General Jesus Christ grave is in India
- Thread starter touch
- Start date
Not they weren't. Actually we're not sure when they were written but John was probably the latest and written while he was still alive. Your information is very outdated.
Matthew was probably the first and written around 57-60 AD possibly earlier if you believe it was written in aremeic and later translated to greek. We now know Luke was written about the same time as Paul's letters which would be first century documents.
Also, some of the oldest gospel texts from from ethiopia date back to 500 ad and were translated from older text and say exactly what our gospels say today so, not twisted and or rewritten.
I can go on.
Yeah, but that kid talked back. Never put his blocks away, stayed up too late. He wasn't missed.
He is right though. Your posts read like something from the dawn of the Internet when people thought they suddenly had access to this groundbreaking new information.
There is zero question the new testament was written in the first century by people who had either known Jesus personally or were very close and had access to someone who did (Luke, for example).
There is actually zero question that entire statement is 100% false.
Literally no one knows who physically wrote ANY of the NT.
And the earliest was 90 ce, 50 years after Yeshuah's death by a scribe on a parchment who'd never met him, being words arrtributed to John, who we know nothing about OTHER than 5 books attributed to him.
And those 5 are the most gnostic allowed in the canon by the Romans.
Imagine reading the canon & being raised on it, 40 years deep without John, 123 John & Revelation.
Then someone unearths them and adds them to his church.
He would've been slaughtered on Day 1 for its content.
Based on what
Here's a couple good one's from my rather large collection
As a collective, with all sayings attributed to Jesus, with proper translation & no "church"(government) involment, Yeshuah, or "Jesus"(Iesus) was on a more probable than not basis closer to a reincarnatist guru.
AAlthough according to Ammon Hillman, he was a trafficker.
Since the disciples were basically kids, his classicist background cannot be discounted as a translator.
The Roman church installed previous Roman & Greek pagan mythologies into "Christianity", which is why its a COMPLETELY different religion century to century.
As a collective, with all sayings attributed to Jesus, with proper translation & no "church"(government) involment, Yeshuah, or "Jesus"(Iesus) was on a more probable than not basis closer to a reincarnatist guru.
AAlthough according to Ammon Hillman, he was a trafficker.
Since the disciples were basically kids, his classicist background cannot be discounted as a translator.
The Roman church installed previous Roman & Greek pagan mythologies into "Christianity", which is why its a COMPLETELY different religion century to century.
Explain?
The real one was crucified by Hebrews, and they still seethe about it to this day.
Why should these authors be trusted
There is a reason the Council of Nicea rejected those books from the official Bible and labeled them apocryphal. Most were written well after the Gospels when nobody who actually knew Jesus was still alive.
Based on what standard? Historians are pretty agreed that Paul wrote his epistles or at least most of them. Admitting this just puts you in line academically, it doesn't make you a person of faith.
No they don't.
They believe he wrote the ORIGINALS of many of them, not what has been found.
That doesn't mean he didn't write originals, just they haven't been found, or have eroded/destroyed/lost.
More to the point regarding Paul, he only met Yeshuah in his dreams, purportedly.
And Paul disgreed with Peter, and others of course.
And Paul's teachings are, as many scholars agree, different in spirit than the gospels.
If one separated all these books, Paul would have his own religion.
Only putting them together as one work is anyone forced to reconcile the differences.
And Paul disgreed with Peter, and others of course.
And Paul's teachings are, as many scholars agree, different in spirit than the gospels.
If one separated all these books, Paul would have his own religion.
Only putting them together as one work is anyone forced to reconcile the differences.
What did they disagree about
BTW, whoever cares to really deep dive any of this, biblical studies etc., ...be warned.
I'm lucky to be alive through my deconstruction, as is written "men's hearts will fail them...", and "a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways", and "there is a way that seems right to a man, the end thereof is death".
Jordan Peterson's statements in one of his books helped me with a psychological barrier I had to put up, saying(paraphrasing) "itaking out a belief system without something to replace it with is a terrible idea."
Generally people as they learn more will jump religions.
Logically many go back to the beginning(Hebrew), then may switch to Messianic, preterism, partial preterism, Judaism or Jehovas Witness.
Oronically some came to my door after the first response to thos thread this morning.
They tucked tail & literally ran away when I attempted to share original Hebrew translations from the Tanack.
Which of course someone seeking truth should not be threatened by.
Fear drives their belief, & that belief is in belief itself, or feelings they attribute to the Holy Spirit.
Facts have nothing to do with it.
The one area of wisdom most seem to lack on this is humankindness.
Sensitivity should be a pinnacle attribute for everyone surrounding most religions, but pride overtakes them, and me.
I'm trying daily to get better with this.
I'm lucky to be alive through my deconstruction, as is written "men's hearts will fail them...", and "a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways", and "there is a way that seems right to a man, the end thereof is death".
Jordan Peterson's statements in one of his books helped me with a psychological barrier I had to put up, saying(paraphrasing) "itaking out a belief system without something to replace it with is a terrible idea."
Generally people as they learn more will jump religions.
Logically many go back to the beginning(Hebrew), then may switch to Messianic, preterism, partial preterism, Judaism or Jehovas Witness.
Oronically some came to my door after the first response to thos thread this morning.
They tucked tail & literally ran away when I attempted to share original Hebrew translations from the Tanack.
Which of course someone seeking truth should not be threatened by.
Fear drives their belief, & that belief is in belief itself, or feelings they attribute to the Holy Spirit.
Facts have nothing to do with it.
The one area of wisdom most seem to lack on this is humankindness.
Sensitivity should be a pinnacle attribute for everyone surrounding most religions, but pride overtakes them, and me.
I'm trying daily to get better with this.
A bunch.
In letters to Timothy Paul laid down laws, basically, about piety & propriety, particularly in regards to women.
And many around Paul felt the laws and prophecy had already been fulfilled, ala full/partial preterism, and they called each other heritics.
In prophecy the messiah(maschiac) would end all confusion.
Confusion still abounds today like it did then.
How about say five examples of what Peter and Paul disagreed about