Well, after breaking 2000 comments on the previous thread, I think it’s time to move to a new one. Feel free to continue the conversation here.
Also, I want to make a note about future posts. The tone on this blog for the last month or so has been decidedly different than what it used to be. While that’s definitely made things interesting, I’d like to move back to a tone more in line with the way things used to be. So going forward, I want the comments on all new posts to remain civil. We can all make our points, and I expect to see a wide range of opinions. But I don’t want to get into name-calling and bashing when we can’t all agree on particular issues. Let’s try to stay focused on the points and not get side-tracked with personal stuff. Let’s also keep each comment substantive so we don’t rack up so many comments in such a short period of time that it’s hard for everyone to keep track.
If you don’t feel like you can participate within those guidelines, then feel free to continue posting within this thread (and any future “Kathy” threads, if they’re needed), because I won’t be enforcing any guidelines here. But if you want to comment on any other posts, you’ll need to abide by the rules I just laid out. Otherwise, your comment will be subject to deletion, and after a warning, you might find yourself banned from at least that thread, if not the entire blog.
If there are any questions, let me know.
Thanks
Finding Truth 
“Worth considering…..”
Check your list. You missed two archaeological studies including one peer reviewed that says it was occupied in the first century.
You know the same two you couldn’t deal with from the last thread. Same ones 🙂
Never let a peer reviewed piece of evidence get in the way of your dogma eh Ark?
LikeLike
Question Ark,
* No ancient historians or geographers mention Nazareth before the beginning of the fourth century
* Nazareth is not mentioned in the Old Testament, the Talmud, nor in the Apocrypha and it does not appear in any early rabbinic literature.
* Nazareth was not included in the list of settlements of the tribes of Zebulun (Joshua 19:10-16) which mentions twelve towns and six villages
* Nazareth is not included among the 45 cities of Galilee that were mentioned by Josephus (37AD-100AD).
* Nazareth is also missing from the 63 towns of Galilee mentioned in the Talmud.
Is it your contention/opinion, then, that the recipients of the gospel of Matthew understood the reference to Jesus coming from Nazareth in a different way? Like possibly that he was a Nazarite, which is something completely different? Or are you of the opinion Jesus just didn’t exist?
Is it possible that the *ahem* original documents might have said something a little different that got translated erroneously? I suppose so since we don’t have the original documents to compare it to.
LikeLike
@Ark,
I guess I’m just thinking that the first century recipients of that gospel (at least some of them) would have known if Nazareth existed or not?
LikeLike
““William.. here’s a direct question.. meaning I’d ESPECIALLY like an answer.. do you understand what “weighing evidence” means?” – kathy
yes, i believe i do. Do you?”
So, just to be clear.. when you “weigh” the evidence for God being real and santa being real, you feel that both weigh the same… correct?”
Hats off to you kathy. After his whole using mentally handicapped little girls as insults and claiming its no big deal i don’t even know why you bother with William. I’ve never seen him make a good point so I just skip over his posts as best as I can. Mind you true enough he is not likely to get into trouble like Arch insisting a mountain is somewhere its not but thats only because he just about never refers to or links to any evidence.
of course they are all at that point so save the time (and mine checking up on you 🙂 – and let them go back to what they really want out of this blog – self affirmation
LikeLike
I’m still waiting for the apologists to produce this physically resurrected Jesus they keep talking about. I’m also waiting for them to openly demonstrate the true believer’s power to cure sick people via prayer. Strange how they keep ignoring those requests. 😉
LikeLike
On a brighter note…
Nick’s alexa rating now stands at 17,896,138—that’s up 1,300,943 from a month ago, and 2.2 million from three months ago. Congrats on your rising popularity in the atheist nexis.
LikeLike
“Is it your contention/opinion, then, that the recipients of the gospel of Matthew understood the reference to Jesus coming from Nazareth in a different way? Like possibly that he was a Nazarite, which is something completely different? ”
Most bible scholars see it as a reference to Isaiah 11 and the Etymological origins of the word nazareth which you can miss if you just read English
http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/matthew-2-23.html
Ark’s previous barf of my beliefs of Matthew’s mention of it was just a hand wave. We never got into that but the actual existence of the city in the first century attested by at least two recent finds.
LikeLike
“Congrats on your rising popularity in the atheist nexis”
LOl I have a site I have done no promotion on built six months ago that now sits at
1,185,321
when you guys move up 16 million spots call me and we can do lunch. 🙂 🙂
P.S. since the average page views is two pages you should all pay Kathy and I. they aren’t reading much besides threads we are in
LikeLike
@Mike,
I was just reading that here:
http://www.crivoice.org/branch.html
Because the verse in Matthew – as it’s read in English – could still be problematic because there’s no OT prediction of the Messiah coming from Nazareth. And while I accept this as a plausible explanation of the verse I still have some question about it:
In Hebrew, the word “branch” is netzer, actually only three consonantal letters: NZR. Note that the town NaZaReth contains the same three primary letters (plus an ending often attached to nouns). In the Aramaic form of Nazareth, (Aramaic was the common language spoken by most Israelites after the exile; some have suggested that the entire book of Matthew was originally written in Aramaic rather than Greek), it comes very close in sound to the Hebrew word for “branch.”
Like why would Matthew write something that sounds like the Hebrew word for branch if he was writing in Greek to a Greek-speaking audience who possibly, maybe even likely didn’t speak Ancient Hebrew? Who were likely using the Greek translation of the Septuagent?
LikeLike
Further, Bratcher goes on to say:
What all of this suggests is that it is very unlikely that Isaiah in 700 BC, or Jeremiah in 600 BC, or Zechariah in 520 BC had in mind the city of Nazareth as they talked about the Branch. They were not predicting anything about the city of Nazareth.
*Emphasis mine
It doesn’t seem a certain interpretation. The words “suggests that it is very unlikely” don’t make this a certain interpretation. I’m not suggesting that it’s a wrong interpretation; just that it’s possible that it is.
LikeLike
*I’m not suggesting*
I meant to say: I’m not insisting…
LikeLike
Even if you don’t believe there is a Creator in this universe, I think you have to admit, this world is amazing
Here’s to civil conversing 🙂
night!
LikeLike
Kathy, didn’t I tell you Mike would be along shortly, to tell you what to think?
Mikey, I gave you the GPS coordinates for Mt. Precipice and for Nazareth – these coordinates are used by airlines and oceanliners the world over, to establish global positioning. I have no evidence that your finding is any more accurate than my own. Even taking your distance as being correct, for which, again, I have no evidence, what angry mob is going to walk a man 45 minutes down a dusty road, just to throw him off a cliff – the line was bogus, Luke should never have written it, but he did, you’re stuck with it, and you’re trying to make it fit the facts – sorry Drucilla, the shoe don’t fit your fat foot.
Oh, and in those days, Nazareth, if it existed, never had more than 200 inhabitants, and that number could be fit into the average apartment complex, and here you are, trying to say that the cliff could be even closer, depending upon where they began, whether in beautiful downtown Nazareth, or in the suburbs of a population-200 hamlet.
As for Ark’s claim that Nazareth didn’t exist during the time that Yeshua allegedly lived, there are others who think that as well – Frank Zindler, for example, who wrote, Where Jesus Never Walked.
In the Strong’s Interpretation of Mat 26:71 the writer uses Ναζωραῖος which is Greek for “Nazarite”. Nazirite is a ancient Jewish vow not a city.
But you’re the great biblical expert Mikey, so draw upon your vast Google expertise and answer a question for me if you will – Matthew 2:23 relates: “And he (Jesus) came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets.” Matt was really big on trying to prove that old Yesh was the prophesied Messiah, no matter HOW far he had to stretch the truth!
Which prophets were those, Mikey? Can you show me the scripture from the OT that speaks of the Messiah living in or coming from Nazareth? Can you find Nazareth mentioned ANYwhere in the OT? If so, Book, Chapter and verse, please – thank you —
(Practicing for Nate’s new guidelines, gotta get in shape – as of now, I’m up to 25 pleases” and “thank you‘s per day and I’m working my way up to 50! Cutting WAY back on the FU’s and still trying to get that middle finger under control!)
Sing it with me, Mikey – you know the tune: ♫The Earth Is Flat, This Much I Know / For the Bible Tells Me So –♪
LikeLike
“The burden of proof remains on the theist.”
A) as an atheistic truism that isn’t supported by sound logic but is more of a beg than anything else – since a burden represents a priori.
B) You claim to have been Christians so why would there be a burden against theism in your minds as Christians? ” – mike
A) I am not too sure what you’re saying here, but Christians state that they have the truth and their book of miraculous events and stories of the divine are absolute truth. What is illogical about asking someone of this position to list why they believe and why others should believe that this book, of all the countless books in the world, is the only book with divinely guided truth?
B) I was once a Christian. I was baptized at the age of 10 for the remission of my sins after confessing that I believed Jesus was the son of god. I prayed, I studied, and I worshipped for many years following – a true believer, unwavering until I became disenchanted with my particular denomination or those in it. They made claims about following the bible strictly, but I soon found that they were not consistent. I was disappointed with their responses when I tried speaking with them on those issues.
My particular denomination was the type that thought all others were wrong, that they didn’t follow the bible correctly and they routinely taught classes and preached sermons making those points. I think maybe my dissatisfaction and distrust with my particular denomination paved the way for me to question the bible when I was asked to by someone who actually showed me problems that I couldn’t answer or explain. I didn’t turn non-believer right away, but after more study and research on those issues and after finding more, I realized that I had never come to the issue of the bible unbiased or objectively.
I was raised in family and around people that all believed in god and the bible. I was indoctrinated from a young age that god was real and that the bible was his perfect word, and that fools didn’t believe in god, but wise people did. Elfish people rejected god and the bible, but righteous and honest people accepted both… It wasn’t until I was much older that I finally realized I was living the “emperor’s new clothes…”
I started out with a belief in the bible. And when I spoke to others about the bible, in my mind it was true even if I didn’t understand things like Matthew 24 reading like the end was supposed to come in the 1st century… yet, when I spoke about other religions, I’d dismiss them right away without reading their books, without really trying to see if something I heard regarding it was taken out of context or not… I never gave them an equal chance with the bible. The bible was right, and they were wrong. That was behaving with bias.
Now, I take the bible like all books, it makes very bold claims about angels, god, demons, healings, flying things, supernatural events, and people raising from the dead. I don’t believe other books or people when they make these claims, do you? And when I see things that certainly look like contradictions in the bible or in any book, I don’t assume there must be a way that they’re really not a contradiction – again, if we can do that, I think any contradiction can be “resolved” unless the stories we’re given account for every half second of time and every minute detail, but I think isn’t realistic or consistent with how we deal with anything else.
“I think this illustrates the bias to which Kathy refers. If anything the question of theism should be totally neutral. After all how do you find truth if you set up a previous burden against a position? You mentioned being skeptical but Truth is
I don’t think I have EVER met a skeptic
1. a person inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions.
and you lot certainly don’t qualify. What I see being called skeptical is being distrustful of one side So you might as well say theists are skeptical ….of the other side.” – mike
I wouldn’t say I’m a skeptical person. although I am skeptical of claims that appear to be contrary to the natural events and orders that we all witness, feel, and otherwise experience.
So if someone told me that they saw a deer in the woods with one antler broken off, I wouldn’t be skeptical of that even though I’ve never seen it. I know that deer are real and can imagine how an antler could be broken.
But if someone told me they saw a sasquatch in the woods, I would be skeptical of that claim, because I’ve never seen one nor have I seen any convincing evidence that bigfoot exists. I would need to see more than a hair or a foot-mold to be convinced – hairs could come from anywhere and foot-molds can be faked. The claim is so huge and so outside anything I know or have experienced, it would require a lot of strong evidence if not all out indisputable proof.
So when a book, written by men who claim that an invisible god told them to write their book, which was verified by miracles that were claimed to have taken place thousands of years ago by the same authors, but also that these miracles don’t happen anymore, in a world with many, may religions, with many or all of the same claims, which are all so outside anything I have ever experienced, and in a time when many of the things once thought to be supernatural are now known to be quite natural, then I do not view that as “neutral” nor do I view it as biased to reject one along with all the others when no exceptional evidence has been provided.
But this is just my perspective. I think it makes sense, but maybe it does not. It is something I think about often.
LikeLike
“Because the verse in Matthew – as it’s read in English – could still be problematic because there’s no OT prediction of the Messiah coming from Nazareth.”
Not sure I am understanding you. Matthew doesn’t say theres a prophecy he would come from Nazareth but what he would be called. If being born there ended up with people calling him close to that name then it would help that being the name (the branch) they called him
“Like why would Matthew write something that sounds like the Hebrew word for branch if he was writing in Greek to a Greek-speaking audience who possibly, maybe even likely didn’t speak Ancient Hebrew? ”
If he were referring to a hebrew word he’d still have to be faithful to use the Greek usage equivalent plus there are those that believe Gospels were written in Hebrew originally too. It pretty clear of all the gospels Matthew is the most written for jews ad as the dead sea scrolls attest Hebrew was very much still in use (as well as greek and aramaic)
Still…good questions
LikeLike
LOl I have a site I have done no promotion on built six months ago that now sits at 1,185,321
Another assertion unaccompanied by evidence.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens
LikeLike
“LOl I have a site I have done no promotion on built six months ago that now sits at
1,185,321
when you guys move up 16 million spots call me and we can do lunch. 🙂 🙂
P.S. since the average page views is two pages you should all pay Kathy and I. they aren’t reading much besides threads we are in”
happy for your popularity. Popularity was something that always seems fickle and petty to me, but i’m sure there is some value there.
What was the bible said, “narrow is the way and few there be that find it…”
LikeLike
“Mikey, I gave you the GPS coordinates for Mt. Precipice and for Nazareth – these coordinates are used by airlines and oceanliners the world over, to establish global positioning. I have no evidence that your finding is any more accurate than my own. ”
Oh give me a break. its right there in a google map search (and if you need some assistance online you can see where the co-ordinates are as well). You are embarrassing yourself again with that denial of the obvious in another thread? You really think thats better than just admitting you were wrong? Just because its me that pointed it out and you don;t want to lose face?
Sheeesh…what a totally dishonest soul.
“Even taking your distance as being correct, for which, again, I have no evidence, what angry mob is going to walk a man 45 minutes down a dusty road,”
More lies. My numbers are not 45 minutes. That was Rata measuring from within the present city. The text said they were already outside of it.
I can’t even bother reading the rest of your post. its apparently all nonsense to hand wave from being wrong about the location of the “mount”.
LikeLike
I know I said night!
But I can’t sleep, so I decided to ask a question instead
William,
Although some people may view that beliefs can move on a spectrum, there are certain core beliefs that don’t follow this, in the sense that you either believe them or you don’t.
For example, I believe in Jesus, but I don’t understand all of the symbols regarding the book of Revelation, so am remain reserved on certain things.
I just wanted to ask, how did people at your church treat you after you left the church?
LikeLike
Portal,
let me say that when i was a believer I didnt think i understood everything either – revelation is a good example.
even now, I dont understand everything about my phone, but i can assure you, I dont stop believing my phone is real.
same with physics, math, etc… – quite a long list.
so, finding something difficult to understand isnt my criteria for abandoning belief.
Again, somethings seem to easier to believe than other. I dont believe that Muhammad road a flying horse and wouldnt – regardless of who told me about it.
But to your question, the people of my church seem to be very similar to the ones that were in nate’s church – they shun disbelievers and while they routinely say that they welcome questions and discussion, what the evidently mean is that they will tel what you should believe and if you dont, they know you’re a dishonest or prideful sinner who has decide to serve te devil instead of god.
LikeLike
and somethings are easier to dismiss than others. Strange symbolism didnt do it for me, what did were things that look more like 2+2=18 – things that i can understand, but dont understand how or why the bible portrayed them wrong if it was perfect and all knowing…
LikeLike
TB still hasn’t explained why a small hamlet of people intimately familiar with the circumstances of Jesus’ birth and promised messiah-ship would become outraged by his teachings.
LikeLike
If he were referring to a hebrew word he’d still have to be faithful to use the Greek usage equivalent plus there are those that believe Gospels were written in Hebrew originally too. It pretty clear of all the gospels Matthew is the most written for jews ad as the dead sea scrolls attest Hebrew was very much still in use (as well as greek and aramaic)
I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. Are you saying that the author used the Greek word that sounded like the Hebrew word for branch? Why would he do that if he’s trying to make a parallel to Jesus being a “branch, shoot of Jesse”. If these are Greek-speaking people who might not have known Hebrew wouldn’t it make more sense to use the Greek word for branch? Not the Greek word that sounded like the Hebrew word? I understand that some people believe that Matthew was written in Hebrew. What evidence is there of that aside from it most likely being written for Jews? Greek was the most widely used language, even among the Jews, at the time right? And there were Jews who had lost there primary language by that point? And it seems that more scholars believe this was written to a primarily Greek-speaking sector?
LikeLike
Ron, RE: “I’m also waiting for them to openly demonstrate the true believer’s power to cure sick people via prayer.” – I’m still waiting to hear Mike tell us that he has cured that poor little girl he keeps using to prop himself up.
LikeLike
“LOl I have a site I have done no promotion on built six months ago that now sits at 1,185,321
Another assertion unaccompanied by evidence.”
Anther Fact I know that you don’t.
If you really think its that hard to have a site ranked 1.1 millionth all I need do is laugh.
LikeLike