Discussion:
Biblical Accuracy?
(too old to reply)
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-09 03:01:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
https://m.news24.com/MyNews24/The-Problem-of-the-Bible-Inaccuracies-contradictions-fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517

Historical and Geographical errors in the Bible

A. River Gihon could not possibly flow from Mesopotamia and encompass Ethiopia (Gen 2:13)

B. The name Babel does not come from the Hebrew word 'balbal' or 'confuse' but from the babylonian 'babili' or 'gate of God' which is a translation of the original Sumerian name Ka-dimirra. (Gen 11:9)

C. Ur was not a Chaldean city until 1000 years after Abraham (Gen 11:28, 15:7)

D. Abraham pursued enemies to 'Dan' (Gen 14:14). That name was not used geographically until after the conquest (Judge 18:29)

Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.

F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.

G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?

Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.

F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.

G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?

. Jericho and Ai (Josh 8) were both ancient ruins at the time of the conquest of Canaan, according to archaeologists. Jericho's walls were destroyed centuries before Joshua.

N. Kings are referred to at Deut 17:17-19, before Israel had kings.

O. The Wilderness is viewed as history at Num 15:32, showing that Numbers was written later.

P. The Sabbath law was unknown when the man gathered sticks at Num 15:32-34.

Q. Book of Joshua refers to Book of Jasher in the past, mentioned at 2 Sam 1:18, therefore Joshua must be post-David.

R. Captivity is mentioned at Judg 18:30, making it post-Exile.

. David took Goliath's head to Jerusalem (1 Sam 17:54). But Jerusalem was not captured until 7 years after David became king (2 Sam 5).

T. David paid 600 shekels of gold for the threshing floor (1 Chron21:22-25). But shekels of gold were not yet used in business transactions (this is the only use of the term in the OT).

U. Psalm 18:6 mentions the temple, thus cannot be by David.

V. Defeat of Sennacherib did not happen at Jerusalem, but at Pelusium, near Egypt, and Jews were not involved, contrary to 2 Kings 19.

. Ninevah was so large it took three days to cross, i.e. about 60 miles (Jonah 3:3-4). Yet it had only 120,000 inhabitants, making a population density of of about 42 people per square

mile for a city.

X. Daniel's account of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar is historically inaccurate; Nebuchadnezzar was never mad. Belshazzar, whom he says was king, was never king, but only regent. Belshazzar was not the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabo-nidus. Babylon was not conquered by Darius the Mede, but by Cyrus the Great, in 539 BC (Dan 5:31). Darius the Mede is unknown to history.

Y. Chronology of the empires of the Medes and Persians is historically incorrect in Isa 13:17, 21:2, Jer 51:11, 28

Z. Esther (and all the characters in the Book of Esther except Ahasuerus [= Xerxes]) is unknown to history, even though itclaims that its events are "written in the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia" (Est 10:2). The Book of Esther is not quoted by any pre-Christian writer, nor mentioned in NT, nor quoted by early Christian fathers.
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-09 03:09:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
https://m.news24.com/MyNews24/The-Problem-of-the-Bible-Inaccuracies-contradictions-fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517
Historical and Geographical errors in the Bible
A. River Gihon could not possibly flow from Mesopotamia and encompass Ethiopia (Gen 2:13)
B. The name Babel does not come from the Hebrew word 'balbal' or 'confuse' but from the babylonian 'babili' or 'gate of God' which is a translation of the original Sumerian name Ka-dimirra. (Gen 11:9)
C. Ur was not a Chaldean city until 1000 years after Abraham (Gen 11:28, 15:7)
D. Abraham pursued enemies to 'Dan' (Gen 14:14). That name was not used geographically until after the conquest (Judge 18:29)
Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.
F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.
G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?
Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.
F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.
G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?
. Jericho and Ai (Josh 8) were both ancient ruins at the time of the conquest of Canaan, according to archaeologists. Jericho's walls were destroyed centuries before Joshua.
N. Kings are referred to at Deut 17:17-19, before Israel had kings.
O. The Wilderness is viewed as history at Num 15:32, showing that Numbers was written later.
P. The Sabbath law was unknown when the man gathered sticks at Num 15:32-34.
Q. Book of Joshua refers to Book of Jasher in the past, mentioned at 2 Sam 1:18, therefore Joshua must be post-David.
R. Captivity is mentioned at Judg 18:30, making it post-Exile.
. David took Goliath's head to Jerusalem (1 Sam 17:54). But Jerusalem was not captured until 7 years after David became king (2 Sam 5).
T. David paid 600 shekels of gold for the threshing floor (1 Chron21:22-25). But shekels of gold were not yet used in business transactions (this is the only use of the term in the OT).
U. Psalm 18:6 mentions the temple, thus cannot be by David.
V. Defeat of Sennacherib did not happen at Jerusalem, but at Pelusium, near Egypt, and Jews were not involved, contrary to 2 Kings 19.
. Ninevah was so large it took three days to cross, i.e. about 60 miles (Jonah 3:3-4). Yet it had only 120,000 inhabitants, making a population density of of about 42 people per square
mile for a city.
X. Daniel's account of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar is historically inaccurate; Nebuchadnezzar was never mad. Belshazzar, whom he says was king, was never king, but only regent. Belshazzar was not the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabo-nidus. Babylon was not conquered by Darius the Mede, but by Cyrus the Great, in 539 BC (Dan 5:31). Darius the Mede is unknown to history.
Y. Chronology of the empires of the Medes and Persians is historically incorrect in Isa 13:17, 21:2, Jer 51:11, 28
Z. Esther (and all the characters in the Book of Esther except Ahasuerus [= Xerxes]) is unknown to history, even though itclaims that its events are "written in the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia" (Est 10:2). The Book of Esther is not quoted by any pre-Christian writer, nor mentioned in NT, nor quoted by early Christian fathers.
https://www.thetrumpet.com/1912-archaeology-proves-bible-history-accurate
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-10 09:06:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
https://m.news24.com/MyNews24/The-Problem-of-the-Bible-Inaccuracies-contradictions-fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517
Historical and Geographical errors in the Bible
A. River Gihon could not possibly flow from Mesopotamia and encompass Ethiopia (Gen 2:13)
B. The name Babel does not come from the Hebrew word 'balbal' or 'confuse' but from the babylonian 'babili' or 'gate of God' which is a translation of the original Sumerian name Ka-dimirra. (Gen 11:9)
C. Ur was not a Chaldean city until 1000 years after Abraham (Gen 11:28, 15:7)
D. Abraham pursued enemies to 'Dan' (Gen 14:14). That name was not used geographically until after the conquest (Judge 18:29)
Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.
F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.
G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?
Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.
F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.
G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?
. Jericho and Ai (Josh 8) were both ancient ruins at the time of the conquest of Canaan, according to archaeologists. Jericho's walls were destroyed centuries before Joshua.
N. Kings are referred to at Deut 17:17-19, before Israel had kings.
O. The Wilderness is viewed as history at Num 15:32, showing that Numbers was written later.
P. The Sabbath law was unknown when the man gathered sticks at Num 15:32-34.
Q. Book of Joshua refers to Book of Jasher in the past, mentioned at 2 Sam 1:18, therefore Joshua must be post-David.
R. Captivity is mentioned at Judg 18:30, making it post-Exile.
. David took Goliath's head to Jerusalem (1 Sam 17:54). But Jerusalem was not captured until 7 years after David became king (2 Sam 5).
T. David paid 600 shekels of gold for the threshing floor (1 Chron21:22-25). But shekels of gold were not yet used in business transactions (this is the only use of the term in the OT).
U. Psalm 18:6 mentions the temple, thus cannot be by David.
V. Defeat of Sennacherib did not happen at Jerusalem, but at Pelusium, near Egypt, and Jews were not involved, contrary to 2 Kings 19.
. Ninevah was so large it took three days to cross, i.e. about 60 miles (Jonah 3:3-4). Yet it had only 120,000 inhabitants, making a population density of of about 42 people per square
mile for a city.
X. Daniel's account of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar is historically inaccurate; Nebuchadnezzar was never mad. Belshazzar, whom he says was king, was never king, but only regent. Belshazzar was not the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabo-nidus. Babylon was not conquered by Darius the Mede, but by Cyrus the Great, in 539 BC (Dan 5:31). Darius the Mede is unknown to history.
Y. Chronology of the empires of the Medes and Persians is historically incorrect in Isa 13:17, 21:2, Jer 51:11, 28
Z. Esther (and all the characters in the Book of Esther except Ahasuerus [= Xerxes]) is unknown to history, even though itclaims that its events are "written in the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia" (Est 10:2). The Book of Esther is not quoted by any pre-Christian writer, nor mentioned in NT, nor quoted by early Christian fathers.
https://tinyurl.com/yaycgmwz
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-10 09:46:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
https://tinyurl.com/yaycgmwz

Art sticks his fingers in his ears and yells LALALALALALALALALALALALALA.

Pffft.
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-11 10:46:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
https://tinyurl.com/yaycgmwz
Art sticks his fingers in his ears and yells LALALALALALALALALALALALALA.
Pffft.
You can't see me, liar.
hypatiab7
2018-04-11 15:10:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
https://tinyurl.com/yaycgmwz
Art sticks his fingers in his ears and yells LALALALALALALALALALALALALA.
Pffft.
You can't see me, liar.
Look up the word 'figurative'.
Yap Honghor
2018-04-12 02:36:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
https://tinyurl.com/yaycgmwz
Art sticks his fingers in his ears and yells LALALALALALALALALALALALALA.
Pffft.
You can't see me, liar.
True, but he can imagine you sticking your fingers...
His imagination is much more probable than your imagination of a pixie!!!
Michael Cole
2018-04-11 18:56:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-11 19:04:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________

One in a row.

Stopped clocks are right twice a day.

The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.

None of our trolls seem to get that. They accept all science that doesn't contradict their beliefs no matter how much or how well documented.

Maybe we should call them cafeteria realists.
%
2018-04-11 19:08:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
None of our trolls seem to get that. They accept all science that doesn't contradict their beliefs no matter how much or how well documented.
Maybe we should call them cafeteria realists.
and you can be a soup bowl
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-11 21:48:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
MISC EVIDENCE OF MOSES

https://books.google.com/books?id=Kbgf52KNsLQC&pg=PA234&lpg=PA234&dq=ancient+writers+who+mentioned+moses&source=bl&ots=Q-WyI3Vtd9&sig=ArjAXHNAlwbrKxm-YTpTgVeVc10&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1z9_Rlc7XAhVD6GMKHedLAE0Q6AEIWTAI#v=onepage&q=ancient%20writers%20who%20mentioned%20moses&f=false


PHILO ON MOSES

https://www3.nd.edu/~undpress/excerpts/P01137-ex.pdf

ANTIQUITY OF MOSES PROVEN BY GREEK WRITERS

http://biblehub.com/library/justin/justins_hortatory_address_to_the_greeks/chapter_ix_the_antiquity_of_moses.htm


From "Historical Method" in Wikipedia 

Indirect witnesses[edit] 
Garraghan says that most information comes from "indirect witnesses," people who were not present on the scene but heard of the events from someone else.[7] Gottschalk says that a historian may sometimes use hearsay evidence when no primary texts are available. He writes, "In cases where he uses secondary witnesses...he asks: (1) On whose primary testimony does the secondary witness base his statements? (2) Did the secondary witness accurately report the primary testimony as a whole? (3) If not, in what details did he accurately report the primary testimony? Satisfactory answers to the second and third questions may provide the historian with the whole or the gist of the primary testimony upon which the secondary witness may be his only means of knowledge. In such cases the secondary source is the historian's 'original' source, in the sense of being the 'origin' of his knowledge. Insofar as this 'original' source is an accurate report of primary testimony, he tests its credibility as he would that of the primary testimony itself." Gottschalk adds, "Thus hearsay evidence would not be discarded by the historian, as it would be by a law court merely because it is hearsay."[8] 


ROTFL! It looks like wikipedia has contradicted itself: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses#Moses_in_Hellenistic_literature 
Yap Honghor
2018-04-12 02:41:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
MISC EVIDENCE OF MOSES
https://books.google.com/books?id=Kbgf52KNsLQC&pg=PA234&lpg=PA234&dq=ancient+writers+who+mentioned+moses&source=bl&ots=Q-WyI3Vtd9&sig=ArjAXHNAlwbrKxm-YTpTgVeVc10&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1z9_Rlc7XAhVD6GMKHedLAE0Q6AEIWTAI#v=onepage&q=ancient%20writers%20who%20mentioned%20moses&f=false
PHILO ON MOSES
https://www3.nd.edu/~undpress/excerpts/P01137-ex.pdf
ANTIQUITY OF MOSES PROVEN BY GREEK WRITERS
http://biblehub.com/library/justin/justins_hortatory_address_to_the_greeks/chapter_ix_the_antiquity_of_moses.htm
From "Historical Method" in Wikipedia 
Indirect witnesses[edit] 
Garraghan says that most information comes from "indirect witnesses," people who were not present on the scene but heard of the events from someone else.[7] Gottschalk says that a historian may sometimes use hearsay evidence when no primary texts are available. He writes, "In cases where he uses secondary witnesses...he asks: (1) On whose primary testimony does the secondary witness base his statements? (2) Did the secondary witness accurately report the primary testimony as a whole? (3) If not, in what details did he accurately report the primary testimony? Satisfactory answers to the second and third questions may provide the historian with the whole or the gist of the primary testimony upon which the secondary witness may be his only means of knowledge. In such cases the secondary source is the historian's 'original' source, in the sense of being the 'origin' of his knowledge. Insofar as this 'original' source is an accurate report of primary testimony, he tests its credibility as he would that of the primary testimony itself." Gottschalk adds, "Thus hearsay evidence would not be discarded by the historian, as it would be by a law court merely because it is hearsay."[8] 
ROTFL! It looks like wikipedia has contradicted itself: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses#Moses_in_Hellenistic_literature 
You want them to be true because you are a Christian deep in your heart?????
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-12 01:38:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
https://canadafreepress.com/article/there-is-historical-non-biblical-proof-of-an-actual-jesus-christ-of-nazaret
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-12 01:39:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
\




Exodus evidence


http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-important-events/egypt-remembers-ancient-accounts-great-exodus-002295



https://faithfulphilosophy.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/vast-majority-of-egyptologists-believe-the-exodus-happened/


https://members.bib-arch.org/biblical-archaeology-review/42/3/2




http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195130881.001.0001/acprof-9780195130881





http://migdolbook.com/exodus-more-fact-than-fiction.shtml



https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/59404/new-film-takes-archaeological-deniers-biblical-exodus-proves-story-accurate-true-biblical-zionism/#7CycAUfKyvyRdXiG.97



http://jewishjournal.com/culture/religion/passover/77833/



Papyrus confirms Exodus Account

https://ohr.edu/838

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/director-posits-proof-of-biblical-exodus/article1098090/


https://www.christiancentury.org/review/books/did-exodus-really-happen

Yes, says the author.He makes a compelling case.
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-12 01:42:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
\
Exodus evidence
http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-important-events/egypt-remembers-ancient-accounts-great-exodus-002295
https://faithfulphilosophy.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/vast-majority-of-egyptologists-believe-the-exodus-happened/
https://members.bib-arch.org/biblical-archaeology-review/42/3/2
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195130881.001.0001/acprof-9780195130881
http://migdolbook.com/exodus-more-fact-than-fiction.shtml
https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/59404/new-film-takes-archaeological-deniers-biblical-exodus-proves-story-accurate-true-biblical-zionism/#7CycAUfKyvyRdXiG.97
http://jewishjournal.com/culture/religion/passover/77833/
Papyrus confirms Exodus Account
https://ohr.edu/838
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/director-posits-proof-of-biblical-exodus/article1098090/
https://www.christiancentury.org/review/books/did-exodus-really-happen
Yes, says the author.He makes a compelling case.
So, still nothing.
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-12 01:51:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
\
Exodus evidence
http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-important-events/egypt-remembers-ancient-accounts-great-exodus-002295
https://faithfulphilosophy.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/vast-majority-of-egyptologists-believe-the-exodus-happened/
https://members.bib-arch.org/biblical-archaeology-review/42/3/2
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195130881.001.0001/acprof-9780195130881
http://migdolbook.com/exodus-more-fact-than-fiction.shtml
https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/59404/new-film-takes-archaeological-deniers-biblical-exodus-proves-story-accurate-true-biblical-zionism/#7CycAUfKyvyRdXiG.97
http://jewishjournal.com/culture/religion/passover/77833/
Papyrus confirms Exodus Account
https://ohr.edu/838
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/director-posits-proof-of-biblical-exodus/article1098090/
https://www.christiancentury.org/review/books/did-exodus-really-happen
Yes, says the author.He makes a compelling case.
So, still nothing.
Keep lying, asshole. I enjoy watching you discredit yourself. You're doing my work for me.
Mitchell Holman
2018-04-12 01:58:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says. ____________
One in a row.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day.
The mountain of evidence against the bible is growing bigger every year.
\
Exodus evidence
http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-important-events/egypt-remembers
-ancient-accounts-great-exodus-002295
https://faithfulphilosophy.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/vast-majority-of-eg
yptologists-believe-the-exodus-happened/
https://members.bib-arch.org/biblical-archaeology-review/42/3/2
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195130881.
001.0001/acprof-9780195130881
http://migdolbook.com/exodus-more-fact-than-fiction.shtml
https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/59404/new-film-takes-archaeological-
deniers-biblical-exodus-proves-story-accurate-true-biblical-zionism/#7C
ycAUfKyvyRdXiG.97
http://jewishjournal.com/culture/religion/passover/77833/
Papyrus confirms Exodus Account
https://ohr.edu/838
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/director-posits-proof-of-biblical-
exodus/article1098090/
From the above:


"Mr. Jacobovici contends that volcanology and
geology can explain not only the first plague -
that Egypt's waters were turned blood-red
through the release of toxic gas, similar to
what happened at Lake Nios in Cameroon in 1986;
but they also can explain the succeeding nine
plagues - frogs, fleas, flies, livestock deaths,
boils, hailstorms, locusts, darkness and the
death of the Egyptian firstborn males."


Well, Arty/Joe - defend that, if you can.
Greywolf
2018-04-11 19:58:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________

Well, hell, doesn't that prove Jesus walked on water, raised people from the dead, and only let rip only Holy farts?
%
2018-04-11 20:02:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
____________
Well, hell, doesn't that prove Jesus walked on water, raised people from the dead, and only let rip only Holy farts?
nah , he never existed
Gospel TT
2018-04-11 20:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:58:56 -0700 (PDT), Greywolf
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 1:57:02 PM UTC-5, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says.
____________
Well, hell, doesn't that prove Jesus walked on water, raised people
from the dead, and only let rip only Holy farts?

I never used to believe in King Kong till I seen the Empire State
Building
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-11 21:47:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
Gospel TT
2018-04-12 01:18:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says.
Post by v***@gmail.com
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
%
2018-04-12 01:22:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:57:02 AM UTC-7, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
and the sea splitter's ball
Kevrob
2018-04-12 01:43:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:57:02 AM UTC-7, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
People's Front of Judea!

My idea of "biblical accuracy" is being to brain
a door-knocker with the Authorized Version at 20 paces. :)

Kevin R
%
2018-04-12 01:47:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael Cole
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:57:02 AM UTC-7, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
People's Front of Judea!
My idea of "biblical accuracy" is being to brain
a door-knocker with the Authorized Version at 20 paces. :)
Kevin R
no it isn't
Gospel TT
2018-04-12 02:09:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael Cole
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:57:02 AM UTC-7, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that
historical
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael Cole
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
People's Front of Judea!
My idea of "biblical accuracy" is being to brain
a door-knocker with the Authorized Version at 20 paces. :)
Kevin R
That's pretty accurate!
Kevrob
2018-04-12 02:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael Cole
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:57:02 AM UTC-7, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that
historical
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael Cole
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just
like
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael Cole
the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
People's Front of Judea!
My idea of "biblical accuracy" is being to brain
a door-knocker with the Authorized Version at 20 paces. :)
Kevin R
That's pretty accurate!
I played catcher in Little League.
I also worked in bookstores for
a quarter century. Lew Zealand
flinging a fish had nothing on
me whipping a stripped cover of
"Battlefield: Earth" at a shoplifter. :)

Kevin R
Gospel TT
2018-04-12 02:31:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:43:45 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob
Post by Kevrob
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 14:47:36 -0700 (PDT),
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:57:02 AM UTC-7, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that
historical
Post by Kevrob
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just
like
Post by Kevrob
the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
People's Front of Judea!
My idea of "biblical accuracy" is being to brain
a door-knocker with the Authorized Version at 20 paces. :)
Kevin R
That's pretty accurate!
I played catcher in Little League.
I also worked in bookstores for
a quarter century. Lew Zealand
flinging a fish had nothing on
me whipping a stripped cover of
"Battlefield: Earth" at a shoplifter. :)
Kevin R
Lol that's so cool your Bible is lot's more accurate then!!
Smiler
2018-04-12 02:18:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael Cole
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:57:02 AM UTC-7, Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical
research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like
the.bible says.
...and the Roman occupation of Judea.
& The Judean People's Front
People's Front of Judea!
Popular Front for the Liberation of Judea!!
--
Smiler, The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made
to exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Cloud Hobbit
2018-04-12 21:33:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The Judean People's Front
Post by Kevrob
People's Front of Judea!
Popular Front for the Liberation of Judea!!
_____________

Fucking splinters!

Yap Honghor
2018-04-12 02:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
In any story, if there is not a single piece of landmark or place, how do people relate? It would like Star Trek when everything is new and not familiar, although the background is always human injected with new species of new animals!!!!
b***@m.nu
2018-04-12 15:58:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written (The
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was supposed to
have lived
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-12 16:16:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written (The
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was supposed to
have lived
"Supposed to have lived", you fucking moron? Suck on this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

You are retarded.
Kevrob
2018-04-12 17:53:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written (The
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was supposed to
have lived
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
As someone with a history B.A., Mr Accountant, I'd say qualifying
the life of Josh with a "supposed to have" is very wise. You don't
think he was divine. If he existed at all, I don't think he was,
either. (But then, who is?) There may have been a Jesus, John may
have baptized him, and he may have been executed. Or, Josh is a
composite figure of a number of different religious reformers. There
isn't agreement on where he was born, and many of the "scholars" who
work or have worked in the areas studied have axes to grind. "Biblical
Archeology" was, and to some extent still is, fueled by people trying to
prove the events of the bible happened, rather than taking the proper
detached, scientific view of collecting artifacts, excavating sites,
translating documents, etc.

But what do I know? I was just taught historical method as part of my
history B.A. Accounting can come in handy in such research. Some of
the earliest known writing was, essentially, inventory records.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39870485

But history, like other fields, has its standards. The "evidence"
that a specific Jesus lived, rather than a legendary or composite one,
isn't compelling. See:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/18/did-historical-jesus-exist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/?utm_term=.4617ad75d70d

A great deal of what survived in written form from the ancient and
classical world refers to works that didn't survive. These gaps
in our knowledge can't really be recovered, absent new finds of lost
manuscripts. We don't have "court records" for Pilate's sentence
of crucifixion, for example. Are references to Jesus to the Nazarene,
or to Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Pappos, or Yeshu the Pharisee?

We just don't know enough, by historical standards, to say one way
or another. Believing Christians don't care. "Proving" a historical
Jesus who was "their Jesus" is just Thomas putting his fingers in
holes. Believing without proof is supposed to be superior. For non-
believers in a divine Jesus, there is still the effects of belief in
a legendary figure to account for. Arguably, finding evidence of
Josh of Nazareth might hurt belief, if it dragged in anything that
contradicted the gospels, or was conveniently not mentioned: that he
did marry, or was gay, or expressly told his followers he wasn't the
promised messiah. {Big "I told you so" from the Jews, in that case.}

Kevin R
b***@m.nu
2018-04-12 18:44:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written (The
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was supposed to
have lived
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
LOL, Your jesus christ aka harry potter never existed....
Post by Kevrob
As someone with a history B.A., Mr Accountant, I'd say qualifying
the life of Josh with a "supposed to have" is very wise. You don't
think he was divine. If he existed at all, I don't think he was,
either. (But then, who is?) There may have been a Jesus, John may
have baptized him, and he may have been executed. Or, Josh is a
composite figure of a number of different religious reformers. There
isn't agreement on where he was born, and many of the "scholars" who
work or have worked in the areas studied have axes to grind. "Biblical
Archeology" was, and to some extent still is, fueled by people trying to
prove the events of the bible happened, rather than taking the proper
detached, scientific view of collecting artifacts, excavating sites,
translating documents, etc.
But what do I know? I was just taught historical method as part of my
history B.A. Accounting can come in handy in such research. Some of
the earliest known writing was, essentially, inventory records.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39870485
But history, like other fields, has its standards. The "evidence"
that a specific Jesus lived, rather than a legendary or composite one,
Well considering there are no written records about a magical being
that did all these wonderful things, nor its birth or its death was
recorded what it was alive, not even shortly after it died. And if
harry potter lived at any time in history after the invention of
writing it would have been noted by A LOT of people. There are no
inscribed stones, walls, statues, not even a freakin post it.
Post by Kevrob
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/18/did-historical-jesus-exist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/?utm_term=.4617ad75d70d
A great deal of what survived in written form from the ancient and
classical world refers to works that didn't survive. These gaps
in our knowledge can't really be recovered, absent new finds of lost
manuscripts. We don't have "court records" for Pilate's sentence
There are no records of pilate either.
Post by Kevrob
of crucifixion, for example. Are references to Jesus to the Nazarene,
or to Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Pappos, or Yeshu the Pharisee?
We just don't know enough, by historical standards, to say one way
or another. Believing Christians don't care. "Proving" a historical
Jesus who was "their Jesus" is just Thomas putting his fingers in
holes. Believing without proof is supposed to be superior. For non-
believers in a divine Jesus, there is still the effects of belief in
a legendary figure to account for. Arguably, finding evidence of
Josh of Nazareth might hurt belief, if it dragged in anything that
contradicted the gospels, or was conveniently not mentioned: that he
did marry, or was gay, or expressly told his followers he wasn't the
promised messiah. {Big "I told you so" from the Jews, in that case.}
Kevin R
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-12 20:18:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written (The
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was supposed to
have lived
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
As someone with a history B.A., Mr Accountant, I'd say qualifying
the life of Josh with a "supposed to have" is very wise. You don't
think he was divine. If he existed at all, I don't think he was,
either. (But then, who is?) There may have been a Jesus, John may
have baptized him, and he may have been executed. Or, Josh is a
composite figure of a number of different religious reformers. There
isn't agreement on where he was born, and many of the "scholars" who
work or have worked in the areas studied have axes to grind. "Biblical
Archeology" was, and to some extent still is, fueled by people trying to
prove the events of the bible happened, rather than taking the proper
detached, scientific view of collecting artifacts, excavating sites,
translating documents, etc.
But what do I know? I was just taught historical method as part of my
history B.A. Accounting can come in handy in such research. Some of
the earliest known writing was, essentially, inventory records.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39870485
But history, like other fields, has its standards. The "evidence"
that a specific Jesus lived, rather than a legendary or composite one,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/18/did-historical-jesus-exist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/?utm_term=.4617ad75d70d
A great deal of what survived in written form from the ancient and
classical world refers to works that didn't survive. These gaps
in our knowledge can't really be recovered, absent new finds of lost
manuscripts. We don't have "court records" for Pilate's sentence
of crucifixion, for example. Are references to Jesus to the Nazarene,
or to Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Pappos, or Yeshu the Pharisee?
We just don't know enough, by historical standards, to say one way
or another. Believing Christians don't care. "Proving" a historical
Jesus who was "their Jesus" is just Thomas putting his fingers in
holes. Believing without proof is supposed to be superior. For non-
believers in a divine Jesus, there is still the effects of belief in
a legendary figure to account for. Arguably, finding evidence of
Josh of Nazareth might hurt belief, if it dragged in anything that
contradicted the gospels, or was conveniently not mentioned: that he
did marry, or was gay, or expressly told his followers he wasn't the
promised messiah. {Big "I told you so" from the Jews, in that case.}
Kevin R
You claim you have a degree in History? You also call people trolls who aren't trolls and accuse people of proselytizing who are doing no such thing. You're a lying motherfucker and I don't believe a word you say.
Kevrob
2018-04-12 20:26:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Kevrob
We just don't know enough, by historical standards, to say one way
or another. Believing Christians don't care. "Proving" a historical
Jesus who was "their Jesus" is just Thomas putting his fingers in
holes. Believing without proof is supposed to be superior. For non-
believers in a divine Jesus, there is still the effects of belief in
a legendary figure to account for. Arguably, finding evidence of
Josh of Nazareth might hurt belief, if it dragged in anything that
contradicted the gospels, or was conveniently not mentioned: that he
did marry, or was gay, or expressly told his followers he wasn't the
promised messiah. {Big "I told you so" from the Jews, in that case.}
Kevin R
You claim you have a degree in History?
Yes. And you claim to have one in Accounting, even if you sometimes
have trouble counting to 30.
Post by v***@gmail.com
You also call people trolls who aren't trolls
I call people who troll, trolls. If the woo shits, fare it.
Post by v***@gmail.com
and accuse people of proselytizing who are doing no such thing.
I go around the merry-go-round with Earl over this.

Repeating something I wrote in one of those posts:

Words mean things. Oxford has "proselytize" as:

Convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief,
or opinion to another.


You seriously mean to convince us you aren't trying to
change my opinion, that there isn't enough evidence to
conclude that a ghod exists? Piffle!

and

Advocate or promote (a belief or course of action)

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/proselytize

You promote your belief in a ghod.


Merriam-Webster puts it as:

to induce someone to convert to one's faith

And

to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proselytize

I'll let the group readers decide if my opinion is "idiocy"
or accurate. Your trollish opinion is worthless.
Post by v***@gmail.com
You're a lying motherfucker and I don't believe a word you say.
Easy enough for you to avoid it. Stop reading the group,
and stop posting here.

You need the tsuris?

Kevin R
Gospel TT
2018-04-12 20:41:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
On Thursday, April 12, 2018 at 12:16:42 PM UTC-4,
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that
historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire,
just like the.bible says.
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written
(The
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was
supposed to
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
have lived
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
As someone with a history B.A., Mr Accountant, I'd say qualifying
the life of Josh with a "supposed to have" is very wise. You don't
think he was divine. If he existed at all, I don't think he was,
either. (But then, who is?) There may have been a Jesus, John may
have baptized him, and he may have been executed. Or, Josh is a
composite figure of a number of different religious reformers.
There
Post by v***@gmail.com
isn't agreement on where he was born, and many of the "scholars" who
work or have worked in the areas studied have axes to grind.
"Biblical
Post by v***@gmail.com
Archeology" was, and to some extent still is, fueled by people trying to
prove the events of the bible happened, rather than taking the proper
detached, scientific view of collecting artifacts, excavating sites,
translating documents, etc.
But what do I know? I was just taught historical method as part of my
history B.A. Accounting can come in handy in such research.
Some of
Post by v***@gmail.com
the earliest known writing was, essentially, inventory records.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39870485
But history, like other fields, has its standards. The "evidence"
that a specific Jesus lived, rather than a legendary or composite one,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/18/did-histori
cal-jesus-exist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/?utm_term=.4617
ad75d70d
Post by v***@gmail.com
A great deal of what survived in written form from the ancient and
classical world refers to works that didn't survive. These gaps
in our knowledge can't really be recovered, absent new finds of lost
manuscripts. We don't have "court records" for Pilate's sentence
of crucifixion, for example. Are references to Jesus to the
Nazarene,
Post by v***@gmail.com
or to Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Pappos, or Yeshu the Pharisee?
We just don't know enough, by historical standards, to say one way
or another. Believing Christians don't care. "Proving" a
historical
Post by v***@gmail.com
Jesus who was "their Jesus" is just Thomas putting his fingers in
holes. Believing without proof is supposed to be superior. For non-
believers in a divine Jesus, there is still the effects of belief in
a legendary figure to account for. Arguably, finding evidence of
Josh of Nazareth might hurt belief, if it dragged in anything that
contradicted the gospels, or was conveniently not mentioned: that he
did marry, or was gay, or expressly told his followers he wasn't the
promised messiah. {Big "I told you so" from the Jews, in that case.}
Kevin R
You claim you have a degree in History? You also call people trolls
who aren't trolls and accuse people of proselytizing who are doing no
such thing. You're a lying motherfucker and I don't believe a word
you say.

Your a rumdum that can't count to 5 lol.
v***@gmail.com
2018-04-12 16:23:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written (The
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was supposed to
have lived
What did non-Christian authors say about Jesus?
As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93. He has two references to Jesus. One of these is controversial because it is thought to be corrupted by Christian scribes (probably turning Josephus’s negative account into a more positive one), but the other is not suspicious – a reference to James, the brother of “Jesus, the so-called Christ”.

About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.

Did ancient writers discuss the existence of Jesus?
Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.
b***@m.nu
2018-04-12 18:49:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by b***@m.nu
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:56:59 -0700 (PDT), Michael Cole
Post by Michael Cole
On the other hand, Cloud Hobbit, you must admit that historical research has confirmed the existence of the Roman Empire, just like the.bible says.
Wow are you serious about this? The existence of the roman empire is
pretty much common knowledge, and for something to be written (The
new testament) at the tail end of the roman empire (300 AD), it is
pretty common that it would be mentioned. It is just too bad that this
jesus character was not EVER written about when it was supposed to
have lived
What did non-Christian authors say about Jesus?
As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus
Who never wrote a damn thing about any jesus christ, since he writing
were found to have been forged and added at a much later date, YOU
WHINING LITTLE BITCH.
Post by v***@gmail.com
, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93. He has two references to Jesus. One of these is controversial because it is thought to be corrupted by Christian scribes (probably turning Josephus’s negative account into a more positive one), but the other is not suspicious – a reference to James, the brother of “Jesus, the so-called Christ”.
About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus
Who NEVER wrote a damn thing about your jesus chrst aka harry potter.
Tacitus mentioned a chrestos which is a title NOT a name you whiney
LITTLE BITCH.

But you know all of this already because I have told you and several
other the same damn thing. YOU RETARDED LITTLE BITCH!!! LOL

(snippage of retarded monkey talk)



"There are two types of people in this world,
those that can count, and monotheists."
JTEM
2018-04-12 19:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Historical and Geographical errors in the Bible
Only religious fundamentalists insists upon an
accurate/literally true bible.

Either you are a fundamentalist Christian or you're
intentionally making a fallacious (straw man)
"Argument."




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/172835864103
Amazing Answers
2018-04-12 21:22:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
https://m.news24.com/MyNews24/The-Problem-of-the-Bible-Inaccuracies-contradictions-fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517
Historical and Geographical errors in the Bible
A. River Gihon could not possibly flow from Mesopotamia and encompass Ethiopia (Gen 2:13)
Pre flood geography didn't have volcanoes.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
B. The name Babel does not come from the Hebrew word 'balbal' or 'confuse' but from the babylonian 'babili' or 'gate of God' which is a translation of the original Sumerian name Ka-dimirra. (Gen 11:9)
The word came to mean bulbul or confuse due to what happened there. Even the Bible says that the name of Jews could become an insult world if they didn't live up to the words they swore to keep.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
C. Ur was not a Chaldean city until 1000 years after Abraham (Gen 11:28, 15:7)
The Ur that many Biblical scholars accept is not the one that is in Southern Turkey. That's because it's Ur "of the Chaldees" - a specific description to identify it from the other Ur.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
D. Abraham pursued enemies to 'Dan' (Gen 14:14). That name was not used geographically until after the conquest (Judge 18:29)
Not too unoften that names are used to identify the location according to the modern understanding. Just like we say that Columbus discovered America when it wasn't even called America.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.
Can't see a contradiction here.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.
The problem lies in the word Hebrews. This could just refer to the land of which they dwelt, which would have been Abraham's land. Abraham was well known back then.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?
He was brought up in the reign of the Thutmoses. He was named king, perhaps?
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.
You repeated
Post by Cloud Hobbit
F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.
You repeated.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?
You repeated
Post by Cloud Hobbit
. Jericho and Ai (Josh 8) were both ancient ruins at the time of the conquest of Canaan, according to archaeologists. Jericho's walls were destroyed centuries before Joshua.
That's because the people who subscribe to this hypothesis believe in earlier date for the Exodus. If you shift the time it's just right.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
N. Kings are referred to at Deut 17:17-19, before Israel had kings.
Read vs 14. God's instruction to the people as to what they shall do when they enter the land and decide they needed a king. God tells them that they shall choose among themselves one of their brothers and not from another nation. Then he goes on to describe what the king will do, and this is where Deut 17:17-19 come into the picture.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
O. The Wilderness is viewed as history at Num 15:32, showing that Numbers was written later.
No it doesn't. There has always been wildernesses . Even to this day.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
P. The Sabbath law was unknown when the man gathered sticks at Num 15:32-34.
That's not true. The Sabbath Law was given immediately when Moses was on Mt Sinai. He brought the tables down and presented the law to the people. Then afterward the ceremonial law and the sacrificial system was introduced. When the guy was found gathering sticks, that was after the ceremonial law was given.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Q. Book of Joshua refers to Book of Jasher in the past, mentioned at 2 Sam 1:18, therefore Joshua must be post-David.
Jasher may not be Joshua.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
R. Captivity is mentioned at Judg 18:30, making it post-Exile.
Making some of it post-Exile.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
. David took Goliath's head to Jerusalem (1 Sam 17:54). But Jerusalem was not captured until 7 years after David became king (2 Sam 5).
Not so. The period of the judges proceeded the time of the kings, Jerusalem was captured just after Joshua died. Read Chapter 1:8 "Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it..."
Post by Cloud Hobbit
T. David paid 600 shekels of gold for the threshing floor (1 Chron21:22-25). But shekels of gold were not yet used in business transactions (this is the only use of the term in the OT).
Gold has always been used in transactions.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
U. Psalm 18:6 mentions the temple, thus cannot be by David.
From the Exodus the temple was a tent. Could it represent heaven, though?
Post by Cloud Hobbit
V. Defeat of Sennacherib did not happen at Jerusalem, but at Pelusium, near Egypt, and Jews were not involved, contrary to 2 Kings 19.
Sennacherib's army was defeated there, but not all of his men were killed. He returned and dwelt at Nineveh. 2 Kings 19:36.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
. Ninevah was so large it took three days to cross, i.e. about 60 miles (Jonah 3:3-4). Yet it had only 120,000 inhabitants, making a population density of of about 42 people per square
Where do you arrive at the 120,000 figure?

According to Wikipedia the average walking time is thus:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day%27s_journey

A Day's journey in pre-modern literature, including the Bible,[1][2] ancient geographers and ethnographers such as Herodotus, is a measurement of distance.

In the Bible, it is not as precisely defined as other Biblical measurements of distance; the distance has been estimated from 32 to 40 kilometers (20–25 miles).

In translation by J.B. Bury (Priscus, fr. 8 in Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum) We set out with the barbarians, and arrived at Sardica, which is thirteen days for a fast traveller from Constantinople. From Constantinople-Istanbul to Sofia is 550–720 km distance at a pace between 42 and 55 km /day.

Hence 102 miles could be the length of the city.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
mile for a city.
X. Daniel's account of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar is historically inaccurate; Nebuchadnezzar was never mad. Belshazzar, whom he says was king, was never king, but only regent. Belshazzar was not the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabo-nidus. Babylon was not conquered by Darius the Mede, but by Cyrus the Great, in 539 BC (Dan 5:31). Darius the Mede is unknown to history.
The absence of information doesn't validate the absence of a truth.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Y. Chronology of the empires of the Medes and Persians is historically incorrect in Isa 13:17, 21:2, Jer 51:11, 28
Z. Esther (and all the characters in the Book of Esther except Ahasuerus [= Xerxes]) is unknown to history, even though itclaims that its events are "written in the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia" (Est 10:2). The Book of Esther is not quoted by any pre-Christian writer, nor mentioned in NT, nor quoted by early Christian fathers.
Actually, this is totally untrue. She was given a longer name that was pagan.
Loading...