- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (pelakeya @ July 22 2009,01:45) Was Jesus an angel before coming to earth as a man?
If he was then Mat 1:20 is wrong.Consider:
We are talking about the begetting of a spiritual entity here.
“for that which is gennao [conceived] in her is of the Holy Ghost.” [Mat 1:20]
“That which is gennao [born] of the flesh is flesh; and that which is gennao [born] of the Spirit is spirit.” [John 3:6]
This is not addressing the issue of the begetting of Jesus as a man, but Gal 4:4 DOES when it says “4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, genomenon [made] of a woman, genomenon [made] under the law,”
Now, Mat 1:16 DOES say Jesus was gennao [born] of Mary, but verse 20 correctly gives us the meaning of that reference.
It was the spirit of Jesus that was gennao in Mary, and gennao of mary.Jesus had no prior existence except in prophecy as the seed of the woman [Gen 3:15]; seed of Abraham [Gen 12:1-3][Gal 3:16]; seed of David [Psalm 132:11][John 7:42].
Just as David experienced joy over the prophecies of the resurrected Christ [Acts 2:26-36], so also Abraham “rejoiced” to see the Messiah in prophecy [John 8:56], as the gospel was preached unto Abraham.[Gal 3:8][Gen 12:1-3]
“Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” [Acts 2:26-36]
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
“Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” [Gen 12:1-3]
Jesus existed in prophecy until his spirit was “begotten of the spirit” in Mary, and his flesh was “Made of a woman,” after which proper time he was born of Mary and “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.” [Luke 5:22]
Tell me how the spiritually begotten Jesus could possibly
“increase” in age if he was ageless?Hi P,
Abraham saw his day.Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and Elijah are yet alive in the abiding Spirit of God.
God is the God of the living and not the dead.Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 21 2009,08:04) Hi and welcome pel,
Scripture never says so but the JWs do.
Nick,That is a lie. I do not claim that Jesus was an angel. Where do you get this stuff?
TC27
Quote (Paladin @ July 30 2009,00:43) Quote (pelakeya @ July 22 2009,01:45) Was Jesus an angel before coming to earth as a man?
If he was then Mat 1:20 is wrong.Consider:
We are talking about the begetting of a spiritual entity here.
“for that which is gennao [conceived] in her is of the Holy Ghost.” [Mat 1:20]
“That which is gennao [born] of the flesh is flesh; and that which is gennao [born] of the Spirit is spirit.” [John 3:6]
This is not addressing the issue of the begetting of Jesus as a man, but Gal 4:4 DOES when it says “4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, genomenon [made] of a woman, genomenon [made] under the law,”
Now, Mat 1:16 DOES say Jesus was gennao [born] of Mary, but verse 20 correctly gives us the meaning of that reference.
It was the spirit of Jesus that was gennao in Mary, and gennao of mary.Jesus had no prior existence except in prophecy as the seed of the woman [Gen 3:15]; seed of Abraham [Gen 12:1-3][Gal 3:16]; seed of David [Psalm 132:11][John 7:42].
Just as David experienced joy over the prophecies of the resurrected Christ [Acts 2:26-36], so also Abraham “rejoiced” to see the Messiah in prophecy [John 8:56], as the gospel was preached unto Abraham.[Gal 3:8][Gen 12:1-3]
“Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” [Acts 2:26-36]
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
“Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” [Gen 12:1-3]
Jesus existed in prophecy until his spirit was “begotten of the spirit” in Mary, and his flesh was “Made of a woman,” after which proper time he was born of Mary and “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.” [Luke 5:22]
Tell me how the spiritually begotten Jesus could possibly
“increase” in age if he was ageless?
Jeus did exist before He became a Man.
Col. 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God and the firstborn of all creation….
Through Him all was created by the power of the Father.
Rev. 3:14 …These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God.”
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God….
verse 3 ” All things were made through Him and for Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”
verse 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us……
Peace and Love IreneQuote (Cindy @ July 30 2009,10:52) Quote (Paladin @ July 30 2009,00:43) Quote (pelakeya @ July 22 2009,01:45) Was Jesus an angel before coming to earth as a man?
If he was then Mat 1:20 is wrong.Consider:
We are talking about the begetting of a spiritual entity here.
“for that which is gennao [conceived] in her is of the Holy Ghost.” [Mat 1:20]
“That which is gennao [born] of the flesh is flesh; and that which is gennao [born] of the Spirit is spirit.” [John 3:6]
This is not addressing the issue of the begetting of Jesus as a man, but Gal 4:4 DOES when it says “4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, genomenon [made] of a woman, genomenon [made] under the law,”
Now, Mat 1:16 DOES say Jesus was gennao [born] of Mary, but verse 20 correctly gives us the meaning of that reference.
It was the spirit of Jesus that was gennao in Mary, and gennao of mary.Jesus had no prior existence except in prophecy as the seed of the woman [Gen 3:15]; seed of Abraham [Gen 12:1-3][Gal 3:16]; seed of David [Psalm 132:11][John 7:42].
Just as David experienced joy over the prophecies of the resurrected Christ [Acts 2:26-36], so also Abraham “rejoiced” to see the Messiah in prophecy [John 8:56], as the gospel was preached unto Abraham.[Gal 3:8][Gen 12:1-3]
“Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” [Acts 2:26-36]
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
“Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” [Gen 12:1-3]
Jesus existed in prophecy until his spirit was “begotten of the spirit” in Mary, and his flesh was “Made of a woman,” after which proper time he was born of Mary and “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.” [Luke 5:22]
Tell me how the spiritually begotten Jesus could possibly
“increase” in age if he was ageless?
Jeus did exist before He became a Man.
Col. 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God and the firstborn of all creation….
Through Him all was created by the power of the Father.
Rev. 3:14 …These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God.”
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God….
verse 3 ” All things were made through Him and for Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”
verse 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us……
Peace and Love Irene
Ah, Dear Cindy;Can you explain the meaning of the Greek word gennao?
It is translated into four or five different English words; begotten, begat, bear, born, birth.
The Lixican lists as meaning: “To cause to be.”
What does that mean to you?
Quote (Paladin @ Aug. 01 2009,10:19) Quote (Cindy @ July 30 2009,10:52) Quote (Paladin @ July 30 2009,00:43) Quote (pelakeya @ July 22 2009,01:45) Was Jesus an angel before coming to earth as a man?
If he was then Mat 1:20 is wrong.Consider:
We are talking about the begetting of a spiritual entity here.
“for that which is gennao [conceived] in her is of the Holy Ghost.” [Mat 1:20]
“That which is gennao [born] of the flesh is flesh; and that which is gennao [born] of the Spirit is spirit.” [John 3:6]
This is not addressing the issue of the begetting of Jesus as a man, but Gal 4:4 DOES when it says “4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, genomenon [made] of a woman, genomenon [made] under the law,”
Now, Mat 1:16 DOES say Jesus was gennao [born] of Mary, but verse 20 correctly gives us the meaning of that reference.
It was the spirit of Jesus that was gennao in Mary, and gennao of mary.Jesus had no prior existence except in prophecy as the seed of the woman [Gen 3:15]; seed of Abraham [Gen 12:1-3][Gal 3:16]; seed of David [Psalm 132:11][John 7:42].
Just as David experienced joy over the prophecies of the resurrected Christ [Acts 2:26-36], so also Abraham “rejoiced” to see the Messiah in prophecy [John 8:56], as the gospel was preached unto Abraham.[Gal 3:8][Gen 12:1-3]
“Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” [Acts 2:26-36]
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
“Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” [Gen 12:1-3]
Jesus existed in prophecy until his spirit was “begotten of the spirit” in Mary, and his flesh was “Made of a woman,” after which proper time he was born of Mary and “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.” [Luke 5:22]
Tell me how the spiritually begotten Jesus could possibly
“increase” in age if he was ageless?
Jeus did exist before He became a Man.
Col. 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God and the firstborn of all creation….
Through Him all was created by the power of the Father.
Rev. 3:14 …These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God.”
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God….
verse 3 ” All things were made through Him and for Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”
verse 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us……
Peace and Love Irene
Ah, Dear Cindy;Can you explain the meaning of the Greek word gennao?
It is translated into four or five different English words; begotten, begat, bear, born, birth.
The Lixican lists as meaning: “To cause to be.”
What does that mean to you?
Oh Dear P. So gennao goes along with what I am saying. He is the Son of God, the begotten Son of God. So what are you doing denying Scriptures? Ore do you interpret them another way. Unless you want to ignore these Scriptures. Look in the preexisting tread.
John 17:5 says this ” And now O Father glorify Me together with Yourself with the glory I had with You, before the World was.” He is the firstborn of all creation.
Col. 1:15-17
Rev. 3:14 ….” These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.”
Col. 1:18 shows that He is also the firstborn of the dead, so in all He will have preeminence. Meaning He is first in all.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and was God.
verse 3 All things were made through Him and for Him.
verse 14 And the Word became flesh.
One more thing God is a tittle and the Father is above all.
Ephesians 4:6
I just noticed that I gave you this Scriptures before. But that's O.K. maybe you will see in time.
IreneYou all seem confident that Jesus existed as a human on earth at all. There must be a lot of blind faith in that position, to make up for the lack of convincing evidence.
Stuart
Cindy,Aug. wrote:[/quote]
©Quote So gennao goes along with what I am saying. He is the Son of God, the begotten Son of God. (P)Hello Cindy. You responded to a question of definition with scriptures of doctrine. I asked you if you understand the meaning of “gennao.” You did not respond to the question. You tell me “So gennao goes along with what I am saying.” Not if you ignore what gennao means. If he is in fact, the “begotten God,” He had a beginning. Do you understand gennao to reference a beginning? Please respond to the question.
©
Quote So what are you doing denying Scriptures? Or do you interpret them another way. (P) Right on target. You certainly deny Mat 1:20 and John 3:6 by ignoring the significance of “gennao” found in both verses.
©
Quote John 17:5 says this ” And now O Father glorify Me together with Yourself with the glory I had with You, before the World was.” We have had this discussion before, please print it out.
Jesus “had glory with the father before the world began” but he was not in eternity with God.
Look at what else was “with God before the world was;”
WE HAD GLORY ORDAINED BEFORE THERE WAS A WORLD
1 Cor 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained BEFORE THE WORLD unto our glory:CHOSE US BEFORE THERE WAS A WORLD
Eph 1:4 According as he hath CHOSEN US in him BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:ORDAINED GOOD WORKS FOR THE SAINTS TO PERFORM
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath BEFORE ORDAINED that WE should walk in them.SAVED US AND CALLED US BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN
2 Tim 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN,PROMISED US ETERNAL LIFE BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN
Titus 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN;PREPARED A SACRIFICIAL LAMB BEFORE THE WORLD WAS FOUNDED
1 Pet 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20 Who verily was foreordained BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, but was manifest in these last times for you,PROMISED JESUS GLORY BEFORE THE WORLD WAS:
AS EXPRESSED IN ISAIAH 52:13 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. AND FULFILLED IN John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee BEFORE THE WORLD WAS. And John 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.WHICH SERVED AS INCENTIVE FOR JESUS TO FULFILL HIS MISSION: Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who FOR THE JOY that was SET BEFORE HIM endured the cross, DESPISING the SHAME, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
WHAT EVIDENCE IS THERE THAT JESUS WAS RELUCTANT TO SUFFER THE DEATH PREPARED FOR HIM?
Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with STRONG CRYING AND TEARS unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; 8 Though he were a Son, yet LEARNED HE obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And BEING MADE perfect, he BECAME the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;Did Jesus have glory with the father before the world was? Yes he did, IN PROPHECY. But he was not there with God at the time. Was I promised eternal life before the world began? Yes I was, but I was not there with God at the time.
©
Quote He is the firstborn of all creation.Col. 1:15-17 (P) Col 1:16 is a reference to the fact that Jesus made changes in the universe; specifically in the realm of heavenly authorities; WHETHER THEY BE thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers.
COL 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, WHETHER THEY BE thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.“WHETHER THEY BE” is a limiting parameter which tells you the scope and focus of “all things” as being thrones, or dominions, principalities, or powers. NOTHING ELSE is involved in the expression “all things.”
(Cindy)
Quote Col. 1:18 shows that He is also the firstborn of the dead, so in all He will have preeminence. Meaning He is first in all. (P)Jesus is “before all things” because he was elevated to first position in the creation, as the first one to be raised from the dead, without an intermediate prophet; and the first one raised from the dead to die no more. Col 1: 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
He did not have the pre-eminence until he was raised from the dead and made head of the body, the church.
(Cindy)
Quote Rev. 3:14 ….” These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.” (P) Jesus is exactly that, the beginning of God's CREATION. He is a CREATURE. He was FIRST. He CANNOT be his own creator. He cannot create himself. And the creation of which he is first creature, is the NEW CREATION, not the original. He is the first of a new type of creature, “resurrected from the dead” creatures.
(Cindy)
Quote John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and was God.” (P)Tells you something about “LOGOS” and nothing else.
(Cindy)
Quote verse 3 All things were made through Him and for Him. Early translations did not use “him” but “it” or “the same.” IF logos is to be referenced as “him,” this is the ONLY reference in scripture that so translates it. ALL the other references to logos are to “it” rather than “him.” And ALL the earliest translators used “it” or “the same” instead of “Him.”
TYNDALE BIBLE (1525)
John 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God, and the worde was god. 2 The sa
me was in the beginnynge with god. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothinge that was made. 4 In it was lyfe; and the lyfe was the lyght of men. 5 And the lyght shyneth in darknes; but the darknes comprehended it not.GREAT BIBLE (1539)
1 In the begynnyng was the worde, and the worde was wyth God: and God was the worde. 2 The same was in the begynnyng wyth God. 3 All things were made by it, and wythout it, was made nothyng that was made. 4 In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men, 5 and the lyght shyneth in darcknes, and the darcknes comprehended it not.GENEVA BIBLE (1560)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the worde, and the worde was with God, and that worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was lif; and the lif was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkenes; and the darkenes comprehended it not.BISHOP'S BIBLE (1568)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was that word. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darknesse; and the darkeness comprehendeth it not.The first translation to use “him” was the Rhiems Catholic Bible in verse 3, even though in verse 2 outos was “”this.” With no explanation, it changed “this” to “him.”
RHEIMS BIBLE (1582)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word. 2 This was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was made nothing. That which was made 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darknesse; and the darkenesse did not comprehend it.And the KJV followed the Rhiems, and so also did almost every translation since then, not because outos changed in meaning, but because the translators now had an example to follow to show Jesus as the logos of God. He is NOT.
KING JAMES BIBLE (1611)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.(Cindy)
Quote verse 14 And the Word became flesh. (P)Already dealt with HERE
(Cindy)
Quote One more thing God is a title and the Father is above all. Ephesians 4:6 (P) I fail to see the relevance of this to our conversation. We agree, but what has that do wo with the issue of Jesus being “in eternity with God?”
(Cindy)
Quote I just noticed that I gave you this Scriptures before. But that's O.K. maybe you will see in time. (P) Yes, I recognized them. It is just that so much is required to help you see a different perspective, and I have much more to do on other boards, so sometimes it takes a little longer to respond. I do appreciate the effort you put into your posts, but I also put a bit into my own.
Quote (Paladin @ Aug. 02 2009,00:37) Cindy,Aug. wrote:[/quote]
©Quote So gennao goes along with what I am saying. He is the Son of God, the begotten Son of God. (P)Hello Cindy. You responded to a question of definition with scriptures of doctrine. I asked you if you understand the meaning of “gennao.” You did not respond to the question. You tell me “So gennao goes along with what I am saying.” Not if you ignore what gennao means. If he is in fact, the “begotten God,” He had a beginning. Do you understand gennao to reference a beginning? Please respond to the question.
©
Quote So what are you doing denying Scriptures? Or do you interpret them another way. (P) Right on target. You certainly deny Mat 1:20 and John 3:6 by ignoring the significance of “gennao” found in both verses.
©
Quote John 17:5 says this ” And now O Father glorify Me together with Yourself with the glory I had with You, before the World was.” We have had this discussion before, please print it out.
Jesus “had glory with the father before the world began” but he was not in eternity with God.
Look at what else was “with God before the world was;”
WE HAD GLORY ORDAINED BEFORE THERE WAS A WORLD
1 Cor 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained BEFORE THE WORLD unto our glory:CHOSE US BEFORE THERE WAS A WORLD
Eph 1:4 According as he hath CHOSEN US in him BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:ORDAINED GOOD WORKS FOR THE SAINTS TO PERFORM
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath BEFORE ORDAINED that WE should walk in them.SAVED US AND CALLED US BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN
2 Tim 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN,PROMISED US ETERNAL LIFE BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN
Titus 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN;PREPARED A SACRIFICIAL LAMB BEFORE THE WORLD WAS FOUNDED
1 Pet 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20 Who verily was foreordained BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, but was manifest in these last times for you,PROMISED JESUS GLORY BEFORE THE WORLD WAS:
AS EXPRESSED IN ISAIAH 52:13 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. AND FULFILLED IN John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee BEFORE THE WORLD WAS. And John 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.WHICH SERVED AS INCENTIVE FOR JESUS TO FULFILL HIS MISSION: Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who FOR THE JOY that was SET BEFORE HIM endured the cross, DESPISING the SHAME, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
WHAT EVIDENCE IS THERE THAT JESUS WAS RELUCTANT TO SUFFER THE DEATH PREPARED FOR HIM?
Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with STRONG CRYING AND TEARS unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; 8 Though he were a Son, yet LEARNED HE obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And BEING MADE perfect, he BECAME the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;Did Jesus have glory with the father before the world was? Yes he did, IN PROPHECY. But he was not there with God at the time. Was I promised eternal life before the world began? Yes I was, but I was not there with God at the time.
©
Quote He is the firstborn of all creation.Col. 1:15-17 (P) Col 1:16 is a reference to the fact that Jesus made changes in the universe; specifically in the realm of heavenly authorities; WHETHER THEY BE thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers.
COL 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, WHETHER THEY BE thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.“WHETHER THEY BE” is a limiting parameter which tells you the scope and focus of “all things” as being thrones, or dominions, principalities, or powers. NOTHING ELSE is involved in the expression “all things.”
(Cindy)
Quote Col. 1:18 shows that He is also the firstborn of the dead, so in all He will have preeminence. Meaning He is first in all. (P)Jesus is “before all things” because he was elevated to first position in the creation, as the first one to be raised from the dead, without an intermediate prophet; and the first one raised from the dead to die no more. Col 1: 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
He did not have the pre-eminence until he was raised from the dead and made head of the body, the church.
(Cindy)
Quote Rev. 3:14 ….” These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.” (P) Jesus is exactly that, the beginning of God's CREATION. He is a CREATURE. He was FIRST. He CANNOT be his own creator. He cannot create himself. And the creation of which he is first creature, is the NEW CREATION, not the original. He is the first of a new type of creature, “resurrected from the dead” creatures.
(Cindy)
Quote John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and was God.” (P)Tells you something about “LOGOS” and nothing else.
(Cindy)
Quote verse 3 All things were made through Him and for Him. Early translations did not use “him” but “it” or “the same.” IF logos is to be referenced as “him,” this is the ONLY reference in scripture that so translates it. ALL the other references to logos are to “it” rather
than “him.” And ALL the earliest translators used “it” or “the same” instead of “Him.”TYNDALE BIBLE (1525)
John 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God, and the worde was god. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with god. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothinge that was made. 4 In it was lyfe; and the lyfe was the lyght of men. 5 And the lyght shyneth in darknes; but the darknes comprehended it not.GREAT BIBLE (1539)
1 In the begynnyng was the worde, and the worde was wyth God: and God was the worde. 2 The same was in the begynnyng wyth God. 3 All things were made by it, and wythout it, was made nothyng that was made. 4 In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men, 5 and the lyght shyneth in darcknes, and the darcknes comprehended it not.GENEVA BIBLE (1560)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the worde, and the worde was with God, and that worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was lif; and the lif was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkenes; and the darkenes comprehended it not.BISHOP'S BIBLE (1568)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was that word. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darknesse; and the darkeness comprehendeth it not.The first translation to use “him” was the Rhiems Catholic Bible in verse 3, even though in verse 2 outos was “”this.” With no explanation, it changed “this” to “him.”
RHEIMS BIBLE (1582)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word. 2 This was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was made nothing. That which was made 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darknesse; and the darkenesse did not comprehend it.And the KJV followed the Rhiems, and so also did almost every translation since then, not because outos changed in meaning, but because the translators now had an example to follow to show Jesus as the logos of God. He is NOT.
KING JAMES BIBLE (1611)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.(Cindy)
Quote verse 14 And the Word became flesh. (P)Already dealt with HERE
(Cindy)
Quote One more thing God is a title and the Father is above all. Ephesians 4:6 (P) I fail to see the relevance of this to our conversation. We agree, but what has that do wo with the issue of Jesus being “in eternity with God?”
(Cindy)
Quote I just noticed that I gave you this Scriptures before. But that's O.K. maybe you will see in time. (P) Yes, I recognized them. It is just that so much is required to help you see a different perspective, and I have much more to do on other boards, so sometimes it takes a little longer to respond. I do appreciate the effort you put into your posts, but I also put a bit into my own.
All I am going to say to you is this:” You are interpating Scripture while I go by it. That makes a big difference.
I stand by what I said. Scriptures speak for themself.
IreneQuote (Stu @ Aug. 02 2009,00:17) You all seem confident that Jesus existed as a human on earth at all. There must be a lot of blind faith in that position, to make up for the lack of convincing evidence. Stuart
One of my teachers many years ago, began by trying to establish as a fact, that Jesus was not born on earth. He could not find the world that would result from that unfortunate circumstance.Think about it.
What if Jesus did NOT been born on earth?
When you see all the changes that have accrued because of that one simple carpenter, it boggles the mind that some even deny his birth and life among men.
Blind faith?
I think it requires more blind faith to assume he did NOT live here.
Quote (Cindy @ Aug. 02 2009,01:53)
(Cindy)Quote All I am going to say to you is this:” You are interpreting Scripture while I go by it. (P) Right! Like you really and truly demonstrate your faith that Jesus had a beginning, was “gennao” of the spirit?
Jesus could NOT have existed prior to his being “gennao of the spirit” [Mat 1:20] except in prophecy.
If you are going to use Greek vocabulary, you owe it to yourself to learn what they actually mean, separate and apart from doctrines of men.
Â
Quote That makes a big difference. I stand by what I said. Scriptures speak for themself. Irene (P) Stand, or fall…
Quote (Paladin @ Aug. 02 2009,07:08) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 02 2009,00:17) You all seem confident that Jesus existed as a human on earth at all. There must be a lot of blind faith in that position, to make up for the lack of convincing evidence. Stuart
One of my teachers many years ago, began by trying to establish as a fact, that Jesus was not born on earth. He could not find the world that would result from that unfortunate circumstance.Think about it.
What if Jesus did NOT been born on earth?
When you see all the changes that have accrued because of that one simple carpenter, it boggles the mind that some even deny his birth and life among men.
Blind faith?
I think it requires more blind faith to assume he did NOT live here.
In the end it makes no difference at all whether Jesus ever existed, it is only what people believe he did, based on what they read. Since what they read in scripture was not written by eyewitnesses, it is not direct evidence of an historical Jesus, it is second-hand gossip based on at least several decades of Chinese whispers. You cannot to any decent standard of probity what Jesus actually said, you have to invoke Judeo-christian magic spells in claiming divine authority of scripture. Since the Flying Spaghetti Monster (bhna) has revealed to me personally that the gospel writers and Paul made it all up, then it is your Imaginary Friend against mine in that argument.Tell all the people brutalised in Jesus's name that it is a good thing that people even believe that Jesus existed.
By the way I have thought about it. The corroborating evidence of Josephus has been fiddled with by christians. Even reading to get the essence of the original, Josephus appears to be reporting what christians told him.
Tacitus, writing his independent reference was almost certainly inventing his own 'gospel' based on what christians told him. He got the detail about Pontius Pilate's official title wrong and there were no records to consult due to fires in public buildings, so he was not basing his account on anything more than the christian belief of those he consulted.
Others who write references that could be interpreted as pertaining to Jesus, like Suetonius and Pliny the Younger, are making little more than references to legend, again probably from christian sources.
Like the writing of the gospels and Paul, ALL this writing is from the century that followed the death of Jesus. There are no references written during his alleged three years of ministry, let alone any way to verify an event from the life of the 12-year old Jesus.
The scholars may come down on the side of Jesus's existence, and I think it more likely than not myself, but there is a huge faith component regarding historicity and virtually 100% regarding deeds and speeches.
Jesus's existence is a close thing and it is unreasonable for you to claim you know exactly what he did and said.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Aug. 02 2009,10:37) Tacitus, writing his independent reference was almost certainly inventing his own 'gospel' based on what christians told him. He got the detail about Pontius Pilate's official title wrong and there were no records to consult due to fires in public buildings, so he was not basing his account on anything more than the christian belief of those he consulted. Others who write references that could be interpreted as pertaining to Jesus, like Suetonius and Pliny the Younger, are making little more than references to legend, again probably from christian sources.
Like the writing of the gospels and Paul, ALL this writing is from the century that followed the death of Jesus. There are no references written during his alleged three years of ministry, let alone any way to verify an event from the life of the 12-year old Jesus.
The scholars may come down on the side of Jesus's existence, and I think it more likely than not myself, but there is a huge faith component regarding historicity and virtually 100% regarding deeds and speeches.
Jesus's existence is a close thing and it is unreasonable for you to claim you know exactly what he did and said.
Stuart
I don't think even YOU know what you believe.Quote (Paladin @ Aug. 02 2009,11:25) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 02 2009,10:37) Tacitus, writing his independent reference was almost certainly inventing his own 'gospel' based on what christians told him. He got the detail about Pontius Pilate's official title wrong and there were no records to consult due to fires in public buildings, so he was not basing his account on anything more than the christian belief of those he consulted. Others who write references that could be interpreted as pertaining to Jesus, like Suetonius and Pliny the Younger, are making little more than references to legend, again probably from christian sources.
Like the writing of the gospels and Paul, ALL this writing is from the century that followed the death of Jesus. There are no references written during his alleged three years of ministry, let alone any way to verify an event from the life of the 12-year old Jesus.
The scholars may come down on the side of Jesus's existence, and I think it more likely than not myself, but there is a huge faith component regarding historicity and virtually 100% regarding deeds and speeches.
Jesus's existence is a close thing and it is unreasonable for you to claim you know exactly what he did and said.
Stuart
I don't think even YOU know what you believe.
I believe in an even-handed treatment of history. That means no doctrines or dogmas, just conclusions based on evidence, with the degree of certainty related to the quality of the evidence.The quality of the evidence for Jesus is poor, and has been tampered with by zealots. Modern zealots have been dealt a rum hand by their ancient counterparts because of that meddling they did, still today's christian blithely asserts all sorts of stuff and expects compliance from others. I think most christians really believe the historicity of Jesus is a sure thing. They have no idea.
Stuart
In 1803 Thomas Jefferson wrote the following in a letter concerning his religious views:
“JESUS.
In this state of things among the Jews, Jesus appeared. His parentage was obscure; his condition poor; his education null; his natural endowments great; his life correct and innocent. He was meek, benevolent, patient, firm, disinterested, and of the sublimest eloquence. The disadvantages under which his doctrines appear are remarkable.
1. Like Socrates and Epictetus, he wrote nothing himself.
2. But he had not, like them, a Xenophon or an Arrian to write for him. I name not Plato, who only used the name of Socrates to cover the whimsies of his own brain.
On the contrary, all the learned of his country, entrenched in its power and riches, were opposed to him, lest his labors should undermine their advantages; and the committing to writing of his life and doctrines fell on unlettered and ignorant men; who wrote, too, from memory, and not till long after the transactions had passed.
3. According to the ordinary fate of those who attempt to enlighten and reform mankind, he fell an early victim to the jealousy and combination of the altar and the throne, at about 33 years of age, his reason having not yet attained the maximum of its energy, nor the course of his preaching, which was but of three years at most, presented occasions for developing a complete system of morals.
4. Hence the doctrines which he really delivered were defective, as a whole, and fragments only of what he did deliver
have come to us mutilated, misstated, and often unintelligible.
5. They have been still more disfigured by the corruptions of schismatizing followers, who have found an interest in sophisticating and perverting the simple doctrines he taught, by engrafting on them the mysticisms of a Grecian Sophist (Plato), frittering them into subtilties and obscuring them with jargon, until they have caused good men to reject the whole in disgust, and to view Jesus himself as an impostor. Notwithstanding these disadvantages, a system of morals is presented to us which, if filled up in the true style and spirit of the rich fragments he left us, would be the most perfect and sublime that has ever been taught by man. The question of his being a member of the Godhead, or in direct communication with it, claimed for him by some of his followers, and denied by others, is foreign to the present view, which is merely an estimate of the intrinsic merits of his doctrines.”
I find it hard to argue with this.Quote (Stu @ Aug. 16 2009,18:03) Quote (Stu @ Aug. 02 2009,10:37) Tacitus, writing his independent reference was almost certainly inventing his own 'gospel' based on what christians told him. He got the detail about Pontius Pilate's official title wrong and there were no records to consult due to fires in public buildings, so he was not basing his account on anything more than the christian belief of those he consulted. Let's see what you consider “evidence” –
1st statement: “…was almost certainly…” is not even an assertion. It means “I have no evidence. If you did, it would be an assertion.
2nd statement: “…He got the detail about Pontius Pilate's official title wrong and there were no records to consult due to fires in public buildings…”
If there were no public records due to fires in public buildings, where did you get your record?
Quote Others who write references that could be interpreted as pertaining to Jesus, like Suetonius and Pliny the Younger, are making little more than references to legend, again probably from christian sources. “…probably from Christian sources…” is not exactly a rebuttal.
It is a statement of probability, having no evidence to substantiate it.Quote Like the writing of the gospels and Paul, ALL this writing is from the century that followed the death of Jesus. There are no references written during his alleged three years of ministry, let alone any way to verify an event from the life of the 12-year old Jesus. You mean like the seven centuries of prophecies written PRIOR TO HIS BIRTH?
As for not anything written during his three years of public ministry, how many politicians do you know that have running commentary on their life before they become public figures?
As for the events of his life at age twelve, do you not consider the Holy Spirit to be an eyewitness? The writers who give the account were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write about events of HIS choosing. Of have you not read the book?
As for your statement:
Quote Like the writing of the gospels and Paul, ALL this writing is from the century that followed the death of Jesus. Assume Jesus died on the day before his birthday [the actual date of his birth and death being uncertain] in 33 a.d. – His resurrection would then take place in the century following his death. Your point makes no sense.
Paul was interviewed by Jesus after Jesus' death, resurrection, and ascension, and the gospel writers were eyewitnesses to the events of which they wrote. AND they had the extra blessing of inspiration to avoid error in their accounts.
Quote The scholars may come down on the side of Jesus's existence, and I think it more likely than not myself, but there is a huge faith component regarding historicity and virtually 100% regarding deeds and speeches. Jesus's existence is a close thing and it is unreasonable for you to claim you know exactly what he did and said. Stuart But I make no such claim. I claim to have access to eyewitness accounts that tell me what he said, and with no eyewitness rebuttals in history.
For example, all Jesus' mother had to do to save his life was say “Joseph is his Father.” She did not make such a statement, so I do not have to weigh the credence of any such statement against statements to the contrary.
(P)
Quote I don't think even YOU know what you believe. (Stu) I believe in an even-handed treatment of history. That means no doctrines or dogmas, just conclusions based on evidence, with the degree of certainty related to the quality of the evidence.
The quality of the evidence for Jesus is poor, and has been tampered with by zealots. Modern zealots have been dealt a rum hand by their ancient counterparts because of that meddling they did, still today's christian blithely asserts all sorts of stuff and expects compliance from others. I think most christians really believe the historicity of Jesus is a sure thing. They have no idea.
(P) No you don't. You believe in a rewriting of history. ALL of history is comprised of documenting a belief as to events alleged to have transpired. History is written by victors, and rewritten by zealots, usually at least a generation later than the time of the factual events.
The quality of evidence begins with the detailed accounts of fulfilled prophecy, which is a different kind of history. It cannot then be treated as though it is just the wandering musings of story tellers of later generations. Treat it as evidence instead of taking later generations of critics as authorities who think they know better.
Paladin
Stu: Tacitus, writing his independent reference was almost certainly inventing his own 'gospel' based on what christians told him. He got the detail about Pontius Pilate's official title wrong and there were no records to consult due to fires in public buildings, so he was not basing his account on anything more than the christian belief of those he consulted.
Quote Let's see what you consider “evidence” – 1st statement: “…was almost certainly…” is not even an assertion. It means “I have no evidence. If you did, it would be an assertion.
Learn some philosophy then get back to us.Quote 2nd statement: “…He got the detail about Pontius Pilate's official title wrong and there were no records to consult due to fires in public buildings…” If there were no public records due to fires in public buildings, where did you get your record?
Are you saying there is no such thing as human memory?Quote “…probably from Christian sources…” is not exactly a rebuttal.
It is a statement of probability, having no evidence to substantiate it.
It is an estimate of the relative likelihood of what happened. I gave my reasoning. Did you read it?Stu: Like the writing of the gospels and Paul, ALL this writing is from the century that followed the death of Jesus. There are no references written during his alleged three years of ministry, let alone any way to verify an event from the life of the 12-year old Jesus.
Quote You mean like the seven centuries of prophecies written PRIOR TO HIS BIRTH?
What are you talking about? There is no mention of “Jesus” before the NT.Quote As for not anything written during his three years of public ministry, how many politicians do you know that have running commentary on their life before they become public figures?
So we agree, there is nothing credible written about Jesus at the age of 12, nor anything during the time of his alleged ministry.Quote As for the events of his life at age twelve, do you not consider the Holy Spirit to be an eyewitness?
What is a holy spirit?Quote The writers who give the account were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write about events of HIS choosing. Of have you not read the book?
What holy spirit?Stu: Like the writing of the gospels and Paul, ALL this writing is from the century that followed the death of Jesus.
Quote Assume Jesus died on the day before his birthday [the actual date of his birth and death being uncertain] in 33 a.d. – His resurrection would then take place in the century following his death. Your point makes no sense.
What resurrection? Your assertion makes no sense.Quote Paul was interviewed by Jesus after Jesus' death, resurrection, and ascension, and the gospel writers were eyewitnesses to the events of which they wrote. AND they had the extra blessing of inspiration to avoid error in their accounts.
Humans do not give interviews after they have died. What ascension? Those are fantasy ideas asserted by your books of historical fiction but they are not verified in any way by people who wrote about seeing them, or by any independent source that refers to such witness accounts. It only occurs as part of christian mythology and nowhere else. We do not even know who the gospel writers were. Even if we did, show me where in any of the gospels it says that the writers were eyewitnesses.Stu: The scholars may come down on the side of Jesus's existence, and I think it more likely than not myself, but there is a huge faith component regarding historicity and virtually 100% regarding deeds and speeches. Jesus's existence is a close thing and it is unreasonable for you to claim you know exactly what he did and said.
Quote But I make no such claim. I claim to have access to eyewitness accounts that tell me what he said, and with no eyewitness rebuttals in history.
Well you cannot substantiate your traditional view. I certainly do not believe your assertion. I think you will have to assert magic again in order to be able to claim that what you read is exactly what Jesus said, or carries accurately the tenor of his alleged speechmaking.Quote For example, all Jesus' mother had to do to save his life was say “Joseph is his Father.” She did not make such a statement, so I do not have to weigh the credence of any such statement against statements to the contrary.
You have not the first clue what Jesus’s mother said, if she existed.Stu: I believe in an even-handed treatment of history. That means no doctrines or dogmas, just conclusions based on evidence, with the degree of certainty related to the quality of the evidence. The quality of the evidence for Jesus is poor, and has been tampered with by zealots. Modern zealots have been dealt a rum hand by their ancient counterparts because of that meddling they did, still today's christian blithely asserts all sorts of stuff and expects compliance from others. I think most christians really believe the historicity of Jesus is a sure thing. They have no idea.
Quote No you don't. You believe in a rewriting of history.
I believe in a rewriting of the traditional view. That is what scholars have done. Do you not believe in correcting historical accounts according to facts, or at least weighting them towards the most reliable evidence?Quote ALL of history is comprised of documenting a belief as to even
ts alleged to have transpired. History is written by victors, and rewritten by zealots, usually at least a generation later than the time of the factual events.
Which is no good reason to assert Jesus’s existence.Quote The quality of evidence begins with the detailed accounts of fulfilled prophecy,
Are you trying to convince me, or make me laugh at your assertion of magic spells?Quote which is a different kind of history. It cannot then be treated as though it is just the wandering musings of story tellers of later generations. Treat it as evidence instead of taking later generations of critics as authorities who think they know better.
Why can it not be treated as an ancient conspiracy to defraud? That is what you MUST conclude from the meddlings with the writing of Josephus. To understand the situation properly you have to include the history of all religions, ancient and modern politics, and the evolutionary adaptation we appear to have that causes us to want to believe in imaginary sky friends. Taking scripture on face value, or even doing long and tortuous ‘exegesis’ on it is to miss the point. People invent stories for all sorts of reasons, and given the popularity of pseudoscience today and the scientific ignorance of the ancients it is no surprise that people make all sorts of mystical claims of magic, like virgin birth and resurrection after death. They are age-old fables, stolen by christianity from previous religious traditions. Mithras had the same basic mythological as Jesus, but he was invented earlier. I rather think that the most likely scenario is that Jesus was a real person, a preacher, but his messianic mythology was invented by others who were in a real hurry to fulfil prophecies and have their messiah confirmed, nevermind that the prophecies turned out to be self-fulfilling and in any case painfully forced. There are as many things patently wrong in Isaiah as there are things that can be twisted to fit the mythology of Jesus, that in any case was invented (badly!) to suit the supposed prophecies in the first place!Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
