ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 114
Dec 12 11 6:14 PM
Dartmistress wrote: I have found a fascinating book called 'The Jesus Dynasty' by James D Tabor. The author is a biblical archeologist and as a professor, holds the chair of Religious studies at North Carolina University. The man has obviously spent many years studying the bible, the Q texts and the dead sea scrolls.While much of the archological work is speculation and posibilities, it is very interesting.He brushes aside the religious hype which was added many years after the death of Jesus, and tries to show us the man, his family and his followers. While using the writing of Josephus, Roman documents, reports of the Messiah (messenger) 100bc, and referring to the old testament as well as the new, he builds up a believable picture. One of the things I found interesting was the ancient references to two messiahs who would usher in God's kingdom. Very little is said of him in the bible, but John the Baptiser appears to have been a great influence in Jesus' life. It seems that his importance was ignored in fear that it would detract from the fame accorded Jesus.Perhaps the two of them had deluded themselves into believing that they were the Messiahs refered to in the scriptures.While I still do not believe that Jesus was anything other than a clever, politically motivated man; I am now more inclined to believe that he did exist.
Interact
Posts: 4371
Dec 12 11 8:12 PM
Crazy Cat Lady
Posts: 8054
Dec 12 11 8:34 PM
Ms. Agreeable
crazee cat ladie wrote: Some people might say you are a bit of a myth or parable O.D.
There is no evidence jEsus ever existed. Josephus is not reliable. It's pretty clear to serious scholars that the jEsus myth was a parable.
Dec 13 11 6:03 AM
I watched part 1 of 3 on a documentary series about Jerusalem tonight, and the historian talked about Jesus like he existed, the programme is about Jerusalem not Jesus, it starts from about 700-1000 B.C. and will go right up to 20th century, but nonetheless Jesus was talked about like he was real. As I understand it most historians do accept Jesus existed.
Dec 13 11 6:18 AM
When the early Christians went into new lands, rather than alienate the locals, they took over the pagan festivals and gave them new names. "Hey man, isn't that strange, our Jesus was born about the same time as you celebrate the winter. Why don't we combine the two and have a great party."
Dec 13 11 6:47 AM
crazee cat ladie wrote: But hey, those are taught by just academic Scholars and Professors, what do they know about history.
I have heard that they actually believe that he was born in the Spring -closer to Easter really.
Posts: 5033
Dec 13 11 9:35 AM
Dartmistress wrote:When the early Christians went into new lands, rather than alienate the locals, they took over the pagan festivals and gave them new names. "Hey man, isn't that strange, our Jesus was born about the same time as you celebrate the winter. Why don't we combine the two and have a great party." Whatever the reason, I agree with Valdo. It's party time, and don't forget my Christmas boxes, Santa. LOL>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>AGREED!!!
Posts: 1717
Dec 13 11 11:39 AM
Hornet wrote:Thanks for taking the time to 'educate' me, Valdo. I am not totally unaware of the other Jesus' - and I certainly know it was a common name, sometimes spelled or pronounced differently. There were also a lot of Josephs and Marys. Even the apostles' names were /are popular.
Posts: 2138
Dec 13 11 4:32 PM
Channel Gran
Posts: 13820
Dec 13 11 5:39 PM
Only Human
Dec 13 11 10:34 PM
Dec 14 11 11:40 AM
The problem with the “Jesus” is not if a person by that name existed or not. The problem is that when I say “Jesus” everybody should be coerced to refer to Jesus of the Bible writers, not Jesus Veracruz who was found dead in a trunk of a car (Damn those Mexican drug cartels).
Another thing you’re coerced is to think that the Bible was always a single book and has actually a “time line”. If the Old Testament has still a debatable time-line events, the New Testament (even written more recently than the Old Testament) is an amalgam of disparate events forced to a time-line. You are forced to believe that initially there was a Guy who walked together with some 12 other guys and the Guy made some miracles and said something smart. Then some witnesses went running in the four cardinal points and talked and talked and talked until after 60 years later from presupposed events, some writers in these four cardinal points put down whatever they heard. And boy and behold, these writers didn’t write only whatever they heard, but more …because when you hear somebody talking about some guy making miracles you get “holy inspired”.
The “holy” writings did not stop; some writers copied “the original testimonies” as if they were taken from the mouth of the Guy. When copied, the new manuscripts had a lot of “holy amalgam” of interpretations, religious practices, translations, plagiarism from other contemporary cultures… all that because… well, people need to believe in something. You have to have a divine empowering, something more powerful than old religions. So, here came, after more than 300 years after the “Jesus” event, an emperor who used Christian a sect belief to empower his government.
The emperor was Constantine the first. He helped Christianism to become a state religion, and when you have a government to tell you in what to believe… then you better believe that the Jesus of newly released edition of the Bible (gathered from a stack of thousands of “holy” booklets and approved by a high “holy” council) existed and has a dynasty.
All in all, some other Christian sects did not believe that Constantine holy council was Christian enough so there were some other booklets thrown out and others added… this apocryphal brouhaha and all that…until nowadays when I’d like to have my own cherry picked Bible where only Charismas music, lights, shopping, gifts is the real, one and only Jesus. Yes, “Jesus Saves”, but I like to spend a lot on Christmas… especially my wife.
Dec 14 11 1:17 PM
Dec 14 11 2:06 PM
valdobiade wrote:
Dec 14 11 5:57 PM
Dec 15 11 11:30 AM
valdobiade wrote:Hornet wrote:Thanks for taking the time to 'educate' me, Valdo. I am not totally unaware of the other Jesus' - and I certainly know it was a common name, sometimes spelled or pronounced differently. There were also a lot of Josephs and Marys. Even the apostles' names were /are popular.Laura, I was sure that you know about the other Jesii. I just wanted to make my point that whoever says that Jesus did not exist is actually an ignorant.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, Jesus, the man of the Christian Bible, the one who is considered the Lord, is almost indisputably a tale of a real man. The "spin" on much of his life and teachnigs is another matter.
Dec 15 11 11:36 AM
Heather wrote:I have heard that they actually believe that he was born in the Spring -closer to Easter really.Yes I heard that, too, just merged it with the pagan thingy, what's it called, yule.
Heather wrote:I have heard that they actually believe that he was born in the Spring -closer to Easter really.
Dec 15 11 2:17 PM
Dec 15 11 3:11 PM
Dec 15 11 5:51 PM
Share This