reyb Posted August 18, 2007 Author Share Posted August 18, 2007 [quote name='abercius24' post='1361030' date='Aug 17 2007, 07:03 AM']I think Mark is trying to emphasize the faith of the Centurion whereas some of the other Four Evangelists emphasize the events that surrounded Christ's death. Church tradition holds that this Centurion is the same one who asked Christ to save his servant's life. Church tradition also holds that this Centurion is also Cornelius from the Acts of the Apostles. If Church tradition is right, then Christ's death would have been a very emotionally and spiritually trying event for the Centurion. Knowing of the controversies surrounding Christ's testimony as claiming to be the Son of God, and then seeing Him die so willingly in the name of that belief, the Centurion would have likely found great inspiration from the Holy Spirit at that moment, leading him to recognize Christ as the Son of God. Furthermore, [color="#0000FF"]the Centurion certainly did not see the curtain of the Holy of Holies torn as that scripture COULD imply[/color]. Gentiles were not allowed beyond the courtyard of the Temple, and the curtain to the Holy of Holies can't be seen unless you are in the Holy Place which is between the courtyard and the Holy of Holies. And Golgatha is just outside of the Temple walls and up a hill, nowhere near the courtyard. I think the event that truly caught the Centurion's attention was the earthquake, ultimately. The timing of such an event with Christ's death would be a distrubing coincidence.[/quote] [indent]May I remind you again, if the Jesus of the bible is referring to historical Jesus and we will obey not to add or subtract anything in the scripture then, there is one conclusion a true seeker of truth can make. It is either 1. the writer of the Book of Matthew is lying or 2. The readers of the book are ‘misinformed’. What do you think?[/indent] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted August 18, 2007 Share Posted August 18, 2007 the roman record is the closest thing to objective evidence for his existance. it records that they executed a man named jesus. other than that, the scriptures are contested as whether they are real. Q gosple andt he spreading of rumors and a new myth, it is claimed. other than the scripture, there is no one who has seen jesus personally who wrote anything, but there are those who wrote who knew people who claimed to have known him. i see no reason to doubt them, but i suppose you never really know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted August 18, 2007 Author Share Posted August 18, 2007 [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1361800' date='Aug 18 2007, 09:51 AM']the roman record is the closest thing to objective evidence for his existance. it records that they executed a man named jesus. other than that, the scriptures are contested as whether they are real. Q gosple andt he spreading of rumors and a new myth, it is claimed. other than the scripture, there is no one who has seen jesus personally who wrote anything, but there are those who wrote who knew people who claimed to have known him. i see no reason to doubt them, but i suppose you never really know.[/quote] [indent]It is written in 2 Cor 11:4-6 [color="#FF0000"]4 For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough. 5 But I do not think I am in the least inferior to those "super-apostles." 6 I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have knowledge. We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way. [/color]NIV[/indent] [indent]Now, if the historical Jesus is the Jesus preached by Apostle Paul, Who is the other Jesus?[/indent] [indent]About your roman record, can I have it? [/indent] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted August 18, 2007 Share Posted August 18, 2007 i'm not saying there's two jesus'. i'm sayig that a jesus did exist. the extent to what he was can be disputed. paul could bte the orchestrator of a false religion. he could have been part of the band wagon. lied about the site he saw of jesus or he could have been schizophrenic and jumped on the jesus myth bandwagon. who knows. i personally think it's taking it too far to say he didn't exist, and too far to even say there's not enough evidence to say there was something extraordinary about jesus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted August 18, 2007 Author Share Posted August 18, 2007 (edited) [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1361969' date='Aug 18 2007, 03:27 PM']i'm not saying there's two jesus'. i'm sayig that a jesus did exist. the extent to what he was can be disputed. paul could bte the orchestrator of a false religion. he could have been part of the band wagon. lied about the site he saw of jesus or he could have been schizophrenic and jumped on the jesus myth bandwagon. who knows. i personally think it's taking it too far to say he didn't exist, and too far to even say there's not enough evidence to say there was something extraordinary about jesus.[/quote] [indent]Yes, I know you did not say ‘There are two Jesus’ but Paul said there is. And it is clear too, you believe that Apostle Paul is referring to historical Jesus as the Christ that is why I asked you ‘Now, if the historical Jesus is the Jesus preached by Apostle Paul, Who is the other Jesus?’ Just to remind you, historical Jesus up to now is just a belief – an interpretation to the scripture even to Apostle Paul’s testimony. You really think that Paul is referring to historical Jesus, Isn’t it? Paul knows two Jesuses but, Why he will chose to become the 'orchestrator of a false religion, lied about the site he saw of jesus and jump on the Jesus myth bandwagon? Why he will ever do it?[/indent] [indent]Do you really, really, really think that Apostle Paul is referring to historical Jesus? Try this and think - who told you about it?[/indent] Edited August 18, 2007 by reyb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 It is written in John 21:25 [indent][color="#FF0000"]25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.[/color] [/indent] According to many preachers, Jesus was 30 years old when he start to preach and he preached about the kingdom of God for 3 years and then he was crucified and died and after 3 days resurrected and go to heaven. Question: Suppose somebody write whatever Jesus did in every second while he is on earth, do you think, ‘even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written’? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starets Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 waitaminute ... about that Josephus passage. I was told it was an interpolation on the basis of it not being in some early manuscripts? has that textual matter been resolved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted December 29, 2007 Author Share Posted December 29, 2007 [quote name='Staretz' post='1439273' date='Dec 28 2007, 05:38 PM']waitaminute ... about that Josephus passage. I was told it was an interpolation on the basis of it not being in some early manuscripts? has that textual matter been resolved?[/quote] [indent]Please read. Just for info. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimonium_Flavianum"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimonium_Flavianum[/url][/indent] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starets Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 thanks, reyb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st-annes Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 All the first-century copies of the book do not have the Jesus passage. All the fourth-century copies of the book do. ...Clearly, something is fishy. And it's not dinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 Testimonium Flavianum The following passage appears in the Greek version of Antiquities of the Jews xviii 3.3, in the translation of William Whiston: 3.3 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. As usual with ancient texts, the surviving sources for this passage are Greek manuscripts, all minuscules, the oldest of which dates from the 9th century. It is likely that these all derive from a single exemplar written in uncial, as is the case with most other ancient Greek texts transmitted to the present in medieval copies, and have come down through the hands of the church. The text of Antiquities appears to have been transmitted in two halves — books 1–10 and books 11–20. But other ad hoc copies of this passage also exist. ------------------------------- The first to cite this passage of Antiquities was Eusebius, writing in about 324, who quotes the passage in essentially the same form. There is another piece - of supposed to be evidence of the existence of historical Jesus - which was mentioned by Eusebius, Bishop of Ceasaria in his writing and he is the first writer who did it (according to the Lost of Books of the bible) - that is, the Epistles of Jesus Christ and Agbarus King of Edessa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 (edited) sorry double post Edited January 6, 2008 by reyb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 (edited) ....sorry double post I will try to scan it or search for a site for our ready reference. Edited January 6, 2008 by reyb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 (edited) [quote name='reyb' post='1348983' date='Aug 3 2007, 08:05 PM'][indent]The subject of all faith, belief and controversies in Christianity and even other religion like Islam is Jesus himself. As some sayings of story- teller, the coming of Jesus is best story ever told in the history of humanity, may I ask, is there really a solid evidence of Jesus’ existence besides the Holy Scripture?[/indent][/quote] My first question is why would you not be satisfied with sacred scripture? The New Testament writings are our earliest sources on the life of Christ, many of them written twenty or thirty years after His resurrection, and are themselves based off much earlier oral traditions and (perhaps) writings. It's impossible to explain the existance of a religion like Christianity without accepting that Jesus of Nazareth walked the earth. Edited January 7, 2008 by mortify Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 (edited) rey b whats up ? what paul is talking about is apostles precahing another jesus not found in the bible. read all the scripture around this, he talks about preaching without a charge. as in saying the gospel should be spread freely and not as a way to make money. he calls these apostles "super apostles" because in their own mind they regard themselfes more superior then the apostle paul. he even goes as far as to say do not be fooled for even satan masquaredes around as an angel of light. so it is no suprise that his ministers do the same also. so by them wanting to get rich and loveing the world they have come along and preached another jesus. a jesus who wants you to be rich and a jesus that is going to come back and rapture you while leaving others behind. a lot of these false teachers are anti catholic and claim the catholic church is the beast of revelations. paul sums up these SUPER apostles by saying their end fate will corilate to their deeds. i didnt quote the scripture now but i can find it and post it. i studied this a while back. so basically paul is refering to apostles who see the gospel as a way to become rich and by doing so they preach another jesus then the jesus of the bible. Godbless p.s. look around today, there is plenty of false teachers teaching a lot of false doctrine Edited January 7, 2008 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts