youtube interview with me and Christian about History.

freelight

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Bible: a collection of books sanctioned by a particular faith community

Bible: a collection of books sanctioned by a particular faith community

~*~*~


Having watched the interview, the first hurdle for John is getting over the KJV-only assumption, which is hardly defensible. The KJV translators had a limited number of manuscripts to work with; today we have more to draw from and compare giving a more complete composite of textual traditions and variant readings. Furthermore, a 'version' of something is not the original article, ever. All translations enter the domain of distortion and become subject to interpretation.

~*~*~

We're KJV bible translators inspired?

Why I do not think the KJV is the best translation (Daniel B. Wallace)

~*~*~

The rest of the interview was dancing around pertinent questions of who wrote or 'canonized' the bible, what dispensation are we under today, what does it mean to be "saved" and the actual history of let's say...the first 3 centuries.

With ancient writings what's important to note is understanding the writers point of view of each document in its own cultural-context and terms, the agenda and intent behind the script. What happens is modern day readers can impose their own interpretations upon the text that suits their own theology so that the original circumstances, purpose, agenda of the writers are superseded or taken out of their native context...so there is a revising, renovation, re-interpretation taking place with future generations of readers. After 'canonization' the collection of books becomes exalted to near 'divine' or 'inerrant' status among some believers, while the texts themselves make no such claims.

See: What is the Bible?
 
Totton Linnet

Totton Linnet

New member
Silver Subscriber
The Catholics wrote the bible?


...I got that far :chuckle:


...I can just see Paul bobbing up and down in front of an altar, saying mass, dressed as a Roman senator.
 
freelight

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Totton Linnet said:
The Catholics wrote the bible?


...I got that far :chuckle:


...I can just see Paul bobbing up and down in front of an altar, saying mass, dressed as a Roman senator.
Click to expand...

It's a common belief, but I think what is usually meant is that the RCC oversaw or coordinated the canonization process until it became finalized into what we have today as the 66 book collection, never mind that traditional Jews reject the NT.

No doubt some socio-political influences may have helped "craft the collection" so to speak, since the church-state was the governing force or entity in those days...so naturally selection of books were predetermined.
 
Totton Linnet

Totton Linnet

New member
Silver Subscriber
I think what they did was decide what we should or shouldn't have, I believe those wicked men PURGED the bible of all doctrinal content concerning the millennium.

I believe somewhere in the vast vaults of the Vatican are more scriptures and post apostolic writings.

Until they come to light we have what we have and it is sufficient for now.

Read Josiah's revival in Kings.
 
JosephR

JosephR

New member
Totton Linnet said:
The damage done to the church by the fathers [so called] is inestimable beginning with Ignatias
Click to expand...

My main hurdle or problem right now, with History, is Titus Flavious.

Any History major or buff knows that in 70 AD Titus sacked Jerusalem.

And what I mean by the RCC wrote the NT pertains to this.

Titus Flavious was by Law a Living Son of a God, His Father the Emperor.Making Him as I said a living son of god.

Now many many things in the four Gospels point to what Titus did, a main one is that when Jesus said, "this generation shall not pass untill all is fulfilled" well it was in that time frame, from 33 ad to 70 ad is one generation.

Second is " not one stone will be left unturned" well Titus did in fact level the Temple not leaving one stone standing.

In the early Christian writings that pre date 70 ad , there never was any mention of a virgin birth , 3 day Resurrection, or a saving gospel by faith in a man elevated to god hood status, all these things have major pagan over tones and are , accept for the sign of Jonah, that is a star constellation, very pagan. And also reflects of the attributes of Mithra, the god of Titus and His family.

If Yeshua rose the third day, why did know one know about it till Titus "found" the text. Why does Josephus writings correlate with the four gospels??

This wasent a bang up job done,it was done by the best writers and historians that gold could buy, by a living god man emperor with the world at His disposal.


This is just some of the surface questions, history goes alot deeper,and the deeper you go,it doesnt abode well for the legitimacy of the New Testament.

Its not what I "want" , or a personal goal,other then seeking truth... it is just what I have found. and what I am struggling with.
 
freelight

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Caesar's Messiah?

Caesar's Messiah?

JosephR said:
My main hurdle or problem right now, with History, is Titus Flavious.

Any History major or buff knows that in 70 AD Titus sacked Jerusalem.

And what I mean by the RCC wrote the NT pertains to this.

Titus Flavious was by Law a Living Son of a God, His Father the Emperor.Making Him as I said a living son of god.

Now many many things in the four Gospels point to what Titus did, a main one is that when Jesus said, "this generation shall not pass untill all is fulfilled" well it was in that time frame, from 33 ad to 70 ad is one generation.

Second is " not one stone will be left unturned" well Titus did in fact level the Temple not leaving one stone standing.

In the early Christian writings that pre date 70 ad , there never was any mention of a virgin birth , 3 day Resurrection, or a saving gospel by faith in a man elevated to god hood status, all these things have major pagan over tones and are , accept for the sign of Jonah, that is a star constellation, very pagan. And also reflects of the attributes of Mithra, the god of Titus and His family.

If Yeshua rose the third day, why did know one know about it till Titus "found" the text. Why does Josephus writings correlate with the four gospels??

This wasent a bang up job done,it was done by the best writers and historians that gold could buy, by a living god man emperor with the world at His disposal.


This is just some of the surface questions, history goes alot deeper,and the deeper you go,it doesnt abode well for the legitimacy of the New Testament.

Its not what I "want" , or a personal goal,other then seeking truth... it is just what I have found. and what I am struggling with.
Click to expand...

Hi JR,

I think you may familiar with Joseph Atwill's book and theory of 'Caesar's Messiah',....where he describes Christianity being a 'Roman invention' more or less. I have not read the book, but some reviews and seen some interviews,....I'm on the fence on this one, but he draws some interesting analogies and parallels to support his theory.

Even Robert M Price (the Bible Geek), one that I often enjoy listening to, does a 'satirical' review on his book in his own trademark fashion here. I think Atwill may recognize some parallels between Josephus and the gospels, but I think there's more to the story ;)

Here is an interview with him with hostess Bracha Bat Yoseph -

TV Interview with Joseph Atwill
 
Last edited:
Ask Mr. Religion

Ask Mr. Religion

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Last edited:
Zeke

Zeke

Well-known member
freelight said:
Hi JR,

I think you may familiar with Joseph Atwill's book and theory of 'Caesar's Messiah',....where he describes Christianity being a 'Roman invention' more or less. I have not read the book, but some reviews and seen some interviews,....I'm on the fence on this one, but he draws some interesting analogies and parallels to support his theory.

Even Robert M Price (the Bible Geek), one that I often enjoy listening to, does a 'satirical' review on his book in his own trademark fashion here. I think Atwill may recognize some parallels between Josephus and the gospels, but I think there's more to the story ;)

Here is an interview with him with hostess Bracha Bat Yoseph -

TV Interview with Joseph Atwill
Click to expand...

I have listen the interviews on Gnostic Media with Atwill about his theory, maybe part of the conspiracy but it's still speculative, plus the dead sea scroll interpretations by John M Allegro that he thought was a mushroom cult is another theory, yada yada etc......

The actual historic accounts are speculative at best assumptions at worst, that can't cover up some major doubt on the historic version being viable, add in the Esoteric intent that is most likely the proper way to interpret them from the beginning of these stories and you have a problem that throws a monkey wrench in the traditional ruse. The Esoteric is starting to gain momentum with the open minded researchers, which will shed some over due light on the whole historical charade, a conspiracy exposed that I believe will disrupts the status quo when the light is turned on that darkness.
 
JosephR

JosephR

New member
the direct world history is still yet to be refuted,that I speak of... thats my "our" problem.. what we are working on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top