation to Daniel 7 are referring to the Shekinah glory of God. Daniel is certainly given a symbolic showing of the Son being brought to the Father for exaltation, but the literal truth is simply Jesus ascending, disappearing in the cloud, then not being seen again (thus out of this dimension altogether), and sitting on His Father's throne, the truth being that the Father is invisible and Jesus is both as God and man the Father's visible representative. The Shekinah glory of God, the glowing cloud of God's presence is quite literal, and is the closest thing the Father Himself has to an appearance (God's appearances are made by the Son, though the Holy Spirit did come down on Jesus' head like a dove, the only time apart from God showing His 'back' to Moses that the Spirit was visible) as the priests serving in the Temple at Solomon's inauguration of the place found out! The cloud that hid Jesus at His Ascension is the same cloud which enveloped Sinai at the giving of the Law, guarded the Tabernacle as well as the Israelites when they were on the move in the wilderness. This is the same cloud that God spoke from at the Ark of the Covenant when talking to Moses, leaving Moses with an afterglow. This same cloud came down on the Mount of Transfiguration when the Father commended Jesus. The expression 'clouds of heaven' refer to the third Heaven of which Paul wrote, which is God's immediate presence in eternity, as opposed to the first and second heavens which are the sky and outer space. The key to all this again is context. Besides, if Jesus is in the sky now, according to your interpretation, where is He? Have you a photo of Him? Unless of course, you actually think the Sun is Jesus, well, I'd like to know what that big yellow thing in the sky was when Jesus was on this Earth living and preaching and teaching. I'm beginning to wonder if you and Man In Black don't deep down believe Jesus was real, that He is just a symbolic summation of other religious symbols from round the world and down the ages. That He is a principle and a concept and not a specific man who lived nearly 2000 years ago. Or that you are inconsistent and resisting the implications of a Christ 'myth' borrowed from all and sundry. I'm hoping now though you will concede that YHWH is not a sun God, nor is Jesus or anything to do with Him a metaphor for any sun deity. Moses is quite clear about this. The Sun is not to be worshipped. Question: do you believe that the Sun is a star, a burning nuclear sphere of light and heat, or a god?

 

LEGION: heres a metaphore to remember "I Am The Light"

 

GUNNER: No problem with that one, but remember, Legion, you must always determine the genre and meaning of any Bible passage by looking at the context. The key is to look at the rituals of the Feast of Tabernacles as laid out in the Torah. Jesus preached His Light of the World sermon deliberately in Tabernacles. Plus- remember Isaiah's prophecy- Israel are to be a Light to the Gentiles. In this context must Jesus' teachings be understood.

 

LEGION: much of the bible was translated not word for word, but interpretation, hense the saying "lost in translation"

 

GUNNER: Only people who have not studied the original languages of the Bible at some level would honestly say that. I've heard claims that the Bible is untranslatable, but only people not grounded in any Hebrew or Greek would say that. Translation and interpretation are two clean different things. Hebrew and Greek are far too precise and logical languages to make the Bible such a mess. I'm well aware of a good translation being as literal as possible, yet with a balance between that and dynamic equivalence. (Meaning for meaning translation.) In essence the trick is to acurately portray the Hebrew and Greek while rendering it in good, understandable English. Interpretation is to do with hermeneutics and exegesis, not translation. Hermeneutics consists of interpretation and guesswork, and understanding the Bible's genres- History, Law, Prophecy, Wisdom writing, Psalms, with a beady eye to the culture of ancient Judaism and the Ancient Near East. Exegesis is explanation. Based on a good straightforward grammatico-historical view of the surface text. When the Bible is being symbolic it is clear when this is the case, and when it is literal is is clear when this is the case. Just try reading a little more closely.

 

MARY: Legion - you are fighting a battle that cannot be won

 

GUNNER: That's because, unfortunately, he's making use of extremely sloppy sources.

 

MARY: everyone has a different view on faith and everyone has their own interpretation of Holy Scripts.

 

GUNNER: True, but there are wrong views and right views. Take holy scripts. What is the intention of the writer? Does the manuscript evidence back up the readings in the holy scripts? Are they historically and theologically correct? Is there a way of verifying it independently? I can confidently say yes to that.

 

MARY: There is no point debating that which is not debatable.

 

GUNNER: Eh? We're debating it right now. For someone who teaches History to say this, is an incredibly defeatist and illogical comment. I always am amazed at how people dogmatically say they can never know.. if they never know! You would have to know in order to know that. And if you know, then saying you don't know is a lie. This is the kind of madness that results from relativist subjectivist post-modernism, creating the kind of cop-out laziness that is anathema to the true historian. Remember your profession, Mary!!!

 

See these links:

 

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=7&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=46&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=48&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=54&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=132&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=151&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=182&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=183&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=227&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=268&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=340&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=359&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=380&TopicID=4&CategoryID=6

 

LEGION: Of course it is

 

GUNNER: Yip.

 

LEGION: I'm hoping to save goonermans soul !

 

GUNNER: LOL you think I'm one of the damned for a literalist approach to the life of Jesus and teachings of the Bible? Listen. Only God can save souls. He placed mine in the bag over 20 years ago.

 

PETER: Too late for that. He's been to Warrington.

 

GUNNER: Time for Darth Vader's Imperial March to become Warrington's official theme then, Obbs will feel at home- oh wait- he's never seen the Star Wars saga!

 

OBSERVER: Our soul?!

 

GUNNER: You wouldn't believe in a soul anyway, Obbs. You're just a random bunch of chemical impulses, and in your case, that might just actually be true... especially when you mention the Gospel of Thomas months after I mentioned it first, considering I have two translations of it in my possession!

 

MAN IN BLACK: I turn my back for one moment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AND GOONERMAN COMES BACK AS SOMEONE ELSE !!!!!!!!!

 

GUNNER: And your point is.....? You talk as if you had authority over me, like some teacher, as if. PS. When Little Fella changed his nick to Little Fella, or BIG became Big Ste, etc., no-one batted an eyelid, not even when Geoff Settle created Muttzy as his sockpuppet, as the internet terminology goes. Is this an argument? In Football terms, a Goonerman and a Gunner are the same thing! I'm simply reverting to my older pre-WWW nick. Same difference. Being here for over two and a half years means that 'Gunner' cannot be prone to misintrepretation any more.

 

MAN IN BLACK: Top marks to Legion for fighting the corner of all those other religions about which Goonerman so obviously knows nothing and which are OLDER than Christianity.

 

GUNNER: Bottom marks to Legion for sloppy research and argumentation, actually. I obviously know nothing about other religions, eh! That's hilariously arrogant, presumptuous and premature of you to say that, given my work above. In yer dreams, pal! And so what if the religions are older than Christianity? If they don't say what Legion or yourself mistakenly think they say, then their older age tells us zilcho, diddly squat, nil.

 

MAN IN BLACK: As I said, maybe Jesus came to fulfill the expectations of ALL the religions of his day - isn't that what you would expect from a 'universal messenger of God' ?

 

GUNNER: Jesus came to fulfil Biblical Judaism and move it on to the next phase in God's plan- the New Covenant for Israel and Judah and God ingrafting the 'unnatural branches' of the Gentile believers into the Jewish 'Olive Tree' through Israel being a Light to the Gentiles. As Jesus said to the Samaritan woman, "Salvation is from the Jews." He came to surpass and correct the other religions, as well as fulfil any aspect of them which had elements of truth in them. But remember- Jesus said that He is the only way to the Father, Peter said there is no other name given under Heaven by which we must be saved, and Paul said that there is one mediator between God and man- the man Christ Jesus. Which is PRECISELY what one would expect from a 'universal messenger of God', who indeed is the very face of God Himself.

 

MAN IN BLACK: When it comes to Goonerman I have no fear

 

GUNNER: Good, there is nothing to fear from me! And I don't fear either you or Legion. Especially when you make screwball remarks like praising Obbs as a Gnostic, which is hilarious, for you mistakenly accused me of being a rationalist secularist in my coverage of the Moses versus the Egyptian priests passage, now you call an Atheist like Obbs a Gnostic, as Obbs is the very secularist anti-supernaturalist you condemned me for being supposedly, but then I suppose like Bishop Spong you don't mind so long as true Christianity gets shafted. I'm not the one you must fear, but God, as the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom- by which I mean a sense of reverence at His holiness and awesomeness rather than cowering in terror. So you are saying the Church was hostile to the Gnostics for saying that God is everywhere? That's bonkers!

 

MAN IN BLACK: because I think I speak for the rest of humanity, Christian and other, when I say the world would be a far better place without 'Goonermen' !

GUNNER: Nice. Could be construed as incitement to religious hatred, eh? Gotta love the ad hominems. Don't edit that remark of the MIB, mods, not that you will, I suspect. I want people to see that remark stand for what it is. I don't think the same way about you, funny enough. Now I wonder why that is???? And since when did you speak for Christians, given that you aren't one? And all the Christians who know about this discussion are gasping at the cobblers you come off with!

MAN IN BLACK: Defeated - no more time to waste on him so on we go - NEXT

GUNNER: LOL- Hilariously presumptuous! I've been delayed by circumstances independent of the internet, not defeated. You're deluded!

I'm going to be blunt- you and Legion cannot have YOUR cake and eat it. If you two followed things to their logical conclusion, then if Jesus is indeed based on myths of other religions, then He didn't exist. My view of Jesus is the only way Jesus could have been real. If your view about these other religions being the source of the Gospels is true, then Jesus is fiction. End of story. So a question I want to put to Legion is this- if the crucifixion of Jesus symbolises the rising and setting of the Sun, does that mean the crucifixion of other Jews, the bandits crucified with Jesus, and Spartacus' men, are also symbolic of this? Are they all the sun god? And what on Earth are Josephus, Celsus and Lucian on about when they say plainly that Jesus was crucified? (And no, none of these fellas were Christians.) Why does the Talmud describe Jesus as being hanged on Passover? (Note that, Passover, NOT Easter, but it's like talking to a brick wall.) Why does Tacitus say that Jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate? Why is it that the pagans attacked Christianity because of it being so different and precisely because they were offended by the absurdity and horror of a crucified God? (Please do read the book, the Christians As The Romans Saw Them. I'd love to know why Celsus and the Emperor Julian spent so much time and ink trying to debunk Christianity, and why Lucian said that Jesus taught the Christians to repudiate the Greek gods! Again, Jesus was crucified not at the vernal equinox but on 3 April! What does Jesus' crucifixion have to do with the wintersolstice when He was not executed at that time of the year?)

Oh, and just for further fun, please go to this link exposing Acharya S as the incompetent quack that she is:

http://www.tektonics.org/af/achy01.html

And for even greater fun, read this:

http://www.tektoonics.com/etc/parody/achyvssheila.html

That's the comedy version of the previous link. Have fun!

 

Your thesis has been totally demolished. RIPPED APART. ALL TOO EASY.

Reminds me of a scene from Doctor Who

HIERONYMUS THE ASTROLOGER: What does it signify when Mars is in the House of the Ram?

THE DOCTOR: All this is a complete waste of time.

COUNT FREDERICO: Answer him!

THE DOCTOR: Well it all depends!

HIERONYMUS: On what?!

THE DOCTOR: On whether the Moon is made of cheese, the **** crows three times before breakfast and twelve hens lay addled eggs!

HIERONYMUS: What school of philosophy is that?!

THE DOCTOR: Oh, I could easily teach him! All it needs is a colourful imagination and a glib- tongue!

COUNT FREDERICO: And you sir have a mocking tongue. Prepare the execution!

THE DOCTOR: But you haven't listened to a word I've said!

[Goonerman]

And finally... before I vanish again...

 

More work on Jesus being the Light of the World. David Brickner, executive director of Jews for Jesus, writes this in his book on Christ in the Feast of Tabernacles:

 

"JESUS AND THE ILLUMINATION CEREMONY

 

Jesus' use of the water-pouring ceremony to make some of the most profound and messianic statements concerning Himself seemed to add further fuel to the debate. The argument over Him continued even into the highest circles of leadership. Some said, "He really is the Messiah!" But the naysayers answered with contempt, "What Messiah ever came out of Galilee?" The question of who Jesus is had reached a fever pitch. It is easy to miss this backdrop to Jesus' next startling statement, because the two statements are separated by the compelling story of the woman caught in adultery (which doesn't appear in most of the early manuscripts). [Gunner's note: the story is authentic, but does not really belong to John's Gospel, but stands out by itself independently of the Four Gospels.] But when we look at His next statement, remember that it is on the heels of Hoshana Rabba [the water ceremony in Tabernacles]. Perhaps only a span of eight hours had passed. It was nighttime. The giant candelabras still stood in the Court of the Women illuminating the night sky all around Jerusalem. Jesus used this dramatic backdrop to counter one of the statements made against Him- that the Messiah would not come from Galilee. He made a second astonishing claim: "I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life." (John 8:12 NASB) The Light of the World statement, like the Living Water statement, had a rich theological backdrop. Jesus was once again referring to a wealth of messianic prophecy that many would recognize. First, his claim to be the Light pointed directly to a prophecy that answered the cynical remarks concerning Galilee:

 

In the future he will honor Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the Jordan- The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned. (Isaiah 9:1-2)

 

In other words, those leaders who didn't believe the Messiah needed to go back and read their Bibles!

 

Other passages in Isaiah speak of light in a messianic context include:

 

Arise, shine, for your light has come, and the glory of the LORD rises upon you. See, darkness covers the earth and thick darkness is over the peoples, but the LORD rises upon you and his glory appears over you. (Isaiah 60:1-2)

 

It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light to the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth. (Isaiah 49:6)

 

Throughout Scripture and in rabbinical comentary the promise of light is connected with the messianic hope. As Simeon took the babe in his arms he said, "Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you now dismiss your servant in peace. For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all the people, a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel" (Luke 2:29-32)

 

Jesus used the same kind of prophetic language to describe Himself. He chose to do it in the Temple area, where light had been central to celebrating God's provision. Remember the Mishnah tells us there was no courtyard in Jerusalem that was not brightened by the illumination ceremony during the feast. Maybe the candelabras were lit right when Jesus made His declaration. Maybe they had been extinguished and the light they recently cast over the city was a lingering memeory to savor. Wheras the light from those candelabra would come and go, Jesus claimed to be the Light of the World. His invitation was, if you follow Me, you'll never walk in darkness. No need to wait another year to see the glorious light from the Tabernacles' celebration. Jesus invited people to come to Him, to step into the Light even as He spoke.

 

When Jesus claimed to be the Light, He wasn't simply claiming to be an outstanding teacher. He wasn't merely offering to point out the right way. Remember, the illumination ceremony was a symbol of an ever-present God who, during the wilderness wanderings, graced the Israelites with His provision and presence through the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night. The Light stood for the Shekinah Glory of God. Remember how the Shekinah glory filled Solomon's Temple, and the desire the Jewish people had to see the Temple once again filled with light?

 

When Jesus stood in the Temple claiming to be the Light of the World. He was making a radical statement. Those who say Jesus never claimed to be God have not dealt with this statement. To stand in the middle of the Temple in conjunction with the Feast of Tabernacles and say, "I am the Light" was like saying, "I am the Shekinah, I am the pillar of fire." It's hard to imagine a more graphic claim to deity.

 

God's provision as well as His presence was personified in Y'shua, the salvation of the nation and for the entire world. But there is more. Jesus demonstrated His claim in the life of an individual. Seeing a blind man Jesus said, "While I am in the world, I am the light of the world." (John 9:5) He then put mud on the eyes of one who saw only darkness and instructed him to go and wash in the Pool of Siloam- the same pool used for the water-drawing ceremony. The man followed Jesus' instructions and returned with his sight. This remarkable healing served as the capstone of Jesus' messianic claims at the feast.

 

So, in the water and in the light, Jesus claimed power and authority as the presence of God. He clearly fulfilled the salvation that God foreshadowed in the Feast of Tabernacles."

 

The water ceremony involved washing the altar. I will be heading for New York soon, and will be meeting up with Jews who believe in Jesus there to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles, the time of year when Jesus was really born and when He proclaimed Himself to be the Light of the World. Shalom Sukkot! See you in October!

 

:biggrinbounce:

 

[ 21.09.2007, 18:38: Message edited by: GUNNER ]

[Legion]

I can't be bothered with big posts to try to hide the truth in, anyone reading your posts can see the futility. most people wont read big posts.

 

so you choose not to use phoenems when in suits you Hesus (esus) Jesus of course they are soooo diffrent especialy sincce H & J form the same sound in the med".

 

and thanks for pointing out Jesus's actual name and not the bastardised version, because that proves my case, that the new testement was altered to suit existing beleifs.

 

Son & Sun are the same, can you not see (I am the light) one must pass through me to enter the kingdom of heaven (the sun is the doorway to heaven).

 

remember most people in history cannot read/write, religeon is mostly passed by word of mouth (thats why they made churches instead of home study courses) very few read the bible now that most people can read, I ask you to re-read the NT and apply what you read as being stellar...you will be enlightened.

 

I'm afraid you did not blow away my argument in the slightest, which anyone who reads it unbias will declair.

 

anyway why the username change ? see same person goonerman = gunner (phoenems) even you do it

[Mary]

Hahahaha!

[Goonerman]

Simple linguistic morphology a conspiracy? To prove to me the NT was changed you need manuscript evidence, Legion. Unfortunately thanks to Metzger, the Alands, Greenlee and FF Bruce, etc., I've got that territory and that of the Canon cornered nicely. :

 

Im orff to New York now. Phew, what a month this has been! And a traumatic week this too!

 

Legion. Honestly, learn some stuff on linguistics and meanings of names. Best wishes! And some stuff on manuscript evidences- the manuscripts are fully available on photographic plates and have been for decades. Look up Amazon and check out Bruce Metzger, and Kurt and Barbara Aland.

 

PS Ever heard of the Muratorian Canon? :confused:

 

If you think the morphing of Jesus' name from the original Yeshua is a conspiracy or a bastardisation, then I despair. Agree to differ. Brick wall time, and we've both hit it!

 

So much for my name then:

 

Andrew

Andre

Andrei

Andrea (yes, men are called that in Italy, oh Italy isn't called Italia in the English speaking world- CONSPIRACY!!!)

Andreas (San Andreas fault.)

 

The Esus/Jesus similarity is an unfortunate fluke. Maybe I'll start calling the Lord Yeshua or Iesous from now on.

 

By the way, Horus in its original form is Hr. That's a rough H as in ch in loch or achtung.

 

Hr (Ccccchurrr) and Yehoshua. Verrrrrrry similar. The opticians can at least expect a huge profit!

[Goonerman]

One last little point or two, before I walk away from this topic for good.

 

Nothing can be a substitute for good, thorough study. If you can't deal with me patiently demolishing each copycat claim, then that's fine by me.

 

The Hebrew word meaning "To save" is Yoshia.

 

So why did the Greeks change the pronunication to Iesous, beginning the modification of Yeshua's name to our English 'Jesus' which by sheer unfortunate fluke rhymes with Esus the Druid god? (The Romans added the 'us' on, so we get something like Es or Ess on the one hand, in its original form, and Yeshua on the other, showing no connection in their original forms.)

 

It isn't a conspiracy to cover anything up. If there was a conspiracy, rather, it could be seen by pagans trying to make Yeshua's name fraudulently resemble Esus, but that is not what is happening here. (There wasn't even ANY SUCH THING as a letter J or a letter U until the MIDDLE AGES!!!) Hence IVLIVS CAESAR.

 

The reason for the modification of Yeshua into Jesus in Greek is due to these:

 

1. Most of the Jews spoke Greek, courtesy of a certain Alexander the Great.

 

2. Greek was the international language due to Alexander, so the Gospel was preached in Greek, and so the New Testament was written in Greek.

 

3. The ending of Jesus' name, transforming it from Yeshua to Iesous, was to help Jesus' name fit in with Greek grammar.

 

Quick Greek lesson. The declension of a masculine noun.

 

logos

loge

logon

logo (as in lego)

logoi

logoi

logon (pronounced logown)

logois

 

logos means word

 

logos is nominative, the subject of the sentence

 

loge is if there was a bloke called logos and he was being addressed- this is the vocative

 

logon means it is the object of the sentence- He preached the word- this is the accusative

 

logou means it belongs to the word- believers of the word- the genitive

 

logo means it was the indirect object- he told the man off with an angry word- this is the dative

 

the other forms are the plural equivalent

 

So this is why the Greeks stuck on a different suffix for Jesus

 

So Iesous did this and that

 

He said, O Iesou, please help me

 

Peter spoke to Iesoun.

 

Peter told Simon Magus off using Ieso as an example.

 

Therefore the modification to Jesus' original name was done to suit Greek grammar. Then the Latins changed it to Iesvs. Then due to the use of Latin to translate the first English translation, it comes to us as Jesus. Directly from Yehoshua or Yeshua in Hebrew we get Joshua. No conspiracy.

 

Besides, what about all the other Jesuses, eh?

 

Jesus of Nazareth wasn't the only Jesus. We know of at least over 1000 blokes called Jesus, whether that form be Yehoshua, Yeshua, Yeshu or Iesous, from His time.

 

Guess what: the majority of parents in 1st century Palestine called their children:

 

Jesus

Simon

Judah (Judas)

Joseph

Abbas

 

BIG DEAL!

 

There are thousands upon thousands of graves of men called Jesus! 1000 of them were sons of men called Joseph!

 

We also know of a Iesous Iou, who was Jesus son of Judas as well.

 

Josephus lists:

 

Jesus Christ

The High Priest Jesus son of Phabet

The mad prophet Jesus son of Ananus

Jesus Jason

The Governor of Tiberias Jesus son of Sapphias

The High Priest Jesus brother of Onias, who was sacked by the mad Seluecid King Antiochus IV Epiphanes

The High Priest Jesus son of Gamaliel

Jesus the priest, the eldest after Ananus

The High Priest Jesus son of Damneus, who was made High Priest in AD 62 by Clodius Albinus

Jesus son of Gamala

Joshua son of Nun, Moses' apprentice and conqueror of Canaan

Jesus son of Saphat the robber ringleader

The priest Jesus son of Thebuthus

Jesus son of Josedek

 

There is also the writer of the Apocryphal Book of Ecclesiasticus, Jesus Ben Sirach.

 

Also, Elymas Bar Jesus, the maigician and opponent of Paul and Barnabas in Cyprus had a father called Jesus, as his name shows, and Paul had an associate in his missionary work called Jesus Justus.

 

Jewish people in Jesus' time were not very original in giving names.

 

Most Popular names of Jewish males in the 1st centuries BC and AD

 

Simon 21%

Joseph 14%

Judah (Judas) 10%

Yohanan (Yochanan or John) 10%

Eliezer 10%

Jesus 9%

Jonathan 6%

Matthew 5%

Hanina 3%

Yo-ezer 3%

Ishmael 2.2%

Menachem 2%

Jacob/James 2%

Hanan 2%

Levi 0.2%

Isaac 0.2%

Gamaliel 0.2%

Hillel 0.2%

 

 

But there are at the very least, something like 1026 known other Jesuses who were sons of Joseph at the minimum to choose from! Not counting the rest!

 

Not to count all the Mexicans and other Spanish speakers called Jesus (pronounced Hey- zus). But then I suppose in your view English and Spanish are the real arbiters of the truth and not Hebrew or Gaulish.

 

Oh, as for Horus, well, in my Hieroglyphic dictionary it is Her or Heru, pronounced Cccchrr. It originates in the name of an ancient African sky-god. Nothing to do with the Hebrew tenses of the verb TO BE, or the Hebrew word for salvation or deliverance.

 

Stick to the original meanings, not how they get bent out of shape on their way into English through transliteration.

 

But I know I am wasting my time completely, totally and utterly.

 

Especially when someone refuses to read the evidence. You can read it all bit by bit, but that's not going to happen! Unless of course I turned round and wrote something in agreement, when suddenly the attention span miraculously increases!

 

[ 09.10.2007, 19:18: Message edited by: GUNNER ]