|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 3, 2014 18:17:30 GMT -5
No, Nathan. It's the media that is lying to Americans. The reason they're doing that is because we pay them to entertain us. [/quote][/quote] The owners of the news stations might not appreciate you saying that. |
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Apr 3, 2014 18:56:13 GMT -5
I am no historian, to say the least, but I am encouraged that , in spite of the "disagreements" on the accuracy of historical scripture , all of your conversations give me the sense that ALL of you agree and believe in the existence of Jesus. That's quite "powerful", imo., that someone from 2000 years ago is still instigating discussions and impacting us as much as He does today. Cool Yes, there are other historical figures get some attention also, but Jesus is talked about more, imo. I suppose there are a few, who refuse to believe He existed, just like the holocaust etc. ....... Alvin Undoubtedly someone called Jesus lived. But as for much of the "ancient history" you hear about is kind of crap from people who haven't studied anything about it. Of course, there is a common tradition among many Americans for preferring the crap version to anything educated researchers have to say. Bob, It has come up a number of times in your posts about "Americans preferring crap", compared to educated research. How would "us" Canadians or any other nationality differ in that respect? Are Americans somewhat unique, to prefer crap in your opinion, compared to others or ? Personally, I don't view them that way at all, especially as a generalization, albeit individuals maybe. Wikipedia "educated researchers" says this about Jesus - Cheers , Alvin Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[1][2][3][24][25][26] In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity.[27][28] There is, however, widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings.[4] Robert E. Van Voorst states that the idea of the non-historicity of the existence of Jesus has always been controversial, and has consistently failed to convince virtually all scholars of many disciplines.[24] Geoffrey Blainey notes that a few scholars have argued that Jesus did not exist, but writes that Jesus' life was in fact "astonishingly documented" by the standards of the time – more so than any of his contemporaries – with numerous books, stories and memoirs written about him. The problem for the historian, wrote Blainey, is not therefore, determining whether Jesus actually existed, but rather in considering the "sheer multitude of detail and its inconsistencies and contradictions".[29] Although a very small number of modern scholars argue that Jesus never existed, that view is a distinct minority and virtually all scholars consider theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.[4][20] Christopher Tuckett states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate seem to be part of the bedrock of historical tradition, based on the availability of non-Christian evidence.[20] Graham Stanton states that "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".[ |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 3, 2014 19:16:03 GMT -5
Study 9/11. The Schools are control by them all. You're told what to TEACH! You already know that, Bob. I know. And they are told to teach science and nit intelligent design. What a travesty! |
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Apr 3, 2014 19:21:51 GMT -5
I think I'd enjoy being a student of Bob's, and I dare say , he might teach stuff not approved by "the government".
Alvin
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 3, 2014 20:11:33 GMT -5
Anne, you seem intent on purposefully misunderstanding what I'm saying.
That it has nothing to do with my supposed "chosen" perspective or whether I, personally, want to "believe" something or not.
My point is the way people understand the method by which history is written today compared to how history was written the days of that FIRST CENTURY AD.
They understood the writings of the gospels for what they were, -stories, not actual history.
from wiki:
Herodotus was as ancient Greek historian who was the first historian who was known "to collect his materials systematically, test their accuracy to a certain extent, and arrange them in a well-constructed and vivid narrative."
"The Histories—his masterpiece and the only work he is known to have produced—is a record of his "inquiry" being an investigation of the origins of the Greco-Persian Wars and including a wealth of geographical and ethnographical information."
It is the "method" of collecting materials systematically, and testing their accuracy to a certain extent that is the present day method lacking in the early writtings about Jesus.
Herodotus is also known as the father of lies...
Herodotus has been called "The Father of History" (first conferred by Cicero), as well as "The Father of Lies" (first conferred by Voltaire).
The point that I am making is that Herodotus was the first known writer to attempt to write in a manner that other writers didn't write, including the gospel writers.
He was the first known historian to collect his materials systematically and test their accuracy to a certain extent.
The gospel writes were not attempting to deceive anyone, but it it just was the way that most writers wrote in their day
The writers knew that and their readers know that.
They weren't even trying to make a factual, infallible account.
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 3, 2014 20:24:36 GMT -5
I am no historian, to say the least, but I am encouraged that , in spite of the "disagreements" on the accuracy of historical scripture , all of your conversations give me the sense that ALL of you agree and believe in the existence of Jesus. That's quite "powerful", imo., that someone from 2000 years ago is still instigating discussions and impacting us as much as He does today. Cool Yes, there are other historical figures get some attention also, but Jesus is talked about more, imo. I suppose there are a few, who refuse to believe He existed, just like the holocaust etc. ....... Alvin
Is he really talked about more than other historical figures?
Is it because that Christianity has so much force in the Western world?
How about other countries in the world, do you think that Jesus is talked about more than other historical figures in some other countries, such as China, India ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2014 20:38:53 GMT -5
with 2 billion followers(est.) and 6 billion(est.)bibles sold as of 2014 i'll bet he is talked about more than any other figure in history, if you google "christ" it shows 107 million hits more than mohammed,buddah and krishna/vishnu combined
|
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Apr 3, 2014 20:39:39 GMT -5
I am no historian, to say the least, but I am encouraged that , in spite of the "disagreements" on the accuracy of historical scripture , all of your conversations give me the sense that ALL of you agree and believe in the existence of Jesus. That's quite "powerful", imo., that someone from 2000 years ago is still instigating discussions and impacting us as much as He does today. Cool Yes, there are other historical figures get some attention also, but Jesus is talked about more, imo. I suppose there are a few, who refuse to believe He existed, just like the holocaust etc. ....... Alvin
Is he really talked about more than other historical figures?
Is it because that Christianity has so much force in the Western world?
How about other countries in the world, do you think that Jesus is talked about more than other historical figures in some other countries, such as China, India ?
I think he is talked about more than other historical figures, perhaps, because he is considered to be one of the greatest "teachers" of all time, by many people of all stripes. There is very much controversy, about him, and his claims that He was God , came from heaven , etc., which not too many other historical people claimed, so naturally talked about . I don't know how much He is talked about in other countries, but sure a familiar name, in the numerous countries I have visited. Alvin |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 3, 2014 20:47:52 GMT -5
The U.S. media news stations are under control by the US government! The owners of the news stations might not appreciate you saying that.[/quote] I am telling the truth. If you don't do what they ask, or told; you're DEAD. This is how they control their citizens through the Media.... Study 9/11. The Schools are control by them all. You're told what to TEACH! You already know that, Bob. [/quote] Yes, a lot of journalists have been executed for writing things against the government. Some of those private school teachers didn't fare any better, poor things. Oh well!! |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 3, 2014 20:48:55 GMT -5
If there was a flood it was regional and it happened around the time of the Sumerian culture not the Hebrew. It is just another story they took and gave it their own little twist and called it Hebrew history. Written while in captivity in Babylon. And, it was regional and not worldwide, right? |
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 3, 2014 21:09:30 GMT -5
Well here's the deal, dmich. There's too much history oral and written that corroborates the truth of the gospels over the course of 2000 years. I can understand you not wanting to believe it - from your chosen perspective - as that would require a different focus for you. However, that doesn't change history. They understood the writings of the gospels for what they were, -stories, not actual history. So you would have us believe that the gospel writers who were eyewitnesses to Christ - Matthew and John - were relating stories only - and not actual events and history? Now while Jesus did often use hyperbole and parables of illustration - that doesn't mean that he didn't actually relate those - nor that they weren't witnessed by his apostles. And he really did perform miracles - which you would also prefer to reduce to ' stories' ... ? |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 3, 2014 21:24:43 GMT -5
with 2 billion followers(est.) and 6 billion(est.)bibles sold as of 2014 i'll bet he is talked about more than any other figure in history, if you google "christ" it shows 107 million hits more than mohammed,buddah and krishna/vishnu combined Hard to believe that Jesus lost out to Miley Cyrus (452,000,000 results). And Justin Bieber (542,000,000). Sticking with historical figures George Washington (812,000,000 results (0.24 seconds). Of course, you probably knew that sex (952,000,000 results) would raise its ugly head! Do you really think looking for google hits in a very christian country is going to give any results that mean anything? I mean, plain old CARBON (145,000,000 results) beat Christ (97,400,000 results). |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 3, 2014 21:26:15 GMT -5
Undoubtedly someone called Jesus lived. But as for much of the "ancient history" you hear about is kind of crap from people who haven't studied anything about it. Of course, there is a common tradition among many Americans for preferring the crap version to anything educated researchers have to say. Bob, It has come up a number of times in your posts about "Americans preferring crap", compared to educated research. How would "us" Canadians or any other nationality differ in that respect? Are Americans somewhat unique, to prefer crap in your opinion, compared to others or ? Personally, I don't view them that way at all, especially as a generalization, albeit individuals maybe. Wikipedia "educated researchers" says this about Jesus - Cheers , Alvin I didn't decide for myself that that was a tradition among many Americans. I have many times heard/read people saying exactly that. There's actually a book by a religious professor of religion at Boston University who has written a book about the religious illiteracy of Americans, especially Christian Americans. I'm a Canadian -- lived there for 40 years -- most people are respected for what they have made of themselves. There are lots of people like that in the US, but the loud-mouth majority do not want to be educated, do not want to know anything about anyone but himself, think they know far more than any PhD, believe they are the Christian light to the rest of the world, and believe the whole world is persecuting them. In a nutshell. If the whole country were like that I would never be here right now. |
|
|
|
Post by xna on Apr 3, 2014 21:28:20 GMT -5
NathanB Said:They are impregnating the women and creating a race of hybrids----Nephilim! Children of the fallen ones AGAIN. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I was thinking about the alien Chimera you speak of. It could be true if The Church of Numbers is right. www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHRqAmdR4qo www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiT-GZ0wg28 www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSEKZp7mlUQThey see everything as planned by a master – creator - programmer. The here and now, heaven, hell, everything is a created by the master programmer. Some calculate it has a 20% chance of being true. I give it about a .02% chance of being true. Do you buy it? |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 3, 2014 21:35:30 GMT -5
I think I'd enjoy being a student of Bob's, and I dare say , he might teach stuff not approved by "the government". Alvin Actually I never taught anything that wasn't perfectly within the expectations of the government or the school system. But I did have a reputation for making history and government classes interesting and personally meaningful to students. And I had as much fun as the students. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 3, 2014 21:37:37 GMT -5
They understood the writings of the gospels for what they were, -stories, not actual history. So you would have us believe that the gospel writers who were eyewitnesses to Christ - Matthew and John - were relating stories only - and not actual events and history? Now while Jesus did often use hyperbole and parables of illustration - that doesn't mean that he didn't actually relate those - nor that they weren't witnessed by his apostles. And he really did perform miracles - which you would also prefer to reduce to ' stories' ... ? The gospel writers were not eyewitnesses to Jesus. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 3, 2014 21:39:12 GMT -5
So you would have us believe that the eyewitnesses to Christ - Matthew and John - were relating stories only - and not actual events and history? Now while Jesus did often use hyperbole and parables of illustration - that doesn't mean that he didn't actually relate those - nor that they weren't witnessed by his apostles. And he really did perform miracles - which you would also prefer to reduce to ' stories' ... ? Come on, StAnne. You know that Matthew and John were almost certainly not the writers of the gospels that have their names. There is nothing that verifies what is found in the bible. The gospels copy each other. Paul doesn't mention them at all. There were probably people who heard what Jesus said but, as multiple studies have shown, eyewitnesses are very, very poor recorders of the facts. Passed down in a decades long game of gossip (telephone?) and you can imagine the distortion. Man: I think it was, "Blessed are the cheesemakers"!
Gregory's wife: What's so special about the cheesemakers?
Gregory: Well, obviously it's not meant to be taken literally. It refers to any manufacturer of dairy products.(Life of Brian) |
|
|
|
Post by déjà vu on Apr 3, 2014 21:43:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 3, 2014 21:43:56 GMT -5
Hard to say for sure but I tend to impute qualities to him that I think he should have.
Isn't this one of the reasons that there so many thousands of Christian denominations in the worlds today?
Its been a spectacular creative animal, huh? |
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 3, 2014 21:46:45 GMT -5
I believe the soul of mankind has a destiny. You can board that train or buck it, but it won't be stopping for you. Depending on how you want to define soul, I probably believe the same thing. We are all on that train and when we reach the end of the line the electrochemical processes in our brains will stop stopand all conscientiousness as we know it will be over. Just like before we were born. Could be thought of as nirvana. Does your wife find you interesting or boring? |
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 3, 2014 21:48:35 GMT -5
Hard to say for sure but I tend to impute qualities to him that I think he should have. Kind of a DIY religion. An expression of faith. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2014 22:08:03 GMT -5
with 2 billion followers(est.) and 6 billion(est.)bibles sold as of 2014 i'll bet he is talked about more than any other figure in history, if you google "christ" it shows 107 million hits more than mohammed,buddah and krishna/vishnu combined Hard to believe that Jesus lost out to Miley Cyrus (452,000,000 results). And Justin Bieber (542,000,000). Sticking with historical figures George Washington (812,000,000 results (0.24 seconds). Of course, you probably knew that sex (952,000,000 results) would raise its ugly head! Do you really think looking for google hits in a very christian country is going to give any results that mean anything? I mean, plain old CARBON (145,000,000 results) beat Christ (97,400,000 results). hmm..thats odd when i google miley cyrus justin beiber i only got 49 million hits each and george got 93 million as for sex and carbon thats just silly were talking people not objects... |
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Apr 3, 2014 22:21:09 GMT -5
hmmmmmm, not sure google search result hits is gonna prove too much statistically , for sound research on historical people. I googled Stalin and got 8 million and then my name , Alvin, and got 21 million. Wow, I'd better realize how important I am historically , beating the likes of Stalin ---- uh, maybe not....... Alvin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2014 22:32:43 GMT -5
yeah but stalin is a unique name and i bet most of the sites are about stalin the dictator...how many different alvins did you get the first one that popped up for me was alvin and the chipmunks.....if you type in your full name i bet it drops dramatically from 21 million...i type in Jesus and it shot up to 176 million verses just 107 million for christ and his whole name jesus christ is at 48 million...
|
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 3, 2014 22:33:24 GMT -5
So you would have us believe that the eyewitnesses to Christ - Matthew and John - were relating stories only - and not actual events and history? Now while Jesus did often use hyperbole and parables of illustration - that doesn't mean that he didn't actually relate those - nor that they weren't witnessed by his apostles. And he really did perform miracles - which you would also prefer to reduce to ' stories' ... ? Come on, StAnne. You know that Matthew and John were almost certainly not the writers of the gospels that have their names. John
... We find that the same conviction concerning the authorship of the Fourth Gospel is expressed at greater length in the Roman Church, about 170, by the writer of the Muratorian Fragment (lines 9-34). Bishop Theophilus of Antioch in Syria (before 181) also cites the beginning of the Fourth Gospel as the words of John (Ad Autolycum, II, xxii). Finally, according to the testimony of a Vatican manuscript (Codex Regin Sueci seu Alexandrinus, 14), Bishop Papias of Hierapolis in Phrygia, an immediate disciple of the Apostle John, included in his great exegetical work an account of the composition of the Gospel by St. John during which he had been employed as scribe by the Apostle.
It is scarcely necessary to repeat that, in the passages referred to, Papias and the other ancient writers have in mind but one John, namely the Apostle and Evangelist, and not some other Presbyter John, to be distinguished from the Apostle. ...
www.newadvent.org/cathen/08438a.htm
Matthew
According to Eusebius (Church History III.39.16), Papias said that Matthew collected (synetaxato; or, according to two manuscripts, synegraphato, composed) ta logia (the oracles or maxims of Jesus) in the Hebrew (Aramaic) language, and that each one translated them as best he could.
... We may believe that here logion comprises all that Christ said and did. Nevertheless, it would seem that, if the two passages on Mark and Matthew followed each other in Papias as in Eusebius, the author intended to emphasize a difference between them, by implying that Mark recorded the Lord's words and deeds and Matthew chronicled His discourses. The question is still unsolved; it is, however, possible that, in Papias, the term logia means deeds and teachings.
(2) Second, does Papias refer to oral or written translations of Matthew, when he says that each one translated the sayings "as best he could"? As there is nowhere any allusion to numerous Greek translations of the Logia of Matthew, it is probable that Papias speaks here of the oral translations made at Christian meetings, similar to the extemporaneous translations of the Old Testament made in the synagogues. This would explain why Papias mentions that each one (each reader) translated "as best he could".
(3) Finally, were the Logia of Matthew and the Gospel to which ecclesiastical writers refer written in Hebrew or Aramaic? Both hypotheses are held. Papias says that Matthew wrote the Logia in the Hebrew (Hebraidi) language; St. Irenæus and Eusebius maintain that he wrote his gospel for the Hebrews in their national language, and the same assertion is found in several writers. Matthew would, therefore, seem to have written in modernized Hebrew, the language then used by the scribes for teaching. But, in the time of Christ, the national language of the Jews was Aramaic, and when, in the New Testament, there is mention of the Hebrew language (Hebrais dialektos), it is Aramaic that is implied. Hence, the aforesaid writers may allude to the Aramaic and not to the Hebrew. Besides, as they assert, the Apostle Matthew wrote his Gospel to help popular teaching. To be understood by his readers who spoke Aramaic, he would have had to reproduce the original catechesis in this language, and it cannot be imagined why, or for whom, he should have taken the trouble to write it in Hebrew, when it would have had to be translated thence into Aramaic for use in religious services. Moreover, Eusebius (Church History III.24.6) tells us that the Gospel of Matthew was a reproduction of his preaching, and this we know, was in Aramaic. ...
www.newadvent.org/cathen/10057a.htm |
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 3, 2014 22:41:35 GMT -5
So you would have us believe that the gospel writers who were eyewitnesses to Christ - Matthew and John - were relating stories only - and not actual events and history? Now while Jesus did often use hyperbole and parables of illustration - that doesn't mean that he didn't actually relate those - nor that they weren't witnessed by his apostles. And he really did perform miracles - which you would also prefer to reduce to ' stories' ... ? The gospel writers were not eyewitnesses to Jesus. Matthew and John were. |
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Apr 3, 2014 22:48:13 GMT -5
yeah but stalin is a unique name and i bet most of the sites are about stalin the dictator...how many different alvins did you get the first one that popped up for me was alvin and the chipmunks.....if you type in your full name i bet it drops dramatically from 21 million...i type in Jesus and it shot up to 176 million verses just 107 million for christ and his whole name jesus christ is at 48 million... What deduction could we really make from that , though , ? Interesting but?  I've never done this kind of d e e p research before lol Alvin |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 3, 2014 22:53:32 GMT -5
The gospel writers were not eyewitnesses to Jesus. Matthew and John were. They weren't the writers -- they're supposed to be the people who told the people who told the writers. |
|
Prayers for all who have requested prayer, or for whom prayer has been requested.
I've never done this kind of d