Should Billy Graham's legacy be rescued?

Feb 13, 2013 Full story: Q-Notes 1,638

President Barack Obama with Rev. Billy Graham at his house in Montreat, N.C., April 25, 2010.

Full Story

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1447 May 17, 2013
Ya I think so. Somewhere there is a passage saying animal sacrifices are no longer needed
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>Did they actually edit that in? I do not remember Jewsus ever absolving the Jews from sacrificing animals.

I could be mistaken, of course--it's been a while since I read that sh7t.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1448 May 17, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Ya I think so. Somewhere there is a passage saying animal sacrifices are no longer needed
<quoted text>
The heretic Paul may have said something. Jewsus never did, AFAIK

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1449 May 17, 2013
You are probably right man.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>The heretic Paul may have said something. Jewsus never did, AFAIK

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1450 May 18, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
The heretic Paul may have said something. Jewsus never did, AFAIK
Paul wasn't giving up any valuable livestock, just to push a god-myth that he was using to his further his own goals.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1451 May 18, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Paul wasn't giving up any valuable livestock, just to push a god-myth that he was using to his further his own goals.
Well, if you look at it dispassionately (as I know you have), the NT part of the BuyBull is in direct conflict.

Paul never speaks of Jewsus as a mortal man or even as a human-- with Paul, Jewsus was >>always<< a celestial being of some kind, a sort of demi-god for a time, before returning as the King God (under the Pagan rules of nomenclature).

It's only in the 4 gospels (which are dated to be much younger than the majority of the Pauline books that are not considered outright forgeries) that we see Jewsus being portrayed as a mortal.

In fact? This conflict was central to many of the various religious wars down through history: was Jewsus a man (as the gospels say) or a ghostly/spirit god (as Paul consistently says) or some combination of both?(as the later, apologists claim)

The conflict is still in dispute, even to this day...

... proving once again?

That no self-respecting Deity would have suffered the idiotic buybull to represent It on earth.

Which means, there are no gods behind the buybull-- at all.

(but you already knew that last bit... <heh> )

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1452 May 18, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if you look at it dispassionately (as I know you have), the NT part of the BuyBull is in direct conflict.
Paul never speaks of Jewsus as a mortal man or even as a human-- with Paul, Jewsus was >>always<< a celestial being of some kind, a sort of demi-god for a time, before returning as the King God (under the Pagan rules of nomenclature).
It's only in the 4 gospels (which are dated to be much younger than the majority of the Pauline books that are not considered outright forgeries) that we see Jewsus being portrayed as a mortal.
In fact? This conflict was central to many of the various religious wars down through history: was Jewsus a man (as the gospels say) or a ghostly/spirit god (as Paul consistently says) or some combination of both?(as the later, apologists claim)
The conflict is still in dispute, even to this day...
... proving once again?
That no self-respecting Deity would have suffered the idiotic buybull to represent It on earth.
Which means, there are no gods behind the buybull-- at all.
(but you already knew that last bit... <heh> )
Yeah, I did know that, and it's too bad that only a limited number of the people who claim to have read it, can see the problems. Ah well, we can but hope ....

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1453 May 18, 2013
..... for a brighter tomorrow.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1454 May 18, 2013
Interesting enough the passages in the NT about not sacrificing animals comes right at the time when the Romans wanted to get away from that anyways.... Gasp!
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Paul wasn't giving up any valuable livestock, just to push a god-myth that he was using to his further his own goals.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1455 May 18, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
..... for a brighter tomorrow.
As the mental disease that is Religious Faith wanes from the younger set?

Tomorrow does appear to be looking brighter.

:D

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1456 May 18, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Interesting enough the passages in the NT about not sacrificing animals comes right at the time when the Romans wanted to get away from that anyways.... Gasp!
<quoted text>
How conveniently the whims of a god, doth parallel the needs and wishes of man.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#1457 May 18, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
As the mental disease that is Religious Faith wanes from the younger set?
Tomorrow does appear to be looking brighter.
:D
:)
How sweet it is.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1458 May 18, 2013
Indeed it is!:)
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>How conveniently the whims of a god, doth parallel the needs and wishes of man.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1459 May 20, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
No I mentioned Bart because he is a favorite amongst your ilk.
Shame you weren't able to put that together with your low IQ.
<quoted text>
Givemeliberty wrote:
"Then you obviously failed to comprehend the information in the link.
Bart Ehrman the apologetic friendly agnostic is about as up to date as you can get and he admits the Josephus passages are fakes added in later as well as backing up my assertion how much of the bible, especially New Testament is forged placed in much later."
<quoted text>

you mean this bart ehrman? the author of "Jesus Interrupted"?

“It is certainly worth knowing that the most prominent Jewish historian of the first century knew at least something about Jesus—specifically that he was a teacher who allegedly did wonderful deeds, had a large following, and was condemned to be crucified by Pontius Pilate. This account confirms some of the most important aspects of Jesus’ life and death as recounted in the Gospels.”(Jesus Interrupted, p. 150)

Josephus is an important witness to the fact that there were traditions about Jesus in circulation near the end of the first century outside of Christian circles. He did not get his information from the Gospels, but from other (unknown) sources. So that’s very important. But no one would say that Josephus was objective in his reporting (at least, no scholar of Josephus would say that). He was far from objective! His biases and agenda very much guided his writing. Still, when it comes to what he has to say about Jesus, he was obviously not presenting a biased account in favor of Jesus (in other words, his account is very different from Christian reports that wanted to affirm Jesus for reasons of their own).
When I say this, I am referring to the scholarly reconstruction of what Josephus probably actually wrote, not the Testimonium Flavianum, as it is called, as it now appears in his book the Antiquities.
The Testimonium that we have in the late manuscripts of Josephus has clearly and obviously been “doctored up” by a Christian scribe, since Josephus himself (as we know, e.g., from his autobiography) never became a Christian and so did not himself believe that Jesus was the messiah who was raised from the dead in fulfillment of the Scriptures (as the Testimonium relates).
But Josephus did refer to Jesus, and he does give us some valuable information about him. And he is the first non-Christian source to do so. This is important historical data, as it shows that Jesus was thought of as having lived a real life by the most important Jewish historian of the first century. As such the Testimonium provides us with some much-needed confirmation of information that we can glean from our Christian sources.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/...

obviously BE does not believe that the TF is a fake that was added later. but rather may have been doctored later. the evidence of a different more neutral syriac version would support this theory.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1460 May 20, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
It was added in the year 1100, yes.
<quoted text>
i wouldn't be so sure.

The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the late 4th or early 5th century. It is also the earliest surviving Latin manuscript to contain it; 17 of the 23 Old Latin manuscripts of John 7-8 contain at least part of the Pericope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_wo...

other ancient works or manuscripts that either contain it or reference it are;
Papias (circa AD 125)
3rd Century Syriac "Didascalia Apostolorum"
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles Book II.24 [generally dated to the late third century]
Codex Fuldensis, which is positively dated to AD 546 contains the adulterae pericope.
The Second Epistle of Pope Callistus section 6 quotes it as a gospel
the 4th century Codex Vaticanus

Augustine claimed that the passage may have been improperly excluded from some manuscripts in order to avoid the impression that Christ had sanctioned adultery:
"Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of the true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord's act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if he who had said, Sin no more, had granted permission to sin."

Codex Bezae (5th century), Codex Basilensis A. N. III. 12 (8th century), 9th century Codices Boreelianus, Seidelianus I, Seidelianus II, Cyprius, Campianus, Nanianus, also Tischendorfianus IV from the 10th, Codex Petropolitanus; Minuscule 28, 318, 700, 892, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1344, 1365, 1546, 1646, 2148, 2174; the Byzantine majority text; &#8467; 79, &#8467; 100 (John 8:1-11), &#8467; 118, &#8467; 130 (8:1-11), &#8467; 221, &#8467; 274, &#8467; 281, &#8467; 411, &#8467; 421, &#8467; 429 (8:1-11), &#8467; 442 (8:1-11), &#8467; 445 (8:1-11), &#8467; 459; the majority of the Old Latin, the Vulgate (Codex Fuldensis), some Syriac, the Bohairic dialect of the Coptic, some Armenian, and the Ethopian translations; Didascalia (3rd century), Didymus the Blind (4th century), Ambrosiaster (4th century), Ambrose (died 397), John Chrysostom (died 407), Jerome (died 420), Augustine (died 430).

so i wouldn't be so sure that it was added later or perhaps it was edited earlier. we do have older manuscripts that do contain it and older authors that reference it.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1461 May 20, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet you worship the same ugly bible....
... how about that?
You are equally guilty of ANY crimes committed because of it.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>"non[e] of our people put anyone to the torch. attack the catholics and their protestrant children all you want but they are not my spiritual forefathers."

i don't think any one can accuse the catholics of "worshipping the Bible". they ignore it in so many places.
nor do they even use the same Bible that they used 50 years ago. so i doubt if their Bible is the same as mine.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1462 May 20, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm reporting what people who STUDY THIS THING have said.
The majority agree with my post-- it is a forgery.
Note: many of these scholars are also People of Faith (not as mindless as YOU, naturally, but they do believe).
<quoted text>
Bollocks. Why do you lie?
so once again your only response is, "it's a lie", "it's a forgery", the scholars agree with me.
however you offer no proof or links, you can't defend your postion in an educated manner because you have none.
Imhotep

Orlando, FL

#1463 May 20, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>Givemeliberty wrote:
"Then you obviously failed to comprehend the information in the link.
Bart Ehrman the apologetic friendly agnostic is about as up to date as you can get and he admits the Josephus passages are
When I say this, I am referring to the scholarly reconstruction of what Josephus probably actually wrote, not the Testimonium Flavianum, as it is called, as it now appears in his book the Antiquities.
The Testimonium that we have in the late manuscripts of Josephus has clearly and obviously been “doctored up” by a Christian scribe, since Josephus himself (as we know, e.g., from his autobiography) never became a Christian and so did not himself believe that Jesus was the messiah who was raised from the dead in fulfillment of the Scriptures (as the Testimonium relates).
But Josephus did refer to Jesus, and he does give us some valuable information about him. And he is the first non-Christian source to do so. This is important historical data, as it shows that Jesus was thought of as having lived a real life by the most important Jewish historian of the first century. As such the Testimonium provides us with some much-needed confirmation of information that we can glean from our Christian sources.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/...
obviously BE does not believe that the TF is a fake that was added later. but rather may have been doctored later. the evidence of a different more neutral syriac version would support this theory.
Like those of the Jewish writer Josephus, the works of the ancient historians Pliny, Suetonius and Tacitus do not provide proof that Jesus Christ ever existed as a "historical" character.

Pliny the Younger, Roman Official and Historian (62-113 CE)
Tacitus, Roman Politician and Historian,(c. 56-120 CE)
Suetonius, Roman Historian (c. 69-c. 122 CE)

When addressing the mythical nature of Jesus Christ, one issue repeatedly raised is the purported "evidence" of his existence to be found in the writings of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from about 37 to 100 CE.

In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews appears the notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavianum" ("TF"):

"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."

The are: No sculptures, no drawings, no markings in stone, nothing written in his own hand; and no letters, no commentaries, indeed no authentic documents written by his Jewish and Gentile contemporaries, Justice of Tiberius, Philo, Josephus, Seneca, Petronius Arbiter, Pliny the Elder, et al., to lend credence to his historicity.

In the final analysis there is no evidence that the biblical character called "Jesus Christ" ever existed.

All of these historians were born well after the alleged events.

'Hearsay' is not 'evidence' for a reason!

Caesar by comparison is easily verified.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1464 May 20, 2013
Sorry your apologetic opinion piece was ignored.

http://dougbullock.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/i...

Doesn't appear in any earlier copies of the text.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>i wouldn't be so sure.
it.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#1465 May 20, 2013
The Jesus lines in Josephus were forged much later. Even if they were legit it would be mere hear say.

But the lines do not appear in earlier copies of his work. Link Barry won't click.

http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

And another

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/josephus.html

And yet another one

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/1stC_Hist.h...

Sadly he only cares about apologetic's opinion pieces.

Oh and the doctor Bart refuses to debate with.

http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1466 May 21, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>barry wrote:
<quoted text>"non[e] of our people put anyone to the torch. attack the catholics and their protestrant children all you want but they are not my spiritual forefathers."
i don't think any one can accuse the catholics of "worshipping the Bible". they ignore it in so many places.
So what? You do the *exact* same thing!

Do you sacrifice animals? I'd bet you don't-- so you *ignore* that part.

Do you live in a commune as Jesus commanded you to? Again-- you don't--- more ignoring by you.

You are all hypocrites to the highest degree possible.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wedding Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Gay marriage set to make grand US... 12 min Rev Don Wildmoan 42
'We feel extremely blessed': Two women get marr... 16 min Rev Don Wildmoan 102
I think my wife wants to Spank me ! Should I pu... 31 min spanky42 17
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 38 min Lolocaust 49,750
New Zealand: Gay Activists Angry As Straight Me... 8 hr Rev Don Wildmoan 16
Couples, firms take sides in gay marriage debate Sat Professor Jumper 2
Buddies' wedding horrifies gay groups Sat nhjeff 14
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Wedding People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••