Who is afraid of the Dead Sea Scrolls?

[BoyntonStu]

While details of a terrible struggle concerning the apparent rigging of Dead Sea Scrolls exhibits have been trickling out there is perhaps not enough general awareness of the role played by anti-Semitism in fifty years of scrolls research. Therefore, it will be useful to present some basic information on the topic, so readers can place the current exhibit controversy in context.

The elements of this scandal have been documented in many venues, including, most recently, in an article by Edward Rothstein of the New York Times.

Rothstein explains that in the aftermath of the 1948 war, virtually all of the thousands of text fragments found in the caves near Qumran were kept in the Rockefeller Museum in East Jerusalem, and the Jordanian government appointed a team of "editors" to publish them, led by Roland de Vaux, a Dominican priest affiliated with the École Biblique (also in East Jerusalem).

Now the crucial fact, as Rothstein indicates, is that "Jewish scholars were deliberately excluded from de Vaux’s original eight-member team, which was dominated by Roman Catholic priests and scholars."

According to Rothstein, De Vaux "rejected offers by Israelis to help his team and persisted in referring to Israel as Palestine." Other members of the team also had a "scorn of political [and] religious aspects of Judaism."

Rothstein explains that while the theory that the scrolls were produced by a sect of ascetic Essenes was first proposed by a Jewish scholar teaching at the Hebrew University, "that vision was filled out by de Vaux and his colleagues," who argued that Qumran housed a "monastic celibate group living in the desert, isolated from other Judaic movements," and espousing messianic views that "embodied almost proto-Christian sensibilities."

Referring to what is commonly known as the Dead Sea Scrolls monopoly, Rothstein reminds us that "the scrolls were passed among generations of scholars like esoteric possessions," and that the Qumran-sectarian theory "became orthodoxy, made immutable because until the 1990s the texts were largely inaccessible to outsiders."

Rothstein observes that "the scholarly cult devoted to these scrolls was as tightly knit, self-regarding and monastic as the cult those scholars imagined produced the scrolls." (Substance is given to Rothstein's account in an editorial by University of Chicago historian Norman Golb, where we read that the “complex history of the Palestinian Jews on the eve of the First Revolt [was] pushed aside in favor of a bizarre, Christologically colored thesis.”)

This situation continued until recent times, because when Israel conquered the West Bank in 1967, it failed, according to Rothstein, to "assert any real authority over the project."

John Strugnell, an early appointee of de Vaux, became head of the team in the 1980s, and in 1990 gave an interview in which he described Judaism as a "horrible religion" that "should have disappeared.” (For more on Strugnell, see his New York Times obituary by John Noble Wilford, where we learn, for example, that he never received a Ph.D.)

At least one member of the original monopoly, David Noel Freedman, was a convert to Christianity who served as a Presbyterian minister; his student, Risa Levitt Kohn, curated the San Diego exhibit and is "guest-curating" the Toronto exhibit; in a published interview, she has declared that the scrolls are "not really Jewish texts."

Another monopoly member, John Allegro, issued an anti-Semitic book, The Chosen People (1971), which is regularly cited on "maverick" websites: see, e.g., this page, where we learn that "the best study ... for the general anti-Semite to read is John Allegro's 'The Chosen People' ... which details just how blood-thirsty, organized and generally genocidal the Jews were." The author of this fascinating statement explains that Allegro was a "theologian who focused on 'macro-theology' and the Essene connection to Christianity."

I don't recall ever reading that anything in the Dead Sea Scrolls reflects a "blood-thirsty and genocidal" world-view. Clearly, then, Dr. Kohn was right to say that they are not really "Jewish texts."

To be sure, Allegro left the editorial "team" before he published his scholarly diatribe; Strugnell himself was dismissed after making his anti-Semitic statements; and in the 1990s the group was gradually opened to a number of Jews, after Oxford scholar Geza Vermes -- another convert to Christianity and an adamant defender of the Qumran-sectarian theory -- admitted that the monopoly was “the academic scandal par excellence of the 20th century,” but entered into a controversial deal to obtain copies of the unpublished scrolls for Oxford under the condition that only individuals selected by the "official" editors could see them.

Despite the grudging expansion of the "team," today it remains a fact that no one who fundamentally disagrees with the old Qumran-sectarian theory has ever been included in it. Moreover, while a variety of Jewish scholars have been invited to give lectures at the current museum exhibits, the views of the key opponents of the sectarian theory -- in particular, of the prominent scholars in Israel and elsewhere who have argued for a specifically Jewish, as opposed to sectarian, theory of scroll origins -- have been largely downplayed and excluded from these venues (with, it would seem, the single exception of the Jewish Museum exhibit in New York).

Finally, is it insignificant that an anti-Semitic insinuation has appeared in a press release announcing at least one of the exhibits, and that a concerted effort to prevent the public from finding out about opposition to the exhibits appears to have been engaged in by interested parties, some of whose work histories include, for example, employment in companies with names like "Christianity.com"?

Clearly these are difficult questions. Nor can anti-Semitism alone be held responsible for the current crisis in scrolls research: personal enmities, financial interests, the ordinary desire for power are surely all partly to blame. This being said, the question of how much influence the shadow of the original monopoly continues to exercise over public perception of the scrolls remains a pressing issue to this day, and one is entitled to wonder whether appeals to Jewish involvement in the traveling exhibition aren't a bit like that old story: "Oh, but I have many Jewish friends..."

________________________________________
A host of TV discussion programs came, before the scrolls were released in full on the net. Once this happened, all the imaginative theories made by scholars in those programs became mute. The issue of not allowing any Jewish input of the Hebrew scrolls is a tradition with Islamic states: prior to 1967, Jerusalem's Hebrew relics were destroyed, as does the Mosque's waft numerously in recent years. The Vatican does not allow any access to its archives in its basements, despite numerous requests and beseeching.

The two most surprise factors of the scrolls is that it did not contain anything which was claimed in the Gospels, which was seen as an affront to Christians. This was then thought to be due to the scrolls referring to older writings before the Gospels emerged. Then the Temple Scrolls were also found, and this was a contemporary document which also did not record anything appearing in the Gospels - alluding to the Gospels being a work written later than it claimed.

Likewise, the Scrolls was an affront to Muslims, who inculcated its peoples the Temple was a myth, and that Jews were occupying Islamic lands.

The scrolls exposed a disdained truth, putting many otherwise sincerely inclined folk in a precarious predicament - and casting again Israel and Jews in a foreboding situation of vilification through no fault of their own: ironically, the scrolls were discovered by an Arab youth. Certainly, and as expected, the scrolls did not result in any forbearance to correct the UN Resolutions, or to subside the demands of wiping Israel off the map - even that it is based on the earth itself spitting out many truths. The charges increased and became more demanding.

Truth alone will not resolve this region's conflict - it poses a negation of too many and too much to be considered. This is equally a problem for all three religions which sprung up from this region.

The Hebrew bible says:

'AND I SHALL MAKE JERUSALEM AS A BURDEN UNTO THE NATIONS'

[Gary Diamond]

In a nut shell it sounds like to me some out there feel this was not written by Jews, which sounds a bit dumb, but i expect with all the wackco people here someone will disagree with me.

[SmartScarecrow]

In a nut shell it sounds like to me some out there feel this was not written by Jews, which sounds a bit dumb, but i expect with all the wackco people here someone will disagree with me.

well, the Essene were sort of a strange bunch ... guess by today's standards you would have to classify them as sort a "cult' ... sort of like "end time Christians" ... but they were most certainly Jewish ...

most give credit to the Essene sect living around the area known as Qumran credit for their creation ... there have been a number of other theories posed and no one really knows 100% for certain ... but the Essene are the most likely publishers ...

some of the material translated is suggestive of early Christian teachings ... but it has been speculated that Jesus as a young Rabi spent time studying with the Essene and may have incorporated some of their teachings rather than the other way around ... again, no one really knows for certain ... lot of guess work, very little factual backed by evidence ...

I just wish they would get on with it and provide at least 2 versions of the translation by two different stake holders ... some of what is contained represent the earliest know manuscripts of biblical text ... would be marvelous to see a modern translation of such early version so that currently popular translations can be verified as accurate ... but with the Catholic church involved, it might take 100 years to get the translations out there ...

I understand someone got sneaky and released photographs of a large portion of the collection to the Internet ... so there may be many independents working on translations now instead of just the priestly cast ... so there is hope ... so far, I have only seen tiny fragments of what is there translated and released ...

[Gary Diamond]

well, the Essene were sort of a strange bunch ... guess by today's standards you would have to classify them as sort a "cult' ... sort of like "end time Christians" ... but they were most certainly Jewish ...

most give credit to the Essene sect living around the area known as Qumran credit for their creation ... there have been a number of other theories posed and no one really knows 100% for certain ... but the Essene are the most likely publishers ...

some of the material translated is suggestive of early Christian teachings ... but it has been speculated that Jesus as a young Rabi spent time studying with the Essene and may have incorporated some of their teachings rather than the other way around ... again, no one really knows for certain ... lot of guess work, very little factual backed by evidence ...

I just wish they would get on with it and provide at least 2 versions of the translation by two different stake holders ... some of what is contained represent the earliest know manuscripts of biblical text ... would be marvelous to see a modern translation of such early version so that currently popular translations can be verified as accurate ... but with the Catholic church involved, it might take 100 years to get the translations out there ...

I understand someone got sneaky and released photographs of a large portion of the collection to the Internet ... so there may be many independents working on translations now instead of just the priestly cast ... so there is hope ... so far, I have only seen tiny fragments of what is there translated and released ...

Why not go to were they are kept, and see for yourself i did, can you read hebrew, Aramaic or greek do you understand why the 3?
Oh and while i'm on the subject your info on Jews is at the second grade level, and reading what you wrote you could never get the respect from any Jew i know

[SmartScarecrow]

Why not go to were they are kept, and see for yourself i did, can you read hebrew, Aramaic or greek do you understand why the 3?
Oh and while i'm on the subject your info on Jews is at the second grade level, and reading what you wrote you could never get the respect from any Jew i know

lol ... well, I guess you are entitled to your opinion ... as am I ... I simplified the explanation for the intended audience ... but no, I do not speak Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek and have no desire to travel any more ... did more than enough of that when I was much younger ...

[BoyntonStu]

well, the Essene were sort of a strange bunch ... guess by today's standards you would have to classify them as sort a "cult' ... sort of like "end time Christians" ... but they were most certainly Jewish ...

most give credit to the Essene sect living around the area known as Qumran credit for their creation ... there have been a number of other theories posed and no one really knows 100% for certain ... but the Essene are the most likely publishers ...

some of the material translated is suggestive of early Christian teachings ... but it has been speculated that Jesus as a young Rabi spent time studying with the Essene and may have incorporated some of their teachings rather than the other way around ... again, no one really knows for certain ... lot of guess work, very little factual backed by evidence ...

I just wish they would get on with it and provide at least 2 versions of the translation by two different stake holders ... some of what is contained represent the earliest know manuscripts of biblical text ... would be marvelous to see a modern translation of such early version so that currently popular translations can be verified as accurate ... but with the Catholic church involved, it might take 100 years to get the translations out there ...

I understand someone got sneaky and released photographs of a large portion of the collection to the Internet ... so there may be many independents working on translations now instead of just the priestly cast ... so there is hope ... so far, I have only seen tiny fragments of what is there translated and released ...

"but it has been speculated that Jesus as a young Rabi spent time studying with the Essene and may have incorporated some of their teachings rather than the other way around ."

The operative word here is "speculated".

AFAIK No contemporary historical record of a Rabbi called Jesus has ever been discovered.

IOW There is no contemporary record, equivalent to the Dead Sea Scrolls, that indicate Jesus ever existed, was born in a manger, or was crucified by the Romans.

All experts agree that the New Testament was written generations after the supposed events occurred.

DATE AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT In the early twentieth century, most scholars dated the New Testament documents as follows:

Matthew, A.D. 851
Mark, A.D. 60-652
Luke, A.D. 80-853
John, A.D. 90-954
Pauline Epistles, A.D. 48-645

To sum it up, everything about Christianity is 'speculation'.

Without Jesus there cannot be Christianity.

Without Moses, Noah, Jonah, etc. there would still be Judaism.

I find that quite interesting.


BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

lol ... well, I guess you are entitled to your opinion ... as am I ... I simplified the explanation for the intended audience ... but no, I do not speak Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek and have no desire to travel any more ... did more than enough of that when I was much younger ...

Question why did you pop out of the blue, that Ashkenazi Jews have no Jewish blood line???

Sure you may read that, but i read that the tooth fairy is real as well.

Do you care that you insulted anyone on this board that is a Ashkenazi Jew? Or perhaps that was your intent

[SmartScarecrow]

Question why did you pop out of the blue, that Ashkenazi Jews have no Jewish blood line???

Sure you may read that, but i read that the tooth fairy is real as well.

Do you care that you insulted anyone on this board that is a Ashkenazi Jew? Or perhaps that was your intent


no offense was intended ... I reported the truth to the best of my knowledge ... the Ashkenazi Jews are of Eurasian stock and are not Semitic with origins in the middle east ... simple as that ... to the best of my knowledge, this is a factual statement ... the historical record is quite clear on the matter ...

[SmartScarecrow]

"but it has been speculated that Jesus as a young Rabi spent time studying with the Essene and may have incorporated some of their teachings rather than the other way around ."

The operative word here is "speculated".

AFAIK No contemporary historical record of a Rabbi called Jesus has ever been discovered.

IOW There is no contemporary record, equivalent to the Dead Sea Scrolls, that indicate Jesus ever existed, was born in a manger, or was crucified by the Romans.

All experts agree that the New Testament was written generations after the supposed events occurred.

DATE AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT In the early twentieth century, most scholars dated the New Testament documents as follows:

Matthew, A.D. 851
Mark, A.D. 60-652
Luke, A.D. 80-853
John, A.D. 90-954
Pauline Epistles, A.D. 48-645

To sum it up, everything about Christianity is 'speculation'.

Without Jesus there cannot be Christianity.

Without Moses, Noah, Jonah, etc. there would still be Judaism.

I find that quite interesting.


BoyntonStu


yes, I have made this argument with some of my Christian friends ... was not very well received ... but the arguments are well made and may be accurate ... though I think the dates of most of the major books of the new testament should probably be moved back at least to the approximate period of the Council of Nicaea, about 325AD ... most of Christian cannon was pretty much locked in stone at that time though quite a few adds, deletes and modifications have been made over the centuries ... it was the same Council of Nicaea that decided to embrace Roman/Egyptian tradition by declaring Jesus to have been God, instead of simply being portrayed as "close to God" or "walking with God" or "child of God" as some early Christian sects would have preferred ... but this is all in recorded history and there is little about it to dispute ...

[BoyntonStu]

yes, I have made this argument with some of my Christian friends ... was not very well received ... but the arguments are well made and may be accurate ... though I think the dates of most of the major books of the new testament should probably be moved back at least to the approximate period of the Council of Nicaea, about 325AD ... most of Christian cannon was pretty much locked in stone at that time though quite a few adds, deletes and modifications have been made over the centuries ... it was the same Council of Nicaea that decided to embrace Roman/Egyptian tradition by declaring Jesus to have been God, instead of simply being portrayed as "close to God" or "walking with God" or "child of God" as some early Christian sects would have preferred ... but this is all in recorded history and there is little about it to dispute ...


King Constantine made the shape of his sword into the Christian 'cross' symbol.

Crucifixions were performed on a "T" not on a t.


A circular letter of Emperor Constantine issued during the Council with strong anti-Jewish language lends weight to the charge of anti-Judaism, stating that that: "... it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy festival we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul. ... Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way.

What was voted on in the Council?

The agenda of the synod were:

1. The Arian question regarding the relationship between God the Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in purpose only or also one in being;
2. The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation
3. The Meletian schism;
4. The validity of baptism by heretics;
5. The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius.

A group of guys about 325 years after a supposed event, voted on what is now the basis of Christianity and believed by millions.

And so it goes.

BTW I believe that there may be a link between Christian 'believers' and HHO 'believers'.

In both I hear, "My mind is made up, don't ask questions or present me with facts, something must be wrong with you, do you work for the big oil companies, etc?"

BoyntonStu

[SmartScarecrow]

King Constantine made the shape of his sword into the Christian 'cross' symbol.

Crucifixions were performed on a "T" not on a t.


A circular letter of Emperor Constantine issued during the Council with strong anti-Jewish language lends weight to the charge of anti-Judaism, stating that that: "... it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy festival we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul. ... Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way.

What was voted on in the Council?

The agenda of the synod were:

1. The Arian question regarding the relationship between God the Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in purpose only or also one in being;
2. The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation
3. The Meletian schism;
4. The validity of baptism by heretics;
5. The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius.

A group of guys about 325 years after a supposed event, voted on what is now the basis of Christianity and believed by millions.

And so it goes.

BTW I believe that there may be a link between Christian 'believers' and HHO 'believers'.

In both I hear, "My mind is made up, don't ask questions or present me with facts, something must be wrong with you, do you work for the big oil companies, etc?"

BoyntonStu


well, I am not sure I take all that as "gospel" ... frankly, those quotations are new and me and I would have to do more research than I have time for right now to confirm that this is actually stated Christian doctrine from the Council of Nicaea ... but it dont sound too far off from what "Emperor" Constantine had in mind ... he did after all have this problem brewing in the eastern empire he was trying to get a handle on ... religion and politics have too often been two edges of the same sword ... and it still goes on today ... too many examples to choose from ...

I tend to have a more forgiving position on matters of faith ... a true believer is just that ... a true believer ... attempting to convert a true believer is a waste of both time and energy ... better to leave them secure in their belief ... in a way I envy them ... but I have to be true to my nature as they have to be true to theirs ... leave them alone, leave them in peace ...

[BoyntonStu]

well, I am not sure I take all that as "gospel" ... frankly, those quotations are new and me and I would have to do more research than I have time for right now to confirm that this is actually stated Christian doctrine from the Council of Nicaea ... but it dont sound too far off from what "Emperor" Constantine had in mind ... he did after all have this problem brewing in the eastern empire he was trying to get a handle on ... religion and politics have too often been two edges of the same sword ... and it still goes on today ... too many examples to choose from ...

I tend to have a more forgiving position on matters of faith ... a true believer is just that ... a true believer ... attempting to convert a true believer is a waste of both time and energy ... better to leave them secure in their belief ... in a way I envy them ... but I have to be true to my nature as they have to be true to theirs ... leave them alone, leave them in peace ...

That is OK if believers would leave the rest of us in peace.

Does South America speak Spanish voluntarily or were the folks forced into Christianity by the Spaniards.

CHRISTopher Columbus brought slavery and genocide to the Western Hemisphere. He murdered 1,500,000 Arawak Indians in Haiti and forced some to be shipped back to Spain as slaves.

Did you ever have a Jehovah's Atheist knock on your door? A Mormon Atheist?

Do you think society is well served if "Creation Science" is taught as an alternative to Science?

Do you think that "The" Bible should be taught as history in public schools?

Do you think it is right for U.S. Navy ships to be "Christened" instead of just named?

My list is much longer.

BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

no offense was intended ... I reported the truth to the best of my knowledge ... the Ashkenazi Jews are of Eurasian stock and are not Semitic with origins in the middle east ... simple as that ... to the best of my knowledge, this is a factual statement ... the historical record is quite clear on the matter ...

http://www.aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/Jewish_Genes.asp

YOUR WRONG, WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE, TO BRING OUT THIS FAIRY TALE, ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE THAT THE JEWS OF TODAY, DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO ISRAEL AS THEIR HOME LAND

[Dave Nowlin]

The problem with them going there is they would be coming up against experts in the subject matter. They Gary/Stu aren't looking for a fair debate. They want to pummel you into submission. Much like they did Stephen, he didn't submit, but they did silence him. I'm not anti-Semetic. I'm a Christian grafted into the root of Judaism as my friend Paul said. You do remember Paul don't you. He was the zealous young temple prosecutor who went about arresting Christians and brought them up to trial. He had a misfortune befall him on the Damascus road. He was blind for a while but then saw the light. Maybe you guys will too.

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

The problem with them going there is they would be coming up against experts in the subject matter. They Gary/Stu aren't looking for a fair debate. They want to pummel you into submission. Much like they did Stephen, he didn't submit, but they did silence him. I'm not anti-Semetic. I'm a Christian grafted into the root of Judaism as my friend Paul said. You do remember Paul don't you. He was the zealous young temple prosecutor who went about arresting Christians and brought them up to trial. He had a misfortune befall him on the Damascus road. He was blind for a while but then saw the light. Maybe you guys will too.

Dave Nowlin

Dave,

Do you have any facts that indicate HHO increases MPG?

Do you have a single "historical" fact to indicate that Jesus existed?

"He (Paul) was the zealous young temple prosecutor who went about arresting Christians and brought them up to trial."

What exactly is a temple prosecutor?

Did Paul make citizen's arrest?

Where there Christians at the time of the Temple?

Why believe unless there are facts to support your belief?

BoyntonStu

[Shane Jackson]

I take it that since there is no "proof" for any religion, that you must be an atheist. You live, you die, the end.

No wonder you are such an old sourpuss, you know your time is close to up and you have nothing to look forward to.



Dave,

Do you have any facts that indicate HHO increases MPG?

Do you have a single "historical" fact to indicate that Jesus existed?

"He (Paul) was the zealous young temple prosecutor who went about arresting Christians and brought them up to trial."

What exactly is a temple prosecutor?

Did Paul make citizen's arrest?

Where there Christians at the time of the Temple?

Why believe unless there are facts to support your belief?

BoyntonStu

[BoyntonStu]

I take it that since there is no "proof" for any religion, that you must be an atheist. You live, you die, the end.

No wonder you are such an old sourpuss, you know your time is close to up and you have nothing to look forward to.

Proof for a religion?

No, a much easier question to answer:

Prove that a person named Jesus existed?

If there is no historical proof that Jesus religion, how can there be a Jesus religion based on the words of a made up person?

BTW Is it Christian to call someone names because he does not believe as you believe?

Do you dispute what I listed above about the acts of Christians?

Has an atheist ever called a believer a name just because s/he believes?

How about killing others (infidels) for not believing in Allah?

Why is the behavior of atheists usually more civil than believers?

BoyntonStu

P.S. God the Father, loves you, but if you don't love him back, he will torture you for eternity. Was that the scene in your family?

[Shane Jackson]

There are many non religious historical accounts that there was indeed a man called Jesus or "Chrestus"

As for calling you an name (sourpuss) that has nothing to do with your religion or lack thereof. It is simply my observation and opinion.

I find most atheists love nothing better than to sit around and argue... excuse me... debate issues such as religion to try and stir up arguments. I guess you get a boner from it or something.

Stu or Gary... whatever you want to call yourself, just so you know, everyone is getting tired of your games.


Proof for a religion?

No, a much easier question to answer:

Prove that a person named Jesus existed?

If there is no historical proof that Jesus religion, how can there be a Jesus religion based on the words of a made up person?

BTW Is it Christian to call someone names because he does not believe as you believe?

Do you dispute what I listed above about the acts of Christians?

Has an atheist ever called a believer a name just because s/he believes?

How about killing others (infidels) for not believing in Allah?

Why is the behavior of atheists usually more civil than believers?

BoyntonStu

P.S. God the Father, loves you, but if you don't love him back, he will torture you for eternity. Was that the scene in your family?

[BoyntonStu]

There are many non religious historical accounts that there was indeed a man called Jesus or "Chrestus"



One non-NT source please.

Did a historical Jesus exist?


Amazingly, the question of an actual historical Jesus rarely confronts the religious believer. The power of faith has so forcefully driven the minds of most believers, and even apologetic scholars, that the question of reliable evidence gets obscured by tradition, religious subterfuge, and outrageous claims. The following gives a brief outlook about the claims of a historical Jesus and why the evidence the Christians present us cannot serve as justification for reliable evidence for a historical Jesus.



ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.

Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.

Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.

If you do not understand this, imagine yourself confronted with a charge for a crime which you know you did not commit. You feel confident that no one can prove guilt because you know that there exists no evidence whatsoever for the charge against you. Now imagine that you stand present in a court of law that allows hearsay as evidence. When the prosecution presents its case, everyone who takes the stand against you claims that you committed the crime, not as a witness themselves, but solely because other people said so. None of these other people, mind you, ever show up in court, nor can anyone find them.

Hearsay does not work as evidence because we have no way of knowing whether the person lies, or simply bases his or her information on wrongful belief or bias. We know from history about witchcraft trials and kangaroo courts that hearsay provides neither reliable nor fair statements of evidence. We know that mythology can arise out of no good information whatsoever. We live in a world where many people believe in demons, UFOs, ghosts, or monsters, and an innumerable number of fantasies believed as fact taken from nothing but belief and hearsay. It derives from these reasons why hearsay cannot serves as good evidence, and the same reasoning must go against the claims of a historical Jesus or any other historical person.

Authors of ancient history today, of course, can only write from indirect observation in a time far removed from their aim. But a valid historian's own writing gets cited with sources that trace to the subject themselves, or to eyewitnesses and artifacts. For example a historian today who writes about the life of George Washington, of course, can not serve as an eyewitness, but he can provide citations to documents which give personal or eyewitness accounts. None of the historians about Jesus give reliable sources to eyewitnesses, therefore all we have remains as hearsay.



THE BIBLE GOSPELS

The most "authoritative" accounts of a historical Jesus come from the four canonical Gospels of the Bible. Note that these Gospels did not come into the Bible as original and authoritative from the authors themselves, but rather from the influence of early church fathers, especially the most influential of them all: Irenaeus of Lyon who lived in the middle of the second century. Many heretical gospels existed by that time, but Irenaeus considered only some of them for mystical reasons. He claimed only four in number; according to Romer, "like the four zones of the world, the four winds, the four divisions of man's estate, and the four forms of the first living creatures-- the lion of Mark, the calf of Luke, the man of Matthew, the eagle of John (see Against the Heresies). The four gospels then became Church cannon for the orthodox faith. Most of the other claimed gospel writings were burned, destroyed, or lost." [Romer]

Elaine Pagels writes: "Although the gospels of the New Testament-- like those discovered at Nag Hammadi-- are attributed to Jesus' followers, no one knows who actually wrote any of them." [Pagels, 1995]


Compare Cicero to "Jesus"

Historical proof that Cicero existed:

Cicero
Early life
Cicero was born in 106 BC in Arpinum, a hill town 100 kilometres (60 miles) south of Rome. So, although a great master of Latin rhetoric and composition, Cicero was not "Roman" in the traditional sense, and was quite self-conscious of this for his entire life.

During this period in Roman history, if one was to be considered "cultured", it was necessary to be able to speak both Latin and Greek. The Roman upper class often preferred Greek to Latin in private correspondence, recognizing its more refined and precise expressions, and its greater subtlety and nuance. Cicero, like most of his contemporaries, was therefore educated in the teachings of the ancient Greek rhetoricians, and most prominent teachers of oratory of the time were themselves Greek.[6] Cicero used his knowledge of Greek to translate many of the theoretical concepts of Greek philosophy into Latin, thus translating Greek philosophical works for a larger audience. It was precisely this obsession that tied him to the traditional Roman elite.[7]
Cicero's father was a well-to-do equestrian (knight) with good connections in Rome. Though he was a semi-invalid who could not enter public life, he compensated for this by studying extensively. Although little is known about Cicero's mother, Helvia, it was common for the wives of important Roman citizens to be responsible for the management of the household. Cicero's brother Quintus wrote in a letter that she was a thrifty housewife.[8]
Cicero's cognomen, personal surname, is Latin for chickpea. Romans often chose down-to-earth personal surnames. Plutarch explains that the name was originally given to one of Cicero's ancestors who had a cleft in the tip of his nose resembling a chickpea. Plutarch adds that Cicero was urged to change this deprecatory name when he entered politics, but refused, saying that he would make Cicero more glorious than Scaurus ("Swollen-ankled") and Catulus ("Puppy").[9]

According to Plutarch, Cicero was an extremely talented student, whose learning attracted attention from all over Rome,[10] affording him the opportunity to study Roman law under Quintus Mucius Scaevola.[11] Cicero's fellow students were Gaius Marius Minor, Servius Sulpicius Rufus (who became a famous lawyer, one of the few whom Cicero considered superior to himself in legal matters), and Titus Pomponius. The latter two became Cicero's friends for life, and Pomponius (who received the cognomen "Atticus" for his philhellenism) would become Cicero's chief emotional support and adviser.


Family
Cicero married Terentia probably at the age of 27, in 79 BC. According to the upper class mores of the day it was a marriage of convenience, but endured harmoniously for some 30 years. Terentia's family was wealthy, probably the plebeian noble house of Terenti Varrones, thus meeting the needs of Cicero's political ambitions in both economic and social terms. She had a uterine sister (or perhaps first cousin) named Fabia, who as a child had become a Vestal Virgin – a very great honour. Terentia was a strong-willed woman and (citing Plutarch) "she took more interest in her husband's political career than she allowed him to take in household affairs".[13] She was a pious and probably a rather down-to-earth person.

In the 40s Cicero's letters to Terentia became shorter and colder. He complained to his friends that Terentia had betrayed him but did not specify in which sense. Perhaps the marriage simply could not outlast the strain of the political upheaval in Rome, Cicero's involvement in it, and various other disputes between the two. The divorce appears to have taken place in 45 BC. In late 46 BC Cicero married a young girl, Publilia, who had been his ward. It is thought that Cicero needed her money, particularly after having to repay the dowry of Terentia, who came from a wealthy family.[14] This marriage did not last long.

Although his marriage to Terentia was one of convenience, it is commonly known that Cicero held great love for his daughter Tullia.[15] When she suddenly became ill in February 45 BC and died after having seemingly recovered from giving birth to a son in January, Cicero was stunned. "I have lost the one thing that bound me to life" he wrote to Atticus.[16] Atticus told him to come for a visit during the first weeks of his bereavement, so that he could comfort him when his pain was at its greatest. In Atticus' large library, Cicero read everything that the Greek philosophers had written about overcoming grief, "but my sorrow defeats all consolation."[17] Caesar and Brutus sent him letters of condolence.[18][19]



Can you see the difference?

If Jesus, his birth in a manger, his miracles, raising Lazarus, Resurrection etc. happened, why wasn't it written down?

Was it a Crucifiction?

BoyntonStu

[Dave Nowlin]

You seem well versed in Jewish literature to refute Jesus. That said there was a Roman Historian of the day who wrote of Jesus. I don't dispute Yaweh or His existence in fact we as Christians also worship Him. That said, the first four books of the Old Testament are attributed to Moses. He wasn't there in the garden of eden nor was he there as an eye witness for many of the events in those books. I don't question the authenticity of those books do you? Do you in fact have absolute proof that Moses wrote them? I accept it on faith. Maybe the real issue here is whether you understand the meaning of the word faith. Your words don't seem to bear witness of an understanding.

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

You seem well versed in Jewish literature to refute Jesus. That said there was a Roman Historian of the day who wrote of Jesus. I don't dispute Yaweh or His existence in fact we as Christians also worship Him. That said, the first four books of the Old Testament are attributed to Moses. He wasn't there in the garden of eden nor was he there as an eye witness for many of the events in those books. I don't question the authenticity of those books do you? Do you in fact have absolute proof that Moses wrote them? I accept it on faith. Maybe the real issue here is whether you understand the meaning of the word faith. Your words don't seem to bear witness of an understanding.

Dave Nowlin

That said there was a Roman Historian of the day who wrote of Jesus.

Incorrect. Name a single historian of the day.

Moses may or may not have existed.

Jonah, probably not.

Noah, probably not.

God? Perhaps the Jews invented God and the Christians took it to seriously?

Most cultures have myths.

Let's assume that all religions are based on myths.

You can have a functioning religion based on its myths.

Consider the Mormons and their myth.

The problem is that blindness come with belief.

The earth is less than 10,000 years old!

So many otherwise intelligent people actually believe that to be true in spite of all the Scientific observations and tons of evidence.

Why? Because they believe in ink on a page written by unknown people at an unknown time.

BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

[[[((({{{Ouch}}})))]]]

[Dave Nowlin]

I will in fact do some research and post his name. The roman historian I speak of did exist. That said if Jesus didn't exist, you need a new calendar. B. C. and A. D. should have no meaning for you. From when would you start counting while establishing your aethists calendar? Tell us Stu, what year is this? You ask all of us questions now answer some of ours. Can you prove God didn't part the Red Sea? Can you dissprove the flood of Noah? If so then please explain the origin of fossilized standing trees in our American west. Are you aware that many prominent scientists who started out aethist are Christian today? They state that the more they learn, the more convinced they are of the existence of God. Quit tearing down the FAITH of others and find something else to do with your miserable life.

Dave Nowlin

[Gary Diamond]

I will in fact do some research and post his name. The roman historian I speak of did exist. That said if Jesus didn't exist, you need a new calendar. B. C. and A. D. should have no meaning for you. From when would you start counting while establishing your aethists calendar? Tell us Stu, what year is this? You ask all of us questions now answer some of ours. Can you prove God didn't part the Red Sea? Can you dissprove the flood of Noah? If so then please explain the origin of fossilized standing trees in our American west. Are you aware that many prominent scientists who started out aethist are Christian today? They state that the more they learn, the more convinced they are of the existence of God. Quit tearing down the FAITH of others and find something else to do with your miserable life.

Dave Nowlin

Ok Dave, HOW OLD IS THE EARTH???

[Shane Jackson]

Ok Dave, HOW OLD IS THE EARTH???


Stu has put on his Gary hat.....

I guess since I never meet, don't have pictures of, or even know his name.... my great great grandfather MUST not have existed. And if you can not prove it with pictures, recorded historical documents, voice recording, and DNA evidence than I refuse to believe he ever existed.

That follows your logic.

[Dave Nowlin]

Approximately 7,000 years Boyton Diamond or do you prefer Gary Stu? Inquiring minds want to know. Since the two of you are intertwined which of these two names do you prefer?

Dave Nowlin

[SmartScarecrow]

I will in fact do some research and post his name. The roman historian I speak of did exist. That said if Jesus didn't exist, you need a new calendar. B. C. and A. D. should have no meaning for you. From when would you start counting while establishing your aethists calendar? Tell us Stu, what year is this? You ask all of us questions now answer some of ours. Can you prove God didn't part the Red Sea? Can you dissprove the flood of Noah? If so then please explain the origin of fossilized standing trees in our American west. Are you aware that many prominent scientists who started out aethist are Christian today? They state that the more they learn, the more convinced they are of the existence of God. Quit tearing down the FAITH of others and find something else to do with your miserable life.

Dave Nowlin



its not any mystery to me that there is little if any contemporary chronicle of a fairly obscure Jewish Rabbi wandering around the middle east ... the journalists of the day were not much different than what we see today ... so you got reports of who was sleeping with who, who was headed for rehab for the umpteenth time and who was plotting against whom ... folks back then were not a whole lot different than what we got today ...

so until there was something interesting that folks might want to read about there would be no more incentive to chronicle the life of Jesus than there would be to chronicle the life any peasant working in the fields ... the Romans were big on taking census' and collecting taxes ... if not for all the turmoil and repeated destruction of public buildings in the region, I suspect that historians would have by now been able to come up with a birth certificate and tax filing paperwork for the man Jesus ... something some modern US Presidents have a problem finding ... but I suspect these documents were lost to history long ago during one sack and pillage or another ...

so the lack of a chronicle is in my opinion is no proof that the man Jesus did not exist ... the existence of most common folk of the day would be pretty hard to prove using that measure ... only the famous and the infamous got special mention ... Jesus did not really gain wide spread notoriety until some years after his death ...



I must say, some of these discussions are interesting and thought provoking ... but I am concerned that we are misusing the venue ... I am not offended by the arguments and in fact find them stimulating ... but is this really the proper place to have them ???

[Dave Nowlin]

SSC, I am in agreement with you. This isn't the place. That said I won't sit back and observe as others attempt to defile my faith or the faith of others. If Mr. Duality wants to have no faith in anything other than his duality, that's O.K. with me. I guess he heard about the Father, Son & Holy Ghost forming a trinity and decided not to be outdone and invented his duality. Boyton Diamond or Gary Stu, which is it? That is the question of the day. Does he prefer one of these names over the other or would he simply prefer to be called Mr. Duality?

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

its not any mystery to me that there is little if any contemporary chronicle of a fairly obscure Jewish Rabbi wandering around the middle east ... the journalists of the day were not much different than what we see today ... so you got reports of who was sleeping with who, who was headed for rehab for the umpteenth time and who was plotting against whom ... folks back then were not a whole lot different than what we got today ...

so until there was something interesting that folks might want to read about there would be no more incentive to chronicle the life of Jesus than there would be to chronicle the life any peasant working in the fields ... the Romans were big on taking census' and collecting taxes ... if not for all the turmoil and repeated destruction of public buildings in the region, I suspect that historians would have by now been able to come up with a birth certificate and tax filing paperwork for the man Jesus ... something some modern US Presidents have a problem finding ... but I suspect these documents were lost to history long ago during one sack and pillage or another ...

so the lack of a chronicle is in my opinion is no proof that the man Jesus did not exist ... the existence of most common folk of the day would be pretty hard to prove using that measure ... only the famous and the infamous got special mention ... Jesus did not really gain wide spread notoriety until some years after his death ...



I must say, some of these discussions are interesting and thought provoking ... but I am concerned that we are misusing the venue ... I am not offended by the arguments and in fact find them stimulating ... but is this really the proper place to have them ???


Compare Cicero to "Jesus".

If nothing was written about ordinary folks, where did the 3 wise men and the manger story come from?

Walk on water?

Awake a few dead people?


Not important enough to write about?

They wrote down what Cicero had for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.


Jesus? Nada.

Have faith brother, have faith that one day people will allow themselves to think for themselves.

Until then, just keep them out of my life!

My H.S. history teacher said that "Christian Missionaries went to Africa to Syphilize the Natives".

That was fairly accurate.

BoyntonStu

P.S. As President Truman once said, "If you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen".

If you do not wish to contribute to a thread, change the channel.

[Dave Nowlin]

I'm still waiting for you to contribute to this one. Drivel isn't a contribution, Mr. Duality.

Dave Nowlin

[Shane Jackson]

I'm still waiting for you to contribute to this one. Drivel isn't a contribution, Mr. Duality.

Dave Nowlin


I second that!

[Gary Diamond]

Hi Dave, I'm Gary, not Stu, i live in CT. he's in FL Please don't confuse me with Stu, i think he's a GREAT GUY, but were not the same person, why on earth did you even think that. Just because we both feel the same way are you SSC/Dave... relax.

Here's my problem, all this started and when i said it was off topic, SSC said it WAS NOT

So it's this way i mind my own business, but if someone starts things i don't like, and i say stop it's off topic but then they push, and push and when i push back, they then say it's off topic something's very wrong

I also see that if your not "Christian" then some how it's "wrong" and you feel you must fix that some how!

[Shane Jackson]

Hi Dave, I'm Gary, not Stu, i live in CT. he's in FL Please don't confuse me with Stu, i think he's a GREAT GUY, but were not the same person, why on earth did you even think that. Just because we both feel the same way are you SSC/Dave... relax.

Here's my problem, all this started and when i said it was off topic, SSC said it WAS NOT

So it's this way i mind my own business, but if someone starts things i don't like, and i say stop it's off topic but then they push, and push and when i push back, they then say it's off topic something's very wrong

I also see that if your not "Christian" then some how it's "wrong" and you feel you must fix that some how!

Get your facts correct, I said it was not off topic as this was the "general discussion" forum....

Also I do not have straw for brains (a joke for SSC)

[Dave Nowlin]

Do some research on Flavius Josephus. He was Jewish and a Roman official. He was indeed a historian and wrote of Jesus and John the Baptist as well as the early Christian movement. You asked for a name there it is and he was indeed a real person who served under several Roman emperors. I guess your next question will be, have I met him? The answer is no, but then I haven't met you either. So maybe you are simply a bad dream.

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

Do some research on Flavius Josephus. He was Jewish and a Roman official. He was indeed a historian and wrote of Jesus and John the Baptist as well as the early Christian movement. You asked for a name there it is and he was indeed a real person who served under several Roman emperors. I guess your next question will be, have I met him? The answer is no, but then I haven't met you either. So maybe you are simply a bad dream.
Dave Nowlin

Flavius Josephus

Jewish historian Flavius Josephus about the year 93 or 94.

This twenty volume work was completed in the last year of the Roman emperor Flavius Domitian. He claims that interested persons have pressed him to give a fuller account of the Jewish culture and constitution. Here, in expounding Jewish history, law and custom, he is entering into many philosophical debates current in Rome at that time. Again he offers an apologia for the antiquity and universal significance of the Jewish people.
Beginning with biblical creation, he outlines Jewish history. Abraham taught science to the Egyptians, who in turn taught the Greeks. Moses set up a senatorial priestly aristocracy, which like that of Rome resisted monarchy. The great figures of the biblical stories are presented as ideal philosopher-leaders.
There is also an autobiographical appendix defending Josephus' own conduct at the end of the war when he cooperated with the Roman forces.

The extant copies of this work, which all derive from Christian sources, even the recently-recovered Arabic version, contain two passages about Jesus. The long one has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum. If genuine, it is the earliest record of Jesus in Jewish sources, and as such is sometimes cited as independent evidence for the historical existence of Jesus. Most scholars view the Testimonium Flavianum as partially genuine with some Christian interpolations.
-----------------------------
What we have are 2 passages about Jesus that come from Christian sources written by a man about 90 years after the supposed event.


Perhaps you know more than all the scholars put together.


BoyntonStu

[Dave Nowlin]

No, just more than you.

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

No, just more than you.

Dave Nowlin


My IQ lower is than room temperature.

Being smarter than me is not saying a lot.

BTW What did Mr. Flavius supposedly write about Jesus 90 years after he supposedly died?

BoyntonStu

[Dave Nowlin]

Go and read and discover for yourself. Whatever I said it said, you would disagree. So read it and disagree with yourself. You've already disagreed with most here.

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

Go and read and discover for yourself. Whatever I said it said, you would disagree. So read it and disagree with yourself. You've already disagreed with most here.

Dave Nowlin

I take it that you never read it.

Faith, not fact, is that how you operate?

BoyntonStu

[Shane Jackson]

I have faith...no it is a fact - that you will argue to no end just to be an a$$hole.

[BoyntonStu]

I have faith...no it is a fact - that you will argue to no end just to be an a$$hole.


Was that a typical Christian response, or just your normal mode of debate?


Do you have faith that a Jewish historian named Flavius was able to record the 2 events 90 years after they supposedly occurred.


You must have a lot of faith in Jewish historians.

OTOH There weren't any Christians historians who heard about Jesus.

Sometimes, you just have to settle for a Jew to learn the truth.


BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

Was that a typical Christian response, or just your normal mode of debate?


Do you have faith that a Jewish historian named Flavius was able to record the 2 events 90 years after they supposedly occurred.


You must have a lot of faith in Jewish historians.

OTOH There weren't any Christians historians who heard about Jesus.

Sometimes, you just have to settle for a Jew to learn the truth.


BoyntonStu

Oh that's right they were all Jewish then, so who was the very first Christian?

I know it wasn't Jesus he was 100% Jewish. Hey Dave your the Christian expert, do you know the answer? I don't, Stu do you know?

Oh and Dave, while i'm asking these questions to learn more, why does Xmas fall on Dec. 25? why not in June? June's a nice time of year.

Your a good debater Dave you keep comming back for more i love a good debate it keep's my old brain young. keep trying you may beat me in a round or two
Gary

[Dave Nowlin]

To be Christian is to attempt to be Christ like. Now I believe the question you are asking is who first referred to themselves as Christians. That would be open to debate. In the beginning Paul simply thought of himself as a Jew. Whenever he went to a new town to spread the Gospel (which means Good News) he first went to the synagogue. He worshipped there and taught there. He understood that Jesus simply fulfilled the prophecies that the Jews had been waiting on for so long. He was in his own words a Pharisee's Pharisee. He had studied under the greatest teacher of his day Gamaliel, prior to becoming a follower of Jesus. Boyton Stu asked how I knew Paul was a temple prosecutor. Read the Book of Acts. You will find the answer there. While I don't mind tutoring you in Christianity, this isn't the proper place for that.

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

To be Christian is to attempt to be Christ like. Now I believe the question you are asking is who first referred to themselves as Christians. That would be open to debate. In the beginning Paul simply thought of himself as a Jew. Whenever he went to a new town to spread the Gospel (which means Good News) he first went to the synagogue. He worshiped there and taught there. He understood that Jesus simply fulfilled the prophecies that the Jews had been waiting on for so long. He was in his own words a Pharisee's Pharisee. He had studied under the greatest teacher of his day Gamaliel, prior to becoming a follower of Jesus. Boyton Stu asked how I knew Paul was a temple prosecutor. Read the Book of Acts. You will find the answer there. While I don't mind tutoring you in Christianity, this isn't the proper place for that.

Dave Nowlin

ACTS


Evidence for historicity

This type of evidence has been assembled by host of scholars[34]. One of them the Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White concludes: "For Acts, the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Yet Acts is, in simple terms and judged externally, no less of a propaganda narrative than the Gospels, liable to similar distortions. But any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted."[35]
• The title proconsul(anthypathos) is correctly used for the governors of the two senatorial provinces named in Acts (Acts 13:7-8, Acts 18:12).
• Inscriptions confirm that the city authorities in the Thessalonica in the first century were called politarchs(Acts 17:6,8).
• According to inscriptions, grammateus is the correct title for the chief magistrate in Ephesus(Acts 19:35).
• Felix and Festus are correctly called procurators of Judea. Acts correctly refers to Cornelius as Centurion and to Claudius Lysias as a tribune(Acts 21:31, 23:36)
• Acts 19: 29-41 describe the function of town assemblies in the operation of a city's business. This is characteristic of the first and perhaps early second centuries.
• Inscriptions speak about the prohibition against the Gentiles in the inner areas of the Temple. Acts 21:27-36 presupposes this.
• Roman soldiers were permanently stationed in the tower of Antionia with the responsibility of watching for and suppressing any disturbances at the festivals of the Jews. To reach the affected area they would have to come down a flight of steps into temple precincts. The events of Acts 21:31-37 reflect this.


Evidence against historicity
On the other hand, Charles Guignebert, Professor of the History of Christianity in the Sorbonne, asserts that "it has been established that the author of Acts was ignorant of the epistles of Paul, and even formally contradicts them; that he does not understand certain ancient traditions [e.g. glossolalia]; and above all that his narrative of the first years of the history of the Christian Church, whose founders he is supposed to have known intimately, is pitifully inadequate" [36]
• Acts 5:33-39 gives an account of speech by the first century Pharisee Gamaliel, in which he refers to two movements other than the Way. One lead by Theudas(v 36) and after him led by Judas the Galilean. Josephus placed Judas about 6 AD. He places Theudas under the procurator Fadus 44-46 AD. Two problems emerge. First, the order of Judas and Theudas is reversed in Acts 5. Second, Theudas's movement comes after the time when Gamaliel is speaking.
• In Acts 9:31 which says "So the church throughout all Judea and Galilea and Samaria had peace and was built up" has been taken to mean that Judea was understood to have been directly connected to Galilee. If so, then Luke had an incorrect understanding of Palestinian Geography.
• In Acts 23:31, says the soldiers brought Paul from Jerusalem to Antipatris, a distance of some 45 miles, overnight. Thirty miles constituted a suitable days journey whether by land or by sea. Both the numbers involved(two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, two hundred spearmen) and the speed of the journey(38 to 45 miles in a night) are exaggerated to emphasize the importance of person being accompanied and the extent of the danger.
• Acts 11:28 and 12:25 speaks of a famine under Claudius(41-54 AD). The famine is mentioned in Acts before the death of Herod(12:20-23. Josephus mentions a famine in Jerusalem relieved by the good graces of Queen Helena of Adiabene connected with procuratorship of Tiberius Julius Alexander(46-48 AD). Josephus however locates the famine after the death of Herod. Agabus' prophecy is therefore not precisely placed in the the sequences of Acts 11:28.
• It seems very strange that Luke could know what Festus and Agrippa said to each other in their private apartments(Acts 25:13-22, 26:30-32) or what the members of the Sanhedrin said in a closed session(Acts 4:15-17, 5:34-40)
Some feel that the text of Acts shows evidence of having used the Jewish historian Josephus as a source (in which case it would have to have been written sometime after 94 AD).[29]

If you have an open mind, you cannot be 100% positive that a book written 90 years after a supposed event was/is accurate and factual.


BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

To be Christian is to attempt to be Christ like. Now I believe the question you are asking is who first referred to themselves as Christians. That would be open to debate. In the beginning Paul simply thought of himself as a Jew. Whenever he went to a new town to spread the Gospel (which means Good News) he first went to the synagogue. He worshipped there and taught there. He understood that Jesus simply fulfilled the prophecies that the Jews had been waiting on for so long. He was in his own words a Pharisee's Pharisee. He had studied under the greatest teacher of his day Gamaliel, prior to becoming a follower of Jesus. Boyton Stu asked how I knew Paul was a temple prosecutor. Read the Book of Acts. You will find the answer there. While I don't mind tutoring you in Christianity, this isn't the proper place for that.

Dave Nowlin

Hey, you never answered my question, why was Dec. 25 picked for Jesus's birthday. I assume you know that was not his birthday, but why Dec. 25 was picked why not Dec. 26

Gary

[Gary Diamond]

ACTS


Evidence for historicity

This type of evidence has been assembled by host of scholars[34]. One of them the Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White concludes: "For Acts, the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Yet Acts is, in simple terms and judged externally, no less of a propaganda narrative than the Gospels, liable to similar distortions. But any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted."[35]
• The title proconsul(anthypathos) is correctly used for the governors of the two senatorial provinces named in Acts (Acts 13:7-8, Acts 18:12).
• Inscriptions confirm that the city authorities in the Thessalonica in the first century were called politarchs(Acts 17:6,8).
• According to inscriptions, grammateus is the correct title for the chief magistrate in Ephesus(Acts 19:35).
• Felix and Festus are correctly called procurators of Judea. Acts correctly refers to Cornelius as Centurion and to Claudius Lysias as a tribune(Acts 21:31, 23:36)
• Acts 19: 29-41 describe the function of town assemblies in the operation of a city's business. This is characteristic of the first and perhaps early second centuries.
• Inscriptions speak about the prohibition against the Gentiles in the inner areas of the Temple. Acts 21:27-36 presupposes this.
• Roman soldiers were permanently stationed in the tower of Antionia with the responsibility of watching for and suppressing any disturbances at the festivals of the Jews. To reach the affected area they would have to come down a flight of steps into temple precincts. The events of Acts 21:31-37 reflect this.


Evidence against historicity
On the other hand, Charles Guignebert, Professor of the History of Christianity in the Sorbonne, asserts that "it has been established that the author of Acts was ignorant of the epistles of Paul, and even formally contradicts them; that he does not understand certain ancient traditions [e.g. glossolalia]; and above all that his narrative of the first years of the history of the Christian Church, whose founders he is supposed to have known intimately, is pitifully inadequate" [36]
• Acts 5:33-39 gives an account of speech by the first century Pharisee Gamaliel, in which he refers to two movements other than the Way. One lead by Theudas(v 36) and after him led by Judas the Galilean. Josephus placed Judas about 6 AD. He places Theudas under the procurator Fadus 44-46 AD. Two problems emerge. First, the order of Judas and Theudas is reversed in Acts 5. Second, Theudas's movement comes after the time when Gamaliel is speaking.
• In Acts 9:31 which says "So the church throughout all Judea and Galilea and Samaria had peace and was built up" has been taken to mean that Judea was understood to have been directly connected to Galilee. If so, then Luke had an incorrect understanding of Palestinian Geography.
• In Acts 23:31, says the soldiers brought Paul from Jerusalem to Antipatris, a distance of some 45 miles, overnight. Thirty miles constituted a suitable days journey whether by land or by sea. Both the numbers involved(two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, two hundred spearmen) and the speed of the journey(38 to 45 miles in a night) are exaggerated to emphasize the importance of person being accompanied and the extent of the danger.
• Acts 11:28 and 12:25 speaks of a famine under Claudius(41-54 AD). The famine is mentioned in Acts before the death of Herod(12:20-23. Josephus mentions a famine in Jerusalem relieved by the good graces of Queen Helena of Adiabene connected with procuratorship of Tiberius Julius Alexander(46-48 AD). Josephus however locates the famine after the death of Herod. Agabus' prophecy is therefore not precisely placed in the the sequences of Acts 11:28.
• It seems very strange that Luke could know what Festus and Agrippa said to each other in their private apartments(Acts 25:13-22, 26:30-32) or what the members of the Sanhedrin said in a closed session(Acts 4:15-17, 5:34-40)
Some feel that the text of Acts shows evidence of having used the Jewish historian Josephus as a source (in which case it would have to have been written sometime after 94 AD).[29]

If you have an open mind, you cannot be 100% positive that a book written 90 years after a supposed event was/is accurate and factual.


BoyntonStu

Ouch i guess you read it, hey Dave he read it, does this mean Stu knows more then you Dave

[Dave Nowlin]

Has he read the entire Bible, both Old and New Testaments? If not probably not. Has he been a Christian lay speaker for over twenty years? Probably not. Is he involved in ministry today? Probably not. The most important question of all. When he reads scripture does he pray for understanding? If not, I'm afraid all he sees is what the cursory reader of scripture sees. He looks but does not see, he listens but does not hear, he types but has not understanding. Then again, I suppose simple minds are easily amused.

Dave Nowlin

[BoyntonStu]

Has he read the entire Bible, both Old and New Testaments? If not probably not. Has he been a Christian lay speaker for over twenty years? Probably not. Is he involved in ministry today? Probably not. The most important question of all. When he reads scripture does he pray for understanding? If not, I'm afraid all he sees is what the cursory reader of scripture sees. He looks but does not see, he listens but does not hear, he types but has not understanding. Then again, I suppose simple minds are easily amused.

Dave Nowlin

Dave,

Who was the 5th person named in the Hebrew Bible?

Father? Mother?

BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

Dave,

Who was the 5th person named in the Hebrew Bible?

Father? Mother?

BoyntonStu

Boy, your smart, why is Dec. 25 Xmass???

[H2OPWR]

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

This is HHOFORUMS.COM. This kind of stuff belongs somewhere else! I am a very patient guy that trys to keep these things to myself but this has gone overboard. PLEASE lets keep this to HHO. I AM NOW REDUCED TO BEGGING!

Larry

[BoyntonStu]

Larry,

The Jews have been begging the Christians to stay out their lives for almost 2,000 years to no avail.

Here, you can change the channel and ignore the discussion.

Imagine it if you couldn't.

BoyntonStu

[H2OPWR]

Larry,

The Jews have been begging the Christians to stay out their lives for almost 2,000 years to no avail.

Here, you can change the channel and ignore the discussion.

Imagine it if you couldn't.

BoyntonStu

This channel will change nothing. The fact remains that this forum is HHOFORUMS.COM. There are many forums for this kind of stuff. I do not want to change anyones beleif's or feelings. I do not even want to discuss them. There is no amount of debate here that will change either your or anyones feelings. They only cause malcontent and bad feelings. I just feel that this is the best forum out there on HHO. That is what it should be. There is a time and place for everything. This is not the time or place for religous debates. It has turned into hatred. Hatred is the worst thing anyone could latch on to.

Larry

[BoyntonStu]

This channel will change nothing. The fact remains that this forum is HHOFORUMS.COM. There are many forums for this kind of stuff. I do not want to change anyones beleif's or feelings. I do not even want to discuss them. There is no amount of debate here that will change either your or anyones feelings. They only cause malcontent and bad feelings. I just feel that this is the best forum out there on HHO. That is what it should be. There is a time and place for everything. This is not the time or place for religous debates. It has turned into hatred. Hatred is the worst thing anyone could latch on to.

Larry

Larry,

A little education will show you that NOTHING has turned into hatred.

Hatred for the Jews is the cornerstone of Christianity.

In case you never knew it, I offer the following example of Jew Hatred written by Martin Luther, the founder of Protestantism, who, after his strong effort to convert the Jews failed, wrote the following:

http://www.humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm

On the Jews and Their Lies, 1543
by Martin Luther (1483-1546)

Translated by Martin H. Bertram

copyright © 1971 Fortress Press & Augsburg Fortress - On the Jews and Their Lies is from Luther’s Works Volume 47. Augsburg Fortress is the publishing ministry of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Funded through sales revenue, Augsburg Fortress is called to provide products and services that communicate the Gospel, enhance faith, and enrich the life of the Christian community from a Lutheran perspective.
Part I

I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that those miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews and who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them. I would not have believed that a Christian could be duped by the Jews into taking their exile and wretchedness upon himself. However, the devil is the god of the world, and wherever God's word is absent he has an easy task, not only with the weak but also with the strong. May God help us. Amen.

Grace and peace in the Lord. Dear sir and good friend, I have received a treatise in which a Jew engages in dialog with a Christian. He dares to pervert the scriptural passages which we cite in testimony to our faith, concerning our Lord Christ and Mary his mother, and to interpret them quite differently. With this argument he thinks he can destroy the basis of our faith.

This is my reply to you and to him. It is not my purpose to quarrel with the Jews, nor to learn from them how they interpret or understand Scripture; I know all of that very well already. Much less do I propose to convert the Jews, for that is impossible. Those two excellent men, Lyra and Burgensis, together with others, truthfully described the Jews' vile interpretation for us two hundred and one hundred years ago respectively. Indeed they refuted it thoroughly. However, this was no help at all to the Jews, and they have grown steadily worse.

They have failed to learn any lesson from the terrible distress that has been theirs for over fourteen hundred years in exile. Nor can they obtain any end or definite terminus of this, as they suppose, by means of the vehement cries and laments to God. If these blows do not help, it is reasonable to assume that our talking and explaining will help even less.

Therefore a Christian should be content and not argue with the Jews. But if you have to or want to talk with them, do not say any more than this: "Listen, Jew, are you aware that Jerusalem and your sovereignty, together with your temple and priesthood, have been destroyed for over 1,460 years?" For this year, which we Christians write as the year 1542 since the birth of Christ, is exactly 1,468 years, going on fifteen hundred years, since Vespasian and Titus destroyed Jerusalem and expelled the Jews from the city. Let the Jews bite on this nut and dispute this question as long as they wish.

For such ruthless wrath of God is sufficient evidence that they assuredly have erred and gone astray. Even a child can comprehend this. For one dare not regard God as so cruel that he would punish his own people so long, so terribly, so unmercifully, and in addition keep silent, comforting them neither with words nor with deeds, and fixing no time limit and no end to it. Who would have faith, hope, or love toward such a God? Therefore this work of wrath is proof that the Jews, surely rejected by God, are no longer his people, and neither is he any longer their God. This is in accord with Hosea 1:9, "Call his name Not my people, for you are not my people and I am not your God." Yes, unfortunately, this is their lot, truly a terrible one. They may interpret this as they will; we see the facts before our eyes, and these do not deceive us.

If there were but a spark of reason or understanding in them, they would surely say to themselves: "O Lord God, something has gone wrong with us. Our misery is too great, too long, too severe; God has forgotten us!" etc. To be sure, I am not a Jew, but I really do not like to contemplate God's awful wrath toward this people. It sends a shudder of fear through body and soul, for I ask, What will the eternal wrath of God in hell be like toward false Christians and all unbelievers? Well, let the Jews regard our Lord Jesus as they will. We behold the fulfillment of the words spoken by him in Luke 21:20: "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near ... for these are days of vengeance. For great distress shall be upon the earth and wrath upon this people.

In short, as has already been said, do not engage much in debate with Jews about the articles of our faith. From their youth they have been so nurtured with venom and rancor against our Lord that there is no hope until they reach the point where their misery finally makes them pliable and they are forced to confess that the Messiah has come, and that he is our Jesus. Until such a time it is much too early, yes, it is useless to argue with them about how God is triune, how he became man, and how Mary is the mother of God. No human reason nor any human heart will ever grant these things, much less the embittered, venomous, blind heart of the Jews. As has already been said, what God cannot reform with such cruel blows, we will be unable to change with words and works. Moses was unable to reform the Pharaoh by means of plagues, miracles, pleas, or threats; he had to let him drown in the sea.

Now, in order to strengthen our faith, we want to deal with a few crass follies of the Jews in their belief and their exegesis of the Scriptures, since they so maliciously revile our faith. If this should move any Jew to reform and repent, so much the better. We are now not talking with the Jews but about the Jews and their dealings, so that our Germans, too, might be informed.

........

Martin Luther's writings inpired Adolph Hitler to murder 6,000,000 Jews in the Shoah.

Read Martin Luther's words and you will understand how Jews feel about Evangelism.

BoyntonStu

[hg2]

Stu,
You've totally flipped dude.Apparently you care not how much credibility you've lost with most of here on the forum.I say this because you "USED" to be an active contributing member here,and now just because Zero and a couple of others make bogus statements,you feel the need to punish the rest of us here with all your religious BS.You've already offended most of here that want to converse and learn,with myself and others literately begging you to cease with all your cut and paste "NONSENSE".

If you're that depressed about something maybe you should seek counsel and or therapy,please don't take it out on us here we've done "NOTHING TO YOU".

[BoyntonStu]

You've totally flipped dude.Apparently you care not how much credibility you've lost with most of here on the forum.I say this because you "USED" to be an active contributing member here,and now just because Zero and a couple of others make bogus statements,you feel the need to punish the rest of us here with all your religious BS.You've already offended most of here that want to converse and learn,with myself and others literately begging you to cease with all your cut and paste "NONSENSE".

If you're that depressed about something maybe you should seek counsel and or therapy,please don't take it out on us here we've done "NOTHING TO YOU".

Do you deny the authenticity of Martin Luther's writing?

Do you own research.

Perhaps the truth hurts?

BoyntonStu

[hg2]

Do you deny the authenticity of Martin Luther's writing?

Do you own research.

Perhaps the truth hurts?

BoyntonStu

The truth is I've done my research ,applied it and made it work.Maybe you aren't good enough to do the same,and now because of your failures you feel the need to take it on the rest of us here(and there are plenty of us)that can make it work.

If you're trying to set the record of members putting you on their "IGNORE LIST"(after this post you'll be on mine along with the rest of the particpants who thought it necessary to argue with you) you're doing a good job of it.Who knows maybe you'll beat "SCOOTERDOGS" record seeing as you've stooped to his level or below.

[BoyntonStu]

The truth is I've done my research ,applied it and made it work.Maybe you aren't good enough to do the same,and now because of your failures you feel the need to take it on the rest of us here(and there are plenty of us)that can make it work.

If you're trying to set the record of members putting you on their "IGNORE LIST"(after this post you'll be on mine along with the rest of the particpants who thought it necessary to argue with you) you're doing a good job of it.Who knows maybe you'll beat "SCOOTERDOGS" record seeing as you've stooped to his level or below.

Ignore the truth at the risk of your own intellectual integrity.

The head in the sand is one position that many choose.

AFAIK I have never told a falsehood and I have always apologized for my mistakes.

BoyntonStu

[Shane Jackson]

AFAIK I have never told a falsehood and I have always apologized for my mistakes.

BoyntonStu

LMAO.... stop you are going to make me pee my pants

[Gary Diamond]

LMAO.... stop you are going to make me pee my pants

:mad::mad::mad::mad:

[Gary Diamond]

This channel will change nothing. The fact remains that this forum is HHOFORUMS.COM. There are many forums for this kind of stuff. I do not want to change anyones beleif's or feelings. I do not even want to discuss them. There is no amount of debate here that will change either your or anyones feelings. They only cause malcontent and bad feelings. I just feel that this is the best forum out there on HHO. That is what it should be. There is a time and place for everything. This is not the time or place for religous debates. It has turned into hatred. Hatred is the worst thing anyone could latch on to.

Larry


Hey relax, again remember I said when this all started "your off topic" but you guys here felt

it was fine to go to the weird side.

But now that it happened, wow, ouch, the world still has anger towards Jews. Something new (2000 years old).

It seems to upset some here, that this subject is talked about.

“I have a idea” why not open on this board a new forum EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING,

BUT HHO it can be set up for Group Memberships which

means if you don’t join and Register EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING, BUT HHO it

wouldn’t show up, that should fix the problem if a

guest or anyone who don’t want to see, or read it

Gary