The Bible is true

[Dana7360]

The Bible Can We Trust It

No, you can trust it. Which you obviously do. I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is your use of the word "we."

That means you're including others in your belief and that's wrong.

There are millions of people in America who aren't christian and they certainly don't trust your christian bible.

I don't know why you have the need to force others to believe as you do. If you had a strong faith it wouldn't need validation by other people. So from what I can see yours is a shallow faith not built on anything but a weird need for validation.

Live however you want. Just stop trying to force it on other people.

Where are you getting that anyone is trying to force their Christian beliefs on you? Nobody is holding a knife to your throat and forcing you to believe.

Oh, wait....yes, some people are, but they are not Christians.

He used the inclusive word "we." Which means he is saying people other than himself should believe what the bible says.

Which isn't what our constitution says. It says we all have the freedom to choose what faith we want to follow. It doesn't say that someone has the right to speak for anyone else on matters of religion.

Which is what nijna007 did. If nijna007 had said "the bible I can believe in it." I wouldn't have replied to the OP. I would have agreed with the OP and kept reading the thread with out replying.

You and ninja007 are so used to expecting everyone to be like you that you don't even realize what you're doing. Whether you like it or not, you live in a nation of people with many different faiths and those of us who aren't your faith are very tired of you including us in it or expecting us to be like you.

May the Mother Goddess bless you and all you love.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Lots of evidence of an extraordinary event. Look how Christianity spread. It was just a century later that someone wrote the equivalent of the Catholic Eucharistic Mass on a scroll and wore it as an amulet in Egypt. Josephus Flavius wrote about Christ. While the Christ's church has never been perfect because of the imperfect men who administer it, look at the extraordinary beneficience the Church has had over the past 2000 years. THAT is extraordinary.

I understand why you, and many other people, need "proof". I did too. After years of looking, and a moderate amount of actual searching, I have enough proof for me.

Christianity spread as a result of imperialism and papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide. How do you reconcile that as evidence the bible is from god? Islam spread as well but I bet you are not Islamic.

You are extrapolating. I am using the rapid spread of Christianity as an indication of something extraordinary, not as evidence the bible is from God. "Papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide"?? What in the WORLD are you talking about.

I would say that Mohammed was an extraordinary person. So was George Washington, and Adolph Hitler.

Yes, some people theorize it is inserted. Most do not. It is widely accepted that Flavius wrote about Jesus on two occasions.

its not theory-----it is established------not that it matters much---what was stuck in the book was very trivial----no more than
"such and such person existed"

When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." .

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church, and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

Yes, many people think that paragraph (if you will) was added, although I have not heard a realistic explanation that "it was the Catholic Church" that purposefully forged it. Again, the Church is administered by imperfect men. However I don't think it is the best "proof" of Jesus. How about the many, many writings of about the same time (including other writings from Josephus) who talked about the followers of Christ? Tacitus wrote clearly about Nero's treatment about the follower's of Christ.

Most every non-biased historians (and, of course, all of the Christian historians) agree that Jesus lived, was crucified, and quickly had a large following of people. The liberal, Christian hating (ie: biased) historians will use their bias to poke holes in everything, but that's the world we live in.

 

[MaxGrit]

The Bible Can We Trust It

No, you can trust it. Which you obviously do. I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is your use of the word "we."

That means you're including others in your belief and that's wrong.

There are millions of people in America who aren't christian and they certainly don't trust your christian bible.

I don't know why you have the need to force others to believe as you do. If you had a strong faith it wouldn't need validation by other people. So from what I can see yours is a shallow faith not built on anything but a weird need for validation.

Live however you want. Just stop trying to force it on other people.

Where are you getting that anyone is trying to force their Christian beliefs on you? Nobody is holding a knife to your throat and forcing you to believe.

Oh, wait....yes, some people are, but they are not Christians.

He used the inclusive word "we." Which means he is saying people other than himself should believe what the bible says.

Which isn't what our constitution says. It says we all have the freedom to choose what faith we want to follow. It doesn't say that someone has the right to speak for anyone else on matters of religion.

Which is what nijna007 did. If nijna007 had said "the bible I can believe in it." I wouldn't have replied to the OP. I would have agreed with the OP and kept reading the thread with out replying.

You and ninja007 are so used to expecting everyone to be like you that you don't even realize what you're doing. Whether you like it or not, you live in a nation of people with many different faiths and those of us who aren't your faith are very tired of you including us in it or expecting us to be like you.

May the Mother Goddess bless you and all you love.

Hahahah when you are looking for good times, we'll be there to help you learn about the Christian faith. It is also our country and we'll be there to convert you to the Christian faith.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

He used the inclusive word "we." Which means he is saying people other than himself should believe what the bible says.

Which isn't what our constitution says. It says we all have the freedom to choose what faith we want to follow. It doesn't say that someone has the right to speak for anyone else on matters of religion.

Which is what nijna007 did. If nijna007 had said "the bible I can believe in it." I wouldn't have replied to the OP. I would have agreed with the OP and kept reading the thread with out replying.

You and ninja007 are so used to expecting everyone to be like you that you don't even realize what you're doing. Whether you like it or not, you live in a nation of people with many different faiths and those of us who aren't your faith are very tired of you including us in it or expecting us to be like you.

May the Mother Goddess bless you and all you love.

Yes he did. He said "The Bible We CAN Trust." He didn't say "The Bible We MUST Trust". Big difference between CAN and MUST.

And our constitution doesn't say that at all. It says the government shall not institute a religion. This was put in our constitution because, among other reasons, the history of civil wars in England over Catholicism versus Anglican rule.

 

[September]

The Holy books of the various Abrahamic religions, as well as various Mesopotamian material such as the Enûma Eliš and the Descent of Ishtar, are all extremely important to my own spiritual/ religious system, which could best be described as Henotheistic Sumero-Abrahamic Paganism.

But "true" or "false" are irrelevant terms when describing a Book as complicated as the Bible.

I interpret the Bible as a profoundly epic combination of history, fantasy, astronomy, prophecy, religious metaphor, lessons regarding wisdom and human Nature, artistic depictions of spiritual conflict, possible records of extraterrestrial encounters, insight into the traditions of the past, and religious material absorbed from more ancient pagan religions.

Yet it also contains material meant to indoctrinate, brainwash, financially exploit, encourage subservience, spiritually enslave, and herd the masses into a direction that benefits those pulling the strings.

What a beautiful creation, the Bible.

​

 

[Asclepias]

Lots of evidence of an extraordinary event. Look how Christianity spread. It was just a century later that someone wrote the equivalent of the Catholic Eucharistic Mass on a scroll and wore it as an amulet in Egypt. Josephus Flavius wrote about Christ. While the Christ's church has never been perfect because of the imperfect men who administer it, look at the extraordinary beneficience the Church has had over the past 2000 years. THAT is extraordinary.

I understand why you, and many other people, need "proof". I did too. After years of looking, and a moderate amount of actual searching, I have enough proof for me.

Christianity spread as a result of imperialism and papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide. How do you reconcile that as evidence the bible is from god? Islam spread as well but I bet you are not Islamic.

You are extrapolating. I am using the rapid spread of Christianity as an indication of something extraordinary, not as evidence the bible is from God. "Papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide"?? What in the WORLD are you talking about.

I would say that Mohammed was an extraordinary person. So was George Washington, and Adolph Hitler.

Yes, some people theorize it is inserted. Most do not. It is widely accepted that Flavius wrote about Jesus on two occasions.

Viruses spread rapidly. So do ideas that are found later to be utterly false. That doesnt make them extraordinary.

I thought people were aware of the papal bull issued by the church that implored Christians to go conquer the world. Are you seriously saying you are unaware of this?

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Viruses spread rapidly. So do ideas that are found later to be utterly false. That doesnt make them extraordinary.

I thought people were aware of the papal bull issued by the church that implored Christians to go conquer the world. Are you seriously saying you are unaware of this?

Apparently we are into semantics about the definition of the word extraordinary. Yes, some viruses spread extraordinarily. Most just ordinarily. The early spread of Christianity was extraordinary.

Regarding the Papal bull....I thought we were talking the first and second century, not more than a millenia later. The crusades were not about spreading Christianity, it was about freeing the holy land from the Muslims who enslaved it.

 

[irosie91]

Lots of evidence of an extraordinary event. Look how Christianity spread. It was just a century later that someone wrote the equivalent of the Catholic Eucharistic Mass on a scroll and wore it as an amulet in Egypt. Josephus Flavius wrote about Christ. While the Christ's church has never been perfect because of the imperfect men who administer it, look at the extraordinary beneficience the Church has had over the past 2000 years. THAT is extraordinary.

I understand why you, and many other people, need "proof". I did too. After years of looking, and a moderate amount of actual searching, I have enough proof for me.

Christianity spread as a result of imperialism and papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide. How do you reconcile that as evidence the bible is from god? Islam spread as well but I bet you are not Islamic.

You are extrapolating. I am using the rapid spread of Christianity as an indication of something extraordinary, not as evidence the bible is from God. "Papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide"?? What in the WORLD are you talking about.

I would say that Mohammed was an extraordinary person. So was George Washington, and Adolph Hitler.

Yes, some people theorize it is inserted. Most do not. It is widely accepted that Flavius wrote about Jesus on two occasions.

its not theory-----it is established------not that it matters much---what was stuck in the book was very trivial----no more than
"such and such person existed"

When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." .

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church, and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

Yes, many people think that paragraph (if you will) was added, although I have not heard a realistic explanation that "it was the Catholic Church" that purposefully forged it. Again, the Church is administered by imperfect men. However I don't think it is the best "proof" of Jesus. How about the many, many writings of about the same time (including other writings from Josephus) who talked about the followers of Christ? Tacitus wrote clearly about Nero's treatment about the follower's of Christ.

Most every non-biased historians (and, of course, all of the Christian historians) agree that Jesus lived, was crucified, and quickly had a large following of people. The liberal, Christian hating (ie: biased) historians will use their bias to poke holes in everything, but that's the world we live in.

calm down-----I believe that Jesus lived and was crucified----
real historians agree that Pontius Pilate crucified an estimated 20,000 jews during the ten years he held his position of roman prelate in Judea. I also believe that Christianity developed shortly thereafter and was, by virtue
of the efforts of Constantine who adopted it foisted on the first reich. (holy roman empire) I cannot imagine why anyone would not believe those facts. Constantine's
mother was a staunch follower of Christianity. ---some
historians doubt that Constantine, himself was. The idea
that Josephus Flavius wrote the lines that were slipped into
his book-----which ---I believe actually still remains in the
possession of the Vatican------is absurd. If he believed
the inserted lines----he would have become a christian

 

[guno]

Lots of evidence of an extraordinary event. Look how Christianity spread. It was just a century later that someone wrote the equivalent of the Catholic Eucharistic Mass on a scroll and wore it as an amulet in Egypt. Josephus Flavius wrote about Christ. While the Christ's church has never been perfect because of the imperfect men who administer it, look at the extraordinary beneficience the Church has had over the past 2000 years. THAT is extraordinary.

I understand why you, and many other people, need "proof". I did too. After years of looking, and a moderate amount of actual searching, I have enough proof for me.

Christianity spread as a result of imperialism and papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide. How do you reconcile that as evidence the bible is from god? Islam spread as well but I bet you are not Islamic.

You are extrapolating. I am using the rapid spread of Christianity as an indication of something extraordinary, not as evidence the bible is from God. "Papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide"?? What in the WORLD are you talking about.

I would say that Mohammed was an extraordinary person. So was George Washington, and Adolph Hitler.

Yes, some people theorize it is inserted. Most do not. It is widely accepted that Flavius wrote about Jesus on two occasions.

its not theory-----it is established------not that it matters much---what was stuck in the book was very trivial----no more than
"such and such person existed"

When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." .

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church, and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

Yes, many people think that paragraph (if you will) was added, although I have not heard a realistic explanation that "it was the Catholic Church" that purposefully forged it. Again, the Church is administered by imperfect men. However I don't think it is the best "proof" of Jesus. How about the many, many writings of about the same time (including other writings from Josephus) who talked about the followers of Christ? Tacitus wrote clearly about Nero's treatment about the follower's of Christ.

Most every non-biased historians (and, of course, all of the Christian historians) agree that Jesus lived, was crucified, and quickly had a large following of people. The liberal, Christian hating (ie: biased) historians will use their bias to poke holes in everything, but that's the world we live in.

Jesus Myth - The Case Against Historical Christ

Jesus Myth - The Case Against Historical Christ

 

[irosie91]

Christianity spread as a result of imperialism and papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide. How do you reconcile that as evidence the bible is from god? Islam spread as well but I bet you are not Islamic.

You are extrapolating. I am using the rapid spread of Christianity as an indication of something extraordinary, not as evidence the bible is from God. "Papal bulls endorsing slavery and genocide"?? What in the WORLD are you talking about.

I would say that Mohammed was an extraordinary person. So was George Washington, and Adolph Hitler.

Yes, some people theorize it is inserted. Most do not. It is widely accepted that Flavius wrote about Jesus on two occasions.

its not theory-----it is established------not that it matters much---what was stuck in the book was very trivial----no more than
"such and such person existed"

When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." .

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church, and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

Yes, many people think that paragraph (if you will) was added, although I have not heard a realistic explanation that "it was the Catholic Church" that purposefully forged it. Again, the Church is administered by imperfect men. However I don't think it is the best "proof" of Jesus. How about the many, many writings of about the same time (including other writings from Josephus) who talked about the followers of Christ? Tacitus wrote clearly about Nero's treatment about the follower's of Christ.

Most every non-biased historians (and, of course, all of the Christian historians) agree that Jesus lived, was crucified, and quickly had a large following of people. The liberal, Christian hating (ie: biased) historians will use their bias to poke holes in everything, but that's the world we live in.

Jesus Myth - The Case Against Historical Christ

Jesus Myth - The Case Against Historical Christ

gunno------your article makes strong points but the evidence
does not PROVE that a person "jesus" did not exist---it simply and correctly demonstrates that there is no proof that
he did exist. As to the gospels----the only way to believe
them is by accepting them on "FAITH" which lots of people
do. He does have some of the same characteristics that
persons claiming to be----"the messiah" have exhibited since
that time----assuming he really did exist------which I kinda assume. I also assume that a person from Ithaca---called
Odysseus-----existed. Always remember HEINRICH SCHLIEMAN

 

[Meriweather]

When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." .

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church, and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

What is often overlooked, is Josephus' second mention of Jesus, in his account of the high priest, Annas:

(Annas) convened the Sanhedrin. He had brought before them the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, who was called James, and some other men, whom he accused of having broken the law, and handed them over to be stoned.

No one questions the authenticity of the above passage. Many scholars believe the original passage about Christ was not inserted, but embroidered. They believe the first passage about Christ may have read something like:

About this time there lived Jesus, a performer of clever deeds. He won over many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. When Pilate, at the suggestion of the leading men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him at the first did not forsake him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day.'

The first paragraph, about Annas, gives a more likely view of what Josephus thought about Christ, "So-called..." Therefore, Josephus probably would also be grudging about praising Jesus' known deeds--and would likely downplay them--but would admit many followed him (or were taken in by him).

 

[irosie91]

There may be writings out there-----in the middle east which were written during the time of Jesus and-----as Christianity
developed. There might be stuff that has escaped
muslim destruction way deep in places like Ethiopia,
Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and even Saudi
Arabia. There were jews in all those places back
then --------jews never give up writing------and sending
their stuff back and forth over ??? camel trails. The key
to history is a comprehensive excavation of Mecca and
Medina

 

[guno]

lairs for jesus


Nearly half of the New Testament is a forgery, according to a provocative new book that charges the Apostle Paul authored only a fraction of the letters attributed to him and the Apostle Peter wrote nothing.

Written by Bart Ehrman, a former evangelical Christian and now agnostic professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, the book claims to unveil "one of the most unsettling ironies of the early Christian tradition": the use of deception to promote the truth.

Forgeries in the Bible s New Testament Discovery News

 

[irosie91]

When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." .

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church, and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

What is often overlooked, is Josephus' second mention of Jesus, in his account of the high priest, Annas:

(Annas) convened the Sanhedrin. He had brought before them the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, who was called James, and some other men, whom he accused of having broken the law, and handed them over to be stoned.

No one questions the authenticity of the above passage. Many scholars believe the original passage about Christ was not inserted, but embroidered. They believe the first passage about Christ may have read something like:

About this time there lived Jesus, a performer of clever deeds. He won over many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. When Pilate, at the suggestion of the leading men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him at the first did not forsake him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day.'

The first paragraph, about Annas, gives a more likely view of what Josephus thought about Christ, "So-called..." Therefore, Josephus probably would also be grudging about praising Jesus' known deeds--and would likely downplay them--but would admit many followed him (or were taken in by him).

'

The story of James itself -----does not make much sense.
The Christian partyline about why the jews did not execute
Jesus is "jews could not execute ANYONE under roman
law" --------(an idea I never actually believed but it does exist
as the explanation as to why DA JOOOS FORCED PILATE
TO DO IT) -----suddenly---whilst still under roman rule-----
the Sanhedrin is "RE-EMPOWERED"???? ~~~ c'mon

 

[guno]

how Christianity was invented


Forgery In Christianity
A Documented Record of the Foundations of the Christian Religion

Forgery in Christianity

 

[irosie91]

PS---something I

lairs for jesus


Nearly half of the New Testament is a forgery, according to a provocative new book that charges the Apostle Paul authored only a fraction of the letters attributed to him and the Apostle Peter wrote nothing.

Written by Bart Ehrman, a former evangelical Christian and now agnostic professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, the book claims to unveil "one of the most unsettling ironies of the early Christian tradition": the use of deception to promote the truth.

Forgeries in the Bible s New Testament Discovery News

fret not Christian bretheren-------it was CONSTANTINE's fault---he was quite a bastard. People like Constantine
lie all the time. He not only screwed up Christianity-----he
screwed the whole world-----with his "JUSTINIAN CODE"

 

[Meriweather]

lairs for jesus


Nearly half of the New Testament is a forgery, according to a provocative new book that charges the Apostle Paul authored only a fraction of the letters attributed to him and the Apostle Peter wrote nothing.

Written by Bart Ehrman, a former evangelical Christian and now agnostic professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, the book claims to unveil "one of the most unsettling ironies of the early Christian tradition": the use of deception to promote the truth.

Forgeries in the Bible s New Testament Discovery News

Ehrman's book was written in 2011. I can't believe some are calling it, "New". A Catholic Bible I use had all this information at least as far back as 1990. About time Ehrman (and others) caught up.

 

[irosie91]

lairs for jesus


Nearly half of the New Testament is a forgery, according to a provocative new book that charges the Apostle Paul authored only a fraction of the letters attributed to him and the Apostle Peter wrote nothing.

Written by Bart Ehrman, a former evangelical Christian and now agnostic professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, the book claims to unveil "one of the most unsettling ironies of the early Christian tradition": the use of deception to promote the truth.

Forgeries in the Bible s New Testament Discovery News

Ehrman's book was written in 2011. I can't believe some are calling it, "New". A Catholic Bible I use had all this information at least as far back as 1990. About time Ehrman (and others) caught up.

2011 seems like modern "NEW" times to me-----however I do agree the information is not entirely -----21st century

I believe that Jesus did exist-----because he did what Pharisee jews of his time did and is REPORTED as
so doing------even with Constantine as editor---CONSTANTINE HATED PHARISEES . it seems Constantine was not all that bright. His editing wrecked
the NT and made it self contradictory

 

[guno]

The first Christians were very unsuccessful at converting Jews. Most Jews knew they had something better, so they would not leave Judaism for Christianity. (Remember: at the beginning it was nothing more than a very small messianic movement within Judaism, and after their "messiah" died, it was rather hard to convert Jews to their movement.)

So paul the inventor of christianity had to do something different. They had to develop appeal. So, they began to assume beliefs that pagan people found attractive. That was how they came up with the concepts of the trinity, transubstantiation, the need to "save" everyone through the resurrection of a messiah, virgin birth, and all the other wacky ideas of Christianity. All these were lifted straight from other religions, some of which preceded Christianity by 700 years. Pagans just lapped up things like demigods, gods having intercourse with humans, virgins giving birth. Such claims meant something to pagans, and they were already familiar with such beliefs from their own cultures. So leaving a pagan religion to join Christianity was not much of a stretch, especially after Paul declared that the pagans did not need to keep the Commandments of the Torah.

 

[irosie91]

The first Christians were very unsuccessful at converting Jews. Most Jews knew they had something better, so they would not leave Judaism for Christianity. (Remember: at the beginning it was nothing more than a very small messianic movement within Judaism, and after their "messiah" died, it was rather hard to convert Jews to their movement.)

So paul the inventor of christianity had to do something different. They had to develop appeal. So, they began to assume beliefs that pagan people found attractive. That was how they came up with the concepts of the trinity, transubstantiation, the need to "save" everyone through the resurrection of a messiah, virgin birth, and all the other wacky ideas of Christianity. All these were lifted straight from other religions, some of which preceded Christianity by 700 years. Pagans just lapped up things like demigods, gods having intercourse with humans, virgins giving birth. Such claims meant something to pagans, and they were already familiar with such beliefs from their own cultures. So leaving a pagan religion to join Christianity was not much of a stretch, especially after Paul declared that the pagans did not need to keep the Commandments of the Torah.

They wanted to attract ROMANS-----and ...also greeks---the
biggie was giving up KOSHER and second biggie was giving
up circumcision. Paul was a universalist kinda like Alexander who wanted to incorporate all of the world into
greek culture---------paul tried to make a JUDAISM FOR THE WORLD (ezra would not have liked him). I have wondered if Paul, himself-----gave up "kosher" ----or just decided -----"let THEM eat whatevah they want"