The Historical Jesus.

[MisterMike]

Commander to Morpheus: "Not everyone believes what you belive."

Morpheus: "My beliefs do not require them to."

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by heretic888

:rofl: :rofl:

 

[heretic888]

Exactly.

 

[Nightingale]

:deadhorse

 

[Josh]

What good does debating and arguing over all this do???

Jesus tells us to go and preach to all the world. He even said that His disciples would do greater than He Himself.

That's why the Gospel whether openly or secretly, is taught in every nation.

and about this Josephus. He was a jewish historian. He taught on the Bible. He wasn't Christ. All you have to do to find about about Josephus is go to any web search. Geez. Yea. I mean. I just tried it. He was Flavius Josephus. Where did ya'll get he was supposedly Christ??

 

[heretic888]

What good does debating and arguing over all this do???

To the world at large?? About as much good as not discussing it; namely, because the world as a whole doesn't give a ***** one way or the other.

We, however, do. Discussions like these are mostly for the benefit of the participants, because they want to discuss the subject at hand. Most people, however, don't.

If you don't like the subject being discussed, here's some simple advice: don't click on the thread's link . Its that simple.

Jesus tells us to go and preach to all the world. He even said that His disciples would do greater than He Himself.

Uhhhhh.... right.

That's why the Gospel whether openly or secretly, is taught in every nation.

Actually, no, its not. I can name about a dozen tribal "nations" off-hand that have never even heard of Christianity.

And, why is everyone treating "the Gospel" as if its a single, monolithic entity?? As if its some uniform creed that all "Christians" agree upon?? I can assure you, no one seems as confused and divided as to what exactly "Christianity" is as the Christians themselves.

Maybe you guys should convert each other before tackling the rest of the world??

and about this Josephus. He was a jewish historian. He taught on the Bible. He wasn't Christ. All you have to do to find about about Josephus is go to any web search. Geez. Yea. I mean. I just tried it. He was Flavius Josephus. Where did ya'll get he was supposedly Christ??

Ugh.

I suggest actually reading the thread next time before making comments like this one again.

Laterz.

 

[ABN]

and about this Josephus. He was a jewish historian. He taught on the Bible. He wasn't Christ. All you have to do to find about about Josephus is go to any web search. Geez. Yea. I mean. I just tried it. He was Flavius Josephus. Where did ya'll get he was supposedly Christ??

Could we please have a moment of silent prayer, or just silence if you prefer, for the American education system....

andy

 

[heretic888]

Could we please have a moment of silent prayer, or just silence if you prefer, for the American education system....

Now now.... I don't think that's being very fair to America. We've got lots of nice people that have mastered the ability to read English.

 

[arnisador]

http://www.cincypost.com/2001/apr/13/jesus041301.html

The search for the answer to that question has inspired some of the greatest artists in Western history, and this Easter season, it's inspired at least two TV documentaries.

''The Face: Jesus in Art''' is a two-hour PBS documentary (3 p.m. Sunday, Channel 48; 2 p.m. Sunday, Channel 54) tracing the depictions of Jesus from the third century.

The Discovery Channel airs its three-part ''Jesus: The complete Story'' 8-11 p.m. Sunday. The final hour includes the reconstruction of Jesus' face using modern forensic science and recent archaeological findings.

The Discovery Channel's documentary falls far short of the ''complete story,'' and the really interesting parts of the show could be condensed to a solid half-hour piece. The best thing about the series is the thrilling use of computer enhanced images that frequently illustrate what a dusty pile of rocks at a digging site really looked like.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

and about this Josephus. He was a jewish historian. He taught on the Bible. He wasn't Christ. All you have to do to find about about Josephus is go to any web search. Geez. Yea. I mean. I just tried it. He was Flavius Josephus. Where did ya'll get he was supposedly Christ??

<groan...>

Nobody here said he was Christ.

Some debated the textual references from Josephus that referred to Jesus as the Christ. Many scholars believe the references to be a Christian interpolation.

Okay...now I need to make something clear here. JOSEPHUS DIDN'T TEACH "ON" (sic) THE BIBLE. The "Bible" as you know it didn't exist back then. In Josephus' time the Gospels either hadn't been written or were in the process of being written.

Given that Josephus was a JEW, and not a Christian, he didn't teach Christian religious principles.

As for doing the internet search, look at some of the other links that have been provided.

Steve

 

[Nightingale]

I saw a very interesting tv show on the discovery channel two days ago. they keep re-running it. It explores the plagues that Moses cast on the Egyptians and the science behind them. According to the show, there's overwhelming evidence that they were caused by a volcanic erruption of a mediteranian island called Santirini, miles away. The interesting debate here would be...was the erruption a coincidence, or an act of God?


network: Discovery Channel
series: Ancient Evidence

episode: Who Was Moses?
rating: nr | cc


... Ancient Evidence Who Was Moses? Experts examine the stables of Ramses II, ancient Egyptian texts and everything in between to get the real story behind Moses ...

airing: — Dec 03 2003 @ 10:00 PM
— Dec 04 2003 @ 01:00 AM
— Dec 07 2003 @ 07:00 PM

 

[Cruentus]

I will say that one must take some of those shows on discovery and PBS with a grain of salt. A lot of time they present ill supported theories that are unique, so they get people to watch the show due to the uniqueness. It works...I watch a lot of these specials, but most of the time I sit there thinking "what a load of crap".

The special where they tried to use forensic science to reconstruct the face of Jesus is a prime example of ill supported conjectures. All the did was take skulls from the time period and culture, reconstruct a face based on those skulls, looked at biblical and historical descriptions of hair color, eye color, skin color, etc., and whammo...they reconstructed a face.

Think for a minute how dumb this is. To me, this is about the equivalent of someone 2000 years from now saying, "lets try to find out what Paul Janulis' face really looked like, then they take Arnisadors skull, reconstruct the face, and give it dirty blonde hair and blue eyes based off a written description of me. See what I mean? No two people look alike in any culture...so I think there attempt to reconstruct the face was a long shot to say the least. This wasn't even what bothered me....it was the fact that in the special they presented their evidence as being factual when it probably is not.

Anyways...thats my feelings on a lot of these specials. Sometimes I come accross interesting theories that gets me thinking, but mostly these specials are a big eye rolling fest.

 

[Nightingale]

there's a lot of scientific evidence to back up the volcano theory, including deposits of volcanic material at appropriate levels in the archeological/fossil record. take a look at the show and see. its really very well done, and makes no judgement on religion. its straight scientific analysis. Although it presents strong evidence that the plagues of egypt were caused by the volcanic erruption, they make no judgement on whether or not the event was divinely influenced, or how the heck Moses knew all about the effects before they happened. The show is very much about using the bible to reconstruct history.

 

[heretic888]

Okay...now I need to make something clear here. JOSEPHUS DIDN'T TEACH "ON" (sic) THE BIBLE. The "Bible" as you know it didn't exist back then. In Josephus' time the Gospels either hadn't been written or were in the process of being written.

According to the Testimonium Flavius attributed to Josephus, however, he's pretty "preachy" on his description of Jesus.

Given that Josephus was a JEW, and not a Christian, he didn't teach Christian religious principles.

Errrr.... that seems like a moot point, considering pretty much *all* "Christians" of the time were Jews.

I saw a very interesting tv show on the discovery channel two days ago. they keep re-running it. It explores the plagues that Moses cast on the Egyptians and the science behind them. According to the show, there's overwhelming evidence that they were caused by a volcanic erruption of a mediteranian island called Santirini, miles away. The interesting debate here would be...was the erruption a coincidence, or an act of God?

Oh boy.

I'm gonna have to go with Paul on this one. Claims like this I can only take with a grain of salt.

ESPECIALLY when you take into consideration the entire BASIS for the theory is based on assumption upon assumption. Namely, that these "volcanic erruptions" took place when Moses was supposed to have lived. Last time I checked, there isn't a whole lof of scholarly agreement as to *when* exactly Moses was supposed to have lived.

Also, how exactly would volcanic eruptions cause "plauges" over a nation as vast as Egypt??

My spider sense is tingling, Batman. Smells mighty fishy to me.

Although it presents strong evidence that the plagues of egypt were caused by the volcanic erruption, they make no judgement on whether or not the event was divinely influenced, or how the heck Moses knew all about the effects before they happened. The show is very much about using the bible to reconstruct history.

Thus making it an exercise in pseudo-science.

Now, the Bible may be historically true and it may not be but these individuals are already operating on the *assumption* that it is true without any real scientific evidence to support such a claim (last time I checked, for example, there is no "scientific" proof these plagues ever took place or that Moses even lived). That, my friends, is pseudo-science and no different than the humorous "creation science" we see being done in other academic circles.

Also, on a personal note, I would just like to add that one of the first things that was taught to me in my introductory psychology class is that correlation is *not* causation.

Spider sense continues to tingle. Laterz.

 

[Nightingale]

We may not have actual birth/death dates of Moses, but we do have the exact dates of the Egyptian Pharoah, Ramses, mentioned in the story.

The show simply analyzed where historical record coincides with biblical mythology. It makes no judgement on the bible. It simply presents the bible story and the historical record and points out where they match (and where they don't.)

Before arguing with me any further on this (and all I said was that the show was interesting, not that it was correct!) watch the dang show so you know what you're talking about, ok?

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by Nightingale
there's a lot of scientific evidence to back up the volcano theory, including deposits of volcanic material at appropriate levels in the archeological/fossil record. take a look at the show and see. its really very well done, and makes no judgement on religion. its straight scientific analysis. Although it presents strong evidence that the plagues of egypt were caused by the volcanic erruption, they make no judgement on whether or not the event was divinely influenced, or how the heck Moses knew all about the effects before they happened. The show is very much about using the bible to reconstruct history.

There are some things that are presented on these specials that are pretty good, for sure. It is just that as a whole, I have been disappointed on more then one occasion.

PAUL

 

[Nightingale]

I have been disappointed in some of the tv specials too... especially the jesus/face one. however, I was impressed by this one, and, having grown up the daughter of a science teacher, that is saying something.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Errrr.... that seems like a moot point, considering pretty much *all* "Christians" of the time were Jews.

Excellent point, Heretic. You're correct. I meant an orthodox Jew, of the kind that wouldn't have been running with the Jesus movement. Something a little more along the line of Paul before his conversion. This movement apparently wasn't popular with the mainstream Jews of the time.



Charles Pellegrino's Return to Sodom and Gomorrah talks about the volcanic explosion of Thera that supposedly gave rise to the plagues of Egypt.

Here's the book:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...=sr_8_1/002-3149925-6835210?v=glance&n=507846

Here's a review of the book:

http://members.aol.com/ScottH9999/essays/highcrit.htm

 

[heretic888]

We may not have actual birth/death dates of Moses, but we do have the exact dates of the Egyptian Pharoah, Ramses, mentioned in the story.

And because he's in the story, that must have been when the events in question took place!

In all seriousness, many scholars contest Ramses being the pharoah that the exodus took place under (assuming it took place at all --- its something the Egyptians make no record of --- come to think of it, there's no record or documentation that the Jews were ever Egyptian slaves or that they built the pyramids... hmmmm). He was a very firm and powerful ruler and it is very unlikely he would have allowed such an event to transpire.

The more likely candidate that I have heard, would be the ruler Akhenaton. He interestingly developed the first form of recorded monotheism in the history of the world. Both Freud and Campbell have proposed Moses, if he existed, may have been a priest in the court of Akhenaton (which would explain the Jews' sudden embracing of "monotheism"). After Akhenaton's defeat, Egypt was thrown into a bit of anarchy for a while, and this would have been the perfect time for a Jewish patriarch like Moses to haul his peepz on outta there.

The show simply analyzed where historical record coincides with biblical mythology. It makes no judgement on the bible. It simply presents the bible story and the historical record and points out where they match (and where they don't.)

*shrugs* It still strikes me that their entire "method" is making a lot of assumptions concerning the "scientific" viability of the Bible. I also don't quite understand how volcanic ash from a nearby island could cause "plagues" to an empire as vast as Egypt.

Before arguing with me any further on this (and all I said was that the show was interesting, not that it was correct!) watch the dang show so you know what you're talking about, ok?

*sigh* But how can I do that when I spend all my free time on this lovely website??

Something a little more along the line of Paul before his conversion.

The actual notion that Paul was an orthodox-style Jew before his "conversion" is extremely dubious. He was from Tarsus, a center of Mithraic and astrological philosophy, and his writings reflect this more than once.

Also, it curious that an "orthodox Jew" speaks only Greek to his audience, and quotes only from the somewhat inaccurate Greek version of the Old Testament to Jewish populations.

Curiouser and curiouser.

This movement apparently wasn't popular with the mainstream Jews of the time.

Well, there was a reason for that. Just as there was a reason the "movement" (which was actually several movements and groups) was extremely popular among the Gentiles.

Laterz.

 

[Nightingale]

the show does explain the effects of volcanic ash on a climate. we're not just talking a little bit of dust here.