What was the Death of Jesus about?

[Colt]

Now that's the RECEIVED WISDOM.
Yet we now know there were many things the Jews of Babylon times simply
could not have known, ie burial practices of the Bronze Age and the destruction
of Shiloh (in Samuel 1)
And the people who gave you this received wisdom did not believe there was
a king David. And just this year the first archaeological evidence that in fact
the population of Israel could have been as large as the bible said it was
(Tinmar Valley excavations.)

What are you talking about? I didn’t say there wasn’t a David?

 

[John1.12]

So you agree that none of those things are mentioned in the Garden story?

Since in fact they aren't mentioned, this is progress!

I can readily understand what happened historically in Genesis. Then I continue to read to understand the details as I go .

 

[John1.12]

All reasoned enquiry is skeptical, including historical method, which Ehrman uses. Carrier puts me to sleep in a page and a half, so I've read little of him.
Well, historical method rules the supernatural out for a start. Otherwise all the gods, miracles, spirits, naiads, sprites, goblins, witches, warlocks, demons, Rainbow Serpents, all the gods and supernatural beings of history would be entitled to equal time. We have not a single authenticated example of a miracle, for example.
That's true, they were. So, of course were a great many other ancient documents. Note that these aren't treated differently ─ each ancient document must be assessed for what, where, when, who and why; and all historical conclusions, like all conclusions in physics, are tentative, subject to things we haven't found yet, or haven't seen the relationship yet.
That they made stuff up is obvious on the face of the record. Apart from the miracles and appearances, and temptation and so on, for example,

the author of Matthew requires Mary to have been a virgin because the LXX in translating Isaiah 7:14 renders Hebrew 'almah, young woman, as parthenos, virgin;

He invents the unhistoric 'Taxation Census' story to get Jesus to be born in Bethlehem to “fulfill” Micah 5:2.

He invents the unhistoric 'Massacre of the Innocents' story to get Jesus into Egypt to “fulfill” Hosea 11.1.

He absurdly sits Jesus across a foal and a donkey to ride into Jerusalem "to fulfill prophecy" (Matthew 21:2-5) in Zechariah 9.9;​

And since the authors of Mark, Luke and John do the same or similar things, you notice that it would be possible to write the entire bio of Jesus in this way.

Oh, and apart from the fact that an authentic resurrection is a contradiction in terms, and that we have no contemporary, no independent, no eyewitness account of it, the accounts of the resurrection in Paul, the four gospels and Acts 1 each contradict the other five in major ways. The evidence is of stunningly low quality. You may remember the Ganesha milk-drinking miracles a few years ago, with videos on the net of statues of Ganesha "drinking milk". That evidence of a miracle was many orders of magnitude better in quality than the bible accounts of the resurrection, but no one who wasn't already a believer was persuaded by it.

To be clear, my own view is that there may have been an historical Jesus, but if there was ─ it's possible there was not ─ then we know very little about him, and the gospels are not innately credible or reliable sources and require considerable care.

//Well, historical method rules the supernatural out for a start. // Bingo! there's the issue right there .

 

[blü 2]

I can readily understand what happened historically in Genesis. Then I continue to read to understand the details as I go .

Nothing happened historically in Genesis ─ the tale is plainly an allegory for the childhood of humankind from their first appearance to the start of Hebrew folk history. See if the story makes sense once you treat eating the apple as adolescence.

Well, historical method rules the supernatural out for a start. // Bingo! there's the issue right there.

Unless and until someone produces the first known authenticated example of the supernatural, I see no issue. Meanwhile, no objective test can distinguish the supernatural from the purely conceptual / imaginary ─ if that's wrong, please tell me the test.

 

[Jimmy]

Nothing happened historically in Genesis ─ the tale is plainly an allegory for the childhood of humankind from their first appearance to the start of Hebrew folk history. See if the story makes sense once you treat eating the apple as adolescence.
Unless and until someone produces the first known authenticated example of the supernatural, I see no issue. Meanwhile, no objective test can distinguish the supernatural from the purely conceptual / imaginary ─ if that's wrong, please tell me the test.

The beginning!!! Yeeha!!!!
Intriguing isnt it?

 

[rational experiences]

Thinking.

We are all humans.
All humans die.

Relative human advice.

Advice to argue why did humans remembering the Jews died first in Egyptian pyramids sciences after ice age new human life died sacrificed?

Clouds own human man and woman equal images. As both lives were harmed.

Totally ignored as a human teaching.

Atmosphere basic presence equals advice naming gases then water oxygen world of natural bio living.

We live inside water oxygenated heavens.

As an equals state.

Human says equals state means everyone should be exactly the same.

Observed notified.

Equal humans.
Perfect beautiful same DNA healthy.

Not sick ugly dying mutated sacrificed.

Common sense not taught. Reason we own life naturally. We should be the same.

So observation then determines a reason why equal life got sacrificed.

The first answer fake mother maths space womb science thesis. The female terms science maths that attacked life.

The teaching totally ignored as relevant human advice.

Status Adam was Adam. Because of eve mother maths atmospheric mass changes.

Human term equal Adam...Adam.

Why life was sacrificed.

The human natural female was not the inventor of the sciences men were.

Also totally ignored.

So when a human looks at old documents. Compares the histories old events to new events including event of sacrifice as it existed seen observed to be compared. Then it was compared.

New updated journals rewritten by advice observation.

So you say brother satanist scientist did you not observe sink holes opening in God earth to update your journal of science causes?

Yes he says I observed everything.

What part of the observation did you own personally?

None.

Are you a man human though and you observed your own man body in brothers life being sacrificed. Daily?

Yes.

Did it involve phenomena?

Yes documented named as satanic.

So it happened to your human man self?

Yes.

Did the heavens spirits Change observed?

Yes.

The reason it was written observed. Science is observation FIRST.

Did science own what was observed?

No.

Why Satanists God theists are wrong. It was observed.

 

[paarsurrey]

Well, it's not what any of the gospel stories or Paul say in the NT.

Well, for one Paul shouldn't had to do anything with the 4-Gospels as Paul never was in the company of Jesus , was a diehard enemy of Jesus and Jesus' followers and their persecutor; unless he had redacted and doctored the 4- Gospels. And which Paul (his associated and the Church) did, I understand. Right?

Regards

 

[blü 2]

The beginning!!! Yeeha!!!!
Intriguing isnt it?

Given the use that's been made of it ─ damn you, Augustine of Hippo! ─ and its resulting place in our folklore, it needs some attention, yes.

 

[blü 2]

Well, for one Paul shouldn't had to do anything with the 4-Gospels as Paul never was in the company of Jesus

None of the gospel writers ever met an historical Jesus.

[Paul] was a diehard enemy of Jesus and Jesus' followers and their persecutor;

Yes, we assume that's what "the church of God" means.

unless he had redacted and doctored the 4- Gospels.

Paul, it appears, was dead before 60 CE. The first gospel, Mark, was written around 75
CE.

 

[F1fan]

Maybe it was designed that way? Look at Genesis 1 - it has TWO creation stories, side by
side.

There's an explanation for why there are two accounts that contradict, and that was to appease two different factions whose narrative differed. To include both was political. Neither are factually true.

And the one which is accurate in its sequence uses the 'seven days' analogy which
many love to mock.

Explain how it is accurate, and how 7 days applies to reality.

It's as if the bible seeks to be mocked - which it often does.
In fact the bible is meant for everyone - if you love God it will touch your heart (read Matt
5,6,7 and latter chapters of John) If you believe its history it will give you the Bronze Age
account and the story of the Jews.

If you assume this God exists you will assume the Bible is true and touches you.

 

[Thief]

So his death is misrepresented, and accomplished nothing?

Makes sense. Thanks.

yeah.....salvation is in the parables

His crucifixion was the result of conflict

when questioned about the Law
the conversation ended.....Do unto others as you would have it done unto you

and notation is dealt....from that hour
the Pharisees sought to have Him dead

 

[F1fan]

I like your analogy. Not sure about the 1930's though.
The bible states it is not about appealing to human nature.
And for inspiration the bible revealed the Messiah in stages
over many centuries, for instance
Jacob speaks of a future Hebrew nation that will end with
the Messiah.
Job says this Messiah already lives and will one day walk
on the earth.
David sees this Messiah suffering in crucifixion.
Isaiah sees the Messiah as rejected, dying and rising again.
Zechariah sees the Messiah coming a second time and the
Jews mourning to see it's the same lowly man they killed.

OK, let's say all these predictions have been recorded and widely known about for many centuries.

Is it more likely that this all magically came true and the events recorded accurately? Or that an opportunity came about where a new sect developed and over about 100 years a new set of stories that claim these predictions came true, which was easily done through creative writing?

Occam's Razor says the latter. If anyone claims the former then those folks need to provide a lot of evidence that all this magic happened.

 

[blü 2]

and notation is dealt....from that hour
the Pharisees sought to have Him dead

My own rather strong feeling is that in his lifetime he was never as important as he's painted, and that the reason his cult survived was the luck of history and the appeal of his message, as repackaged by Paul, to pagans; and of course later the decisive intervention of Constantine.

 

[Thief]

My own rather strong feeling is that in his lifetime he was never as important as he's painted, and that the reason his cult survived was the luck of history and the appeal of his message, as repackaged by Paul, to pagans; and of course later the decisive intervention of Constantine.

I suspect.....He did understand
if the end of His ministry had been long life and death by natural causes
His parables would not have held

His death caused a public reaction
with the outstanding question nailed over His head on the cross

Jesus Nexsus Rex Judea

 

[F1fan]

«

I suspect.....He did understand
if the end of His ministry had been long life and death by natural causes
His parables would not have held

I like the story where he and Mary Magdalene escaped to southern France.

His death caused a public reaction
with the outstanding question nailed over His head on the cross

And it took about 100 years to reach a fever pitch.

 

[blü 2]

I suspect.....He did understand
if the end of His ministry had been long life and death by natural causes
His parables would not have held

His death caused a public reaction
with the outstanding question nailed over His head on the cross

Jesus Nexsus Rex Judea

So it was a personal publicity stunt? If so, it went unnoticed at the time, and only by luck came good later (Paul again, it appears).

 

[rational experiences]

Self bible human warning.

Two humans equal in creation creation equalled all balances naturally.

So says human natural observation is conscience explanation.

Not science.

A human is observer.

God said observer is the O planet entity that exists first. God O is origin.

Mind says so no man human is God.

The heavens not O God origin as it is neither origin not God was self formed. I live inside the heavens as a human.

No man is God no man is heavens.

Notice what explanation is missing?

No man is the heavens.

Reason.....man already said no man is God and the heavens is not God. Why say as a reiteration anything logical when it is observed naturally? Such as no man is the heavens as masses of gases.

Or do you need instructions to think for yourself?




Basic advice human.
Common sense advice human.

No coercion being sophism being science.

 

[PruePhillip]

OK, let's say all these predictions have been recorded and widely known about for many centuries.

Is it more likely that this all magically came true and the events recorded accurately? Or that an opportunity came about where a new sect developed and over about 100 years a new set of stories that claim these predictions came true, which was easily done through creative writing?

Occam's Razor says the latter. If anyone claims the former then those folks need to provide a lot of evidence that all this magic happened.

In as much as TWO Messiahs are spoken of then I see no difference in these
Messianic prophecies. Your idea of various cults over the millennium is interesting
but you would need to identify how the cultic order of Israel changed from Moses
onward. I don't see that.

 

[PruePhillip]

So it was a personal publicity stunt? If so, it went unnoticed at the time, and only by luck came good later (Paul again, it appears).

If you read in Luke that 'road to Emmaus' account you will see that only a 'stranger'
would not have known what had happened in Jerusalem. The trial of Jesus involved
Herod, Pilot, the Sanhedrin and the high priests, Jesus entry into Jerusalem the week
before came with much acclaim and every day the people were attentive to hear Him.
Furthermore, the crucifixion was necessarily an event for that generation, that nation
and that city - it's a story for everyone.
Jacob must have mystified the Hebrews in Egypt when he spoke of the Messiah as
being He who the gentiles would believe in. So too for Isaiah and Zechariah, amongst
others - always the connection between the Jewish Messiah and the Gentile's Messiah.

 

[John1.12]

Nothing happened historically in Genesis ─ the tale is plainly an allegory for the childhood of humankind from their first appearance to the start of Hebrew folk history. See if the story makes sense once you treat eating the apple as adolescence.
Unless and until someone produces the first known authenticated example of the supernatural, I see no issue. Meanwhile, no objective test can distinguish the supernatural from the purely conceptual / imaginary ─ if that's wrong, please tell me the test.

Apple ?