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
Seriously Arch! Anybody who has dedicated their whole life to the study of the scriptures and history of the time has some preconceived idea that they are trying to prove. They aren’t anymore trust worthy than Kathy’s “consensus”. Why do people believe that the scriptures were penned in Greek? Because the oldest manuscript fragment we have is greek, so that means it must have been greek. That doesn’t make any sense. Because church fathers that lived 3 hundred years later said it was greek, they must be right? Use your big mensa brain for a moment please Arch. What was the language of the day? Is it likely that poor fishermen and carpenters were bilingual?
LikeLike
How about Josephus? He lived at the time in question, and was educated. He says that the language was Aramaic, and that Jews did not learn to speak greek. He comments in multiple places on this, and how hard it was for him to try and learn the language for translation purposes.
There is no denying that aramaic was the language of Yahusha
LikeLike
“You are incorrect sir, and it wasn’t Kathy that said that.” – First of all (gotta maintain my MENSA standing), contrary to consensus, Kathy IS human, not a “thing” and consequently deserves to be called a “who,” rather than a “that.” Your sentence should have read, “it wasn’t Kathy who said that.”
Secondly, “Whachoo talkin’ ’bout, Willis?” – who is incorrect, and Kathy didn’t say what?!
LikeLike
Interesting you would say that Kathy, as all four gospels were written in Greek.
I’m sure she would agree with you, but it was I WHO said that.
Thanks for the English lesson, it was never my strong suit
LikeLike
“Anybody who has dedicated their whole life to the study of the scriptures and history of the time has some preconceived idea that they are trying to prove.” – As I’ve pointed out repeatedly (and no, I honestly don’t expect you to have read through these thousands of comments, that would be cruel and unusual punishment), objective scholars put pieces of evidence together until they form a picture, where subjective theists, like yourself and Kathy, begin with a picture, then toss out any pieces of evidence that don’t fit that image.
“Why do people believe that the scriptures were penned in Greek? Because the oldest manuscript fragment we have is greek, so that means it must have been greek. That doesn’t make any sense. Because church fathers that lived 3 hundred years later said it was greek, they must be right?” – Look to history, my child – since Alexander conquered the Levant in 300 BCE, Greek became the lengua franca of the time. All of the educated were fluent in Greek, Paul included.
However, when you ask, “What was the language of the day? Is it likely that poor fishermen and carpenters were bilingual?“, some may have, if their livelihood depended on selling products or services to those whose language was Greek, but even those would have been illiterate, as was 97% of the country, and incapable of writing it. Still more evidence that the Gospels weren’t written by those who lived them.
LikeLike
I’m sure Paul did speak Greek, but I wasn’t talking about him, which you would know if you had read my previous comment. And you are incorrect again, as usual. It is quite obvious that people like israel finklestein, and yourself are just as guilty as you assume Kathy and I are.
Why else would you continue to use camels, and rabbits chewing the cud, when you know as well as I, that this info is out of date and long disproven.
Because Israel has an agenda, and the truth isn’t part of it.
LikeLike
Just to clarify, are you saying that aramaic was not the language of the Jews in the first century?
LikeLike
“There is no denying that aramaic was the language of Yahusha” – Oh, absolutely, I wouldn’t argue that with you for a minute. (Hard to believe we agree on something –)
“How about Josephus? He lived at the time in question, and was educated.” – what about him?
Josephus wasn’t born until seven years after the alleged crucifiction, and didn’t write his Antiquities until the year 93. In this, he included the following account:
This, from josephus.org:
It goes on to say:
LikeLike
“I’m sure she would agree with you, but it was I WHO said that.” – My apologies, it would appear that I was
wro– not entirely correct.LikeLike
That’s very nice Arch, thank you for that! It is also not relevant in any way to what I said. I was not arguing that josephus believed in Yahusha, but that the language was Aramaic. Which it was. The fact that he was born in 37 is also irrelevant, unless you are trying to say there was a language change.
LikeLike
And you are incorrect again, as usual – I’ve never mentioned “rabbits chewing cuds”! Are you saying that contrary to consensus, which you, yourself, claim is so reliable, that you have evidence that the camel had been domesticated as early as 2300 BCE? I would LOVE to see THAT evidence!
LikeLike
“Just to clarify, are you saying that aramaic was not the language of the Jews in the first century? – not at all, there was a complete language change among the Jews returning from the Babylonian captivity. Then, after the Grecian conquest of the Levant in 300 BCE, travel restrictions for the Jews were lifted, due to Alexander’s more liberal policies of government, and the Jews were free to travel. The wealthy elite quickly recognized the benefits of speaking Greek, the language of the conquerors, and many sent their children to be educated in Greek schools.
The average – say, “blue-collar worker,” – however, would be entirely ignorant of it, further proof that none of the apostles wrote anything in Greek.
LikeLike
Laurie,
The point is that even theologians representing the world’s leading Christian organization do not support Kathy’s contention that the current copies of the gospels bear the titles of their respective authors. Moreover, there are no extant Aramaic or Hebrew copies (assuming there ever were any to begin with) of those gospels available to make a comparison.
LikeLike
That is true Ron, but my point was that the Catholic encyclopedia is not something that should be used as evidence, since they are well known for concealing things, and twisting scriptures to fit there Pauline religion.
I do not believe that the consensus is correct on MOST occasions Arch, obviously you remember very little about our previous discussions.
LikeLike
“Arch, obviously you remember very little about our previous discussions.” – Surely you jest – I treasure each and every word ever laid down by your dainty, flying fingers, and keep them tucked away, tied with a pink satin ribbon, in my heart of hearts.
LikeLike
I can’t continue this discussion right now, but remind me about the camels later and I will furnish evidence about that and proof that finklestein is more interested in discrediting the bible than making real archeological finds to uncover our past. Bye for now
LikeLike
Laurie,
I understand your point, but it’s a side argument to what was originally being discussed and further weakens your case. Because casting aspersions on the teachings of other denominations and highlighting the lack of unity amongst those professing themselves Christians presents a strong argument against consensus, don’t you think?
LikeLike
Ron,
I do not agree with the majority. Also, I am not casting aspersions on other denominations, as I am not a Christian myself.
I simply meant that we should use info from more scholarly sources than that of the Catholic church or anyone else that is deliberately concealing the truth as they are.
LikeLike
Let me explain that again… it sounds as though you think I am a Christian trying to prove Christianity, and speaking negatively about another denomination is counterproductive to my case. I am not trying to prove Christianity, but I do agree with Kathy that the scriptures are inspired. Hope that clarifies some things
LikeLike
@ Laurie,
You said:
Let me explain that again… it sounds as though you think I am a Christian trying to prove Christianity, and speaking negatively about another denomination is counterproductive to my case.
Do you mind my asking what religion and/or spirituality you adhere to?
LikeLike
If I had to put a label on it, I guess I would consider myself Jewish. I believe in the Torah and do accept the entire bible as inspired, but I believe Paul to be the false apostle of revelation 2, Deuteronomy 13, as well as the ravenous wolf of genesis 49.
I believe that Yahusha was the mashiach, but he was Jewish, and Christianity is a product of Paul and the blinding light aka Lucifer that met him in the wilderness and desert. Interesting that Paul was blinded by serpent scales covering his eyes
LikeLike
Arch,
”
Another example of liberal “reasoning” that doesn’t make sense. How does medical knowledge prove God DIDN’T “do it”? It doesn’t.. in any way.
”
Kathy, I’d like to think as highly of you as possible – please quit trying to convince me that you’re as stupid as the above remark would indicate. I guess the age of reason hasn’t yet quite reached your neighborhood.”
It’s not me Arch, it’s clearly YOU. All you have to do is explain how understanding the medical process proves God wasn’t involved. And, we all see that you FAILED to do that. Instead you chose to insult me.. nothing new.. you’re a liberal after all.. you’ve got to take it out on someone.
LikeLike
Laurie,
“Kathy,
I hate to say it, but you are never going get anyone here to agree with you.”
I know you are right.. but one can hope..
ps, welcome! There’s been a terrible void with Mike gone.
You seem very knowledgeable, I hope to learn from you as I did from him.
LikeLike
Arch,
“Oh sigh! I never denied that Jesus’ teachings weren’t new/ different. I am stating the FACT that Jesus would NEVER be a liberal today, adhering to your destructive anti God views.~me
And I am stating the FACT that (if he ever existed) your Yeshua was crucified by Conservatives like you, because he was a Liberal.”
Jesus’ crucifixion had nothing to do with politics. He was not a “liberal” and the Jews were not “conservatives”. Your point failed.. miserably.. Jesus was not a “liberal”. Again, He would NEVER support what liberals today support, the things that make them liberals. Please get a clue.
LikeLike
Arch,
““The Marxist philosophy is a govt. based philosophy.” – clearly, you have been told what to think for so long that you’ve forgotten how to do so on your own and can’t recognize a chain of events, when one is presented to you. First came the philosophy, written down by Karl Marx – it wasn’t until many years later that the Russian government adopted it. Eggs come first, then chickens.”
I don’t get why this matters. It changes nothing that I stated.
LikeLike