What did Jesus Sacrifice?

[Neo Deist]

Many doubted the existence of Roman ruler Pontius Pilate as there was no historical record of him. In 1961 the name of Pontius Pilate was found in an inscription in the ruins of a Roman theater at Caesarea.

In Luke’s Gospel, we read that John the Baptizer began his ministry “when . . . Lysanias was district ruler of Abilene.” (Luke 3:1) Some doubted that statement because Josephus mentioned a Lysanias who ruled Abilene and who died in 34 B.C.E., long before the birth of John. However, archaeologists have uncovered an inscription in Abilene mentioning another Lysanias who was tetrarch (district ruler) during the reign of Tiberius, who was ruling as Caesar in Rome when John began his ministry.This could easily have been the Lysanias to whom Luke was referring.

In Acts 13:7 we read that Paul and Barnabas were sent to do missionary work in Cyprus and there met up with a proconsul named Sergius Paulus, “an intelligent man.” In the middle of the 19th century, excavations in Cyprus uncovered an inscription dating from 55 C.E. that mentions this very man. Of this, archaeologist G. Ernest Wright says: “It is the one reference we have to this proconsul outside the Bible and it is interesting that Luke gives us correctly his name and title."

When he was in Athens, Paul said he had observed an altar that was dedicated “To an Unknown God.” (Acts 17:23) Altars dedicated in Latin to anonymous gods have been discovered in parts of the territory of the Roman Empire. One was found in Pergamum with the inscription written in Greek, as would have been the case in Athens.

Later, while in Ephesus, Paul was violently opposed by silversmiths, whose income was derived from making shrines and images of the goddess Artemis. Ephesus was referred to as “the temple keeper of the great Artemis.” (Acts 19:35) In harmony with this, a number of terra-cotta and marble figurines of Artemis have been discovered at the site of ancient Ephesus. During the last century, the remains of the huge temple itself were excavated.

I repeat the question: what archaeological evidence supports Jesus? The Bible is not said evidence.

I'll answer the question and save you the time and effort of writing some long winded, spin job of a reply...

There's not any.

 

[Neo Deist]

Lets see what modern day scholars say about the NWT and its accuracy then, here are just some of many;

ALLEN WIKGREN: (Allen Wikgren was on the New Revised Standard Version committee, as well as on the committee which produced the UBS Greek text). "Independent readings of merit often occur in other modern speech versions, such as...the Jehovah's Witnesses edition of the New Testament(1950)." (The Interpreter's Bible, 1952 Vol. 1 page 99)

BENJAMIN KEDAR: (Benjamin Kedar is a professor of Hebrew in Israel). "In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavour to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew...Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translation. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain."

S. MACLEAN GILMORE: "In 1950 the Jehovah's Witnesses published their New World Translation of the New Testament, and the preparation of the New World Old Testament is now far advanced. The New Testament edition was made by a committee...that possessed an unusual competence in Greek." (The Andover Newton Quarterly, September 1966, Vol 7, #1 page 25, 26) 5. C. HOUTMAN: Mr. Houtman notes that on the point of translator bias. "the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses can survive the scrutiny of criticism." (Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift, [Dutch Theological Magazines] 38 1984, page 279-280)

JASON BEDUHN: (Jason Beduhn teaches at the University of Indiana). "I have just recently completed teaching a course for the Religious Studies Department of Indiana University, Bloomington, ...This is primarily a course in the Gospels. Your help came in the form of copies of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures which my students used as one of the textbooks for the class. These small volumes were invaluable to the course and very popular with my students...Simply put, it is the best interlinear New Testament available. I am a trained scholar of the Bible, familiar with the texts and tools in use in modern biblical studies, and by the way, not a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses. But I know a quality publication when I see one, and your 'New World Bible Translation Committee' has done its job well. Your interlinear English rendering is accurate and consistent to an extreme that forces the reader to come to terms with the linguistic, cultural, and conceptual gaps between the Greek-speaking world and our own. Your 'New World Translation' is a high quality, literal translation that avoids traditional glosses in its faithfulness to the Greek. It is, in many ways, superior to the most successful translations in use today." The Harper Collins Bible Dictionary calls it one of the "major translations of the Bible into English," along with the Knox translation, the Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible and the New English Bible. p. 292

Give their full impressions, not your cherry picked version. You can find them here: http://www.forananswer.org/Top_JW/Scholars and NWT.htm

Jason Beduhn also said, "the introduction of the name "Jehovah" into the New Testament 237 times was "not accurate translation by the most basic principle of accuracy", and that it "violate accuracy in favor of denominationally preferred expressions for God"

Benjamin Kedar (who did not major in Hebrew) wrote, "A translation is bound to be a compromise, and as such it's details are open to criticism; this applies to the NWT too. In the portion corresponding to the Hebrew Bible, however, I have never come upon an obviously erroneous rendition which would find it's explanation in a dogmatic bias."

The problem is that no one really questions the NWT on the Hebrew OT, as most English Bibles have it more or less fairly accurate. It is the Greek NT that comes into question, and that is where the NWT fails.

In a rebuttle to Kedar, H.H.Rowley wrote, "The translation [NWT - NT] is marked by a wooden literalism which will only exasperate any intelligent reader - if such it finds - and instead of showing reverence for the Bible which the translators profess, it is an insult to the Word of God."

 

[Kenny]

I repeat the question: what archaeological evidence supports Jesus? The Bible is not said evidence.

I'll answer the question and save you the time and effort of writing some long winded, spin job of a reply...

There's not any.

First, I would disagree that the Bible doesn't constitute as evidence. Written material (whether on walls, pots of clay, rocks, pyramids) all constitute as evidence.
And last, I would disagree that there is no archaeological evidence that supports the existence of Jesus

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible/

 

[Riders]

what evidence? Anything outside the bible because on walls pots of clay rocks and pyramids have all been dated its not the written word, do we have the right dates for biblical scrolls, theres so many questions on the dating. Clay pots and yramids speak for themselves.

 

[Neo Deist]

First, I would disagree that the Bible doesn't constitute as evidence.

It's not evidence, especially the Gospels. All four were written by anonymous, 3rd parties that were not eyewitnesses, decades after the fact. That makes hem hearsay at best.

Written material (whether on walls, pots of clay, rocks, pyramids) all constitute as evidence.

Depends on who is doing the writing. Just because something is written does not mean it is accurate.

And last, I would disagree that there is no archaeological evidence that supports the existence of Jesus

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible/

What archaeological evidence is there?

Don't quote some highly biased website as a source that starts off with "The reliable Gospel eyewitness accounts aren’t the only ancient description of Jesus" which is completely false.

There are two documents that have been covered in other threads. The works of Jewish writer Josephus and the Roman writer Tacitus. Josephus' writing is viewed as a forgery by many. However, neither portray Jesus as the divine son of God, the messiah, or a holy man that rose from the dead. All they briefly mention is that Jesus was killed by order of Pilate. I have never stated that Jesus did not exist; just the opposite. What I have stated is that there is not a single shred of evidence supporting the biblical claims of what he did. Without the Bible (Gospels) you have NOTHING. NADA. ZIP. ZILCH.

So I will repeat the question: what archaeological evidence is there about Jesus that supports the biblical claims?

 

[Kenny]

It's not evidence, especially the Gospels. All four were written by anonymous, 3rd parties that were not eyewitnesses, decades after the fact. That makes hem hearsay at best.

I'm not surprised that you selected only the Gospels at the expense of the other 23 NT books. As always, people can look at the same archaeological evidence and come to different conclusion. I don't agree with yours:

1. Decades after the fact is to be expected. Usually biographies are written at the end and not at the beginning - doesn't make it wrong
2. What evidence do you have that all were 3rd party eyewitnesses?
3. Luke 1:1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilledamong us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. As one who talked to eyewitnesses and, as a doctor, carefully investigated every point... sounds like a good witness to me. Getting professional viewpoints from doctors is admissible evidence in today's courts, even if they weren't eye-witnesses.

Depends on who is doing the writing. Just because something is written does not mean it is accurate.

That's why we can rely on them. They were accurate.

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible/

Don't quote some highly biased website as a source that starts off with "The reliable Gospel eyewitness accounts aren’t the only ancient description of Jesus" which is completely false.

Your bias is showing.

The author of Cold Case Christianity was written by someone who wasn't a Christian but an atheist and is an expert in dealing with cold case murders as a career being featured in national TV. He actually wanted to disprove the Bible using the highly developed techniques used in cold case murders and then, through his investigation, realized it was accurate and gave his life to Jesus.

Therefore, your "highly biased website" has been disproved and my information stands.

So I will repeat the question: what archaeological evidence is there about Jesus that supports the biblical claims?

Therefore,this isn't a case of "finding evidence" but rather a case of "No matter what you say, I -- Neo Deist -- will never agree".

 

[Neo Deist]

The author of Cold Case Christianity was written by someone who wasn't a Christian but an atheist and is an expert in dealing with cold case murders as a career being featured in national TV.

Well, s***! I guess that settles it then.

Oh wait...your author, J. Warner Wallace, used to be an atheist but converted to Christianity at the age of 35. After his conversion he wrote his books, so yes, he is a biased author of pro-Christian works. He used his "detective skills" as a selling point for his books, hoping that the gullible would eat it up and make him rich. "OMGosh, a cold case detective looked at all the evidence and determined that the Gospels were right and Jesus was real!"

Unless he has a time machine, there isn't jack s*** he can investigate. No witnesses to question, no DNA to analyze, no latent prints to examine.Your argument has been debunked.

As far as being an expert in dealing with murder cases, I too am a CSI officer and have YEARS of experience in the field. I even have a Theology Doctorate from seminary (where I converted from Baptist to Deist). You can disagree all you want; that is your right after all. You are entitled to your opinion. It matters little to me.

I had a broken watch once...it was right twice a day!

Edit: addendum

I have no problem with Jesus existing. I have no problem with him being a teacher, and preaching a positive message about morality and compassion. I have no problem believing he was crucified.

What I don't like is when people take hearsay or non-evidence and spin into it something that it is not. They make leaps and bounds and pull assumptions out of thin air. They are blinded by their own biases and ignorance.

 

[Kenny]

Well, s***! I guess that settles it then.

Oh wait...your author, J. Warner Wallace, used to be an atheist but converted to Christianity at the age of 35. After his conversion he wrote his books, so yes, he is a biased author of pro-Christian works. He used his "detective skills" as a selling point for his books, hoping that the gullible would eat it up and make him rich. "OMGosh, a cold case detective looked at all the evidence and determined that the Gospels were right and Jesus was real!"

Unless he has a time machine, there isn't jack s*** he can investigate. No witnesses to question, no DNA to analyze, no latent prints to examine.Your argument has been debunked.

As far as being an expert in dealing with murder cases, I too am a CSI officer and have YEARS of experience in the field. I even have a Theology Doctorate from seminary (where I converted from Baptist to Deist). You can disagree all you want; that is your right after all. You are entitled to your opinion. It matters little to me.

I had a broken watch once...it was right twice a day!

Edit: addendum

I have no problem with Jesus existing. I have no problem with him being a teacher, and preaching a positive message about morality and compassion. I have no problem believing he was crucified.

What I don't like is when people take hearsay or non-evidence and spin into it something that it is not. They make leaps and bounds and pull assumptions out of thin air. They are blinded by their own biases and ignorance.

OH WAIT!! He wrote about what he learned through his efforts to debunk the bible BEFORE the age of 35.

As I said:

"Therefore,this isn't a case of "finding evidence" but rather a case of "No matter what you say, I -- Neo Deist -- will never agree"."

You have confirmed it through empirical and verifiable evidence.

 

[Neo Deist]

OH WAIT!! He wrote about what he learned through his efforts to debunk the bible BEFORE the age of 35.

As I said:

"Therefore,this isn't a case of "finding evidence" but rather a case of "No matter what you say, I -- Neo Deist -- will never agree"."

You have confirmed it through empirical and verifiable evidence.

Like I said, the gullible fell for his selling point.

Kind of like the book "The Boy Who Came Back From Heaven" written by the father/son team of Kevin and Alex Malarkey. It was about an 11 year old who died, went to heaven, came back and told what he saw. The book was scooped up by gullible believers, made the best seller list, and the family became rich. There's only one problem...Alex (who supposedly died and came back) has now admitted that it was completely made up! People should have been wiser to such a claim with the last name of "malarkey"...

Edit: so let's get back on track...

What archaeological evidence do you speak of?

No bones
No clothes
No blood/tissue sample
No tomb
No crown of thorns
No divine light shining from a cave with graffiti scrawled on the wall "JESUS WAS HERE"

 

[Kenny]

Like I said, the gullible fell for his selling point.

Kind of like the book "The Boy Who Came Back From Heaven" written by the father/son team of Kevin and Alex Malarkey. It was about an 11 year old who died, went to heaven, came back and told what he saw. The book was scooped up by gullible believers, made the best seller list, and the family became rich. There's only one problem...Alex (who supposedly died and came back) has now admitted that it was completely made up! People should have been wiser to such a claim with the last name of "malarkey"...

Edit: so let's get back on track...

What archaeological evidence do you speak of?

No bones
No clothes
No blood/tissue sample
No tomb
No crown of thorns
No divine light shining from a cave with graffiti scrawled on the wall "JESUS WAS HERE"

No bones? Obviously
No clothes? why keep them?
No blood? hmm... do we have any of Shakespeare?
No tissue? Obviously
No crown of thorns? why would someone keep it?
No divine light? we have witnesses.
No "JESUS WAS HERE"? He sure is in my life
No "matter what you say, I -- Neo Deist -- will never agree" - Obviously.



No reason to continue this scratched record? You betcha!

 

[Neo Deist]

No bones? Obviously
No clothes? why keep them?
No blood? hmm... do we have any of Shakespeare?
No tissue? Obviously
No crown of thorns? why would someone keep it?
No divine light? we have witnesses.
No "JESUS WAS HERE"? He sure is in my life
No "matter what you say, I -- Neo Deist -- will never agree" - Obviously.



No reason to continue this scratched record? You betcha!

I agree. You don't really have a leg to stand on. Ciao!

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

No bones? Obviously
No clothes? why keep them?
No blood? hmm... do we have any of Shakespeare?
No tissue? Obviously
No crown of thorns? why would someone keep it?
No divine light? we have witnesses.
No "JESUS WAS HERE"? He sure is in my life

1. We don't have bones for every single human or even any other living animal in existence ever. So?
2,5. You are asking why a church who parades things like divine hangnails of some random saint would keep Jesus' clothes?
3,4. Even if you could (and really there's no reason you can't, as we can get tissues from mummies that far predate Jesus), would Christians ever accept the conclusions?
6. UFOs? We have witnesses. Magic? We have witnesses. Ghosts? We have ...
7. You know very well the difference between a spiritual connection and concrete physical evidence.

 

[Muffled]

I believe He sacrificed His reputation. Having never sinned He had to suffer public humiliation as a sinner.

 

[Muffled]

What did Jesus Sacrifice?

His self-respect?

I don't believe so. I believe God has always had a good opinion of Himself.

 

[Muffled]

Perhaps you missed the part of the story where Jesus was not recognized by his own followers after the resurrection:

John 20:14
John 21:4
Luke 24:13-31

There is a good reason for it. Jesus was dead, and this other person was an impostor. That is why he looked different. Not that I give much credit to the Gospels, given that they were written by anonymous, 3rd parties decades after the fact.

I believe that serves as a fun speculation but not the only possible explanation.

I believe another explanation is that He did not wish to be identified by His enemies and crucified again.

 

[Kenny]

I agree. You don't really have a leg to stand on. Ciao!

Arrivederci bambino. We don't even have a body.

 

[Kenny]

1. We don't have bones for every single human or even any other living animal in existence ever. So?

?? point?

2,5. You are asking why a church who parades things like divine hangnails of some random saint would keep Jesus' clothes?

People parade it, yes. Hardly believable. No... no person would keep his clothes because, as Jews, you don't worship clothes. They wouldn't keep his clothes.

3,4. Even if you could (and really there's no reason you can't, as we can get tissues from mummies that far predate Jesus), would Christians ever accept the conclusions?

What conclusion? Application?

6. UFOs? We have withesses. Magic? We have witnesses. Ghosts? We have ...

witnesses--they call it the paranormal and there are quite a few sites that believe in them. I would call call them demons.

7. You know very well the difference between a spiritual connection and concrete physical evidence.

Yes I do.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

?? point?

That the bones are not available (or at least no one is going to sit there and go, Yup, there's Jesus' bones) does not make Jesus divine or was resurrected or anything.

No... no person would keep his clothes because, as Jews, you don't worship clothes. They wouldn't keep his clothes.

You don't have any mementos of lost loved ones?

What conclusion? Application?

Let's say we found a body of the right type, with the right genetic material, to give us a more than passing conclusion that it could very well be Jesus. Would Christianity accept it or just call it fake because the dogma of the resurrection is already done?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I believe He sacrificed His reputation. Having never sinned He had to suffer public humiliation as a sinner.

Sacrificed his blood for us - 1 John 1:7

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Would stabbing himself worked just as well?