Posted on 04/10/2023 7:24:53 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
i’ve always been a non believer but have always thought that it was better to have the good book out there as a moral compass than not. the problem has been/is the preachers of the good book are not good. The houses of the good book now fly rainbow flags above them.
Unfortunately yes they do. However I rather think that the problem is too many are happy to have someone between themselves and that book. Because as a person reads it, it reads them.
I pray you would come to understand that.
Yes some preachers are bad... “trust God...question everyone else”
The good book describes what you are witnessing as the equivalent of about 2,000 demon possessed swine.
That’s what these last about 2,000 years has been.
Swine is an unclean animal for Israel in the good book.
Wasn’t to be eaten or even touched.
The good book discusses doctrines of demons, unclean doctrines of lies and falsehoods and leaven(a picture of sin)
So, the last about 2,000 years is full of unclean doctrines of demons that Israel shouldn’t eat or touch..
The last about 2,000 years is also considered the ‘Church Age’.
The Church Age was always going to be full of demon possessed/ bad doctrines, bad shepherds, that one would be wise not to eat or consume.
The good book can be read and applied without attending a church.
Even if that Church doesn’t have a rainbow flag flying, it may still have other doctrines of demons that leaven the whole lump.
Thankfully, it wasn’t about 3,000 demon possessed swine in the good book.
Thankfully, it wasn’t about 3,000 cubits Israel was kept from the Ark as they crossed over into the Promised Land.
It too, was about 2,000.
Cubits, that is..
Same non exact, yet exactly the same- about 2,00.
A measurement of distance in the good book and an accounting of demon possessed swine in the good book.
We have the blessing of being born about 2,000 years after His death as the Passover Lamb , His burial as the Unleavened Bread of Sincerity and Truth, and His resurrection as First Fruits of those who have fallen asleep.
He’s the Ark that Israel has had to stay away for about 2,000 years before crossing over into the Promised Land..
While they’ve been wandering this wilderness,He’s in Heaven.
The about 2,000 years is just about up.
That includes the modern ‘Church Age’
For His Purposes and His Glory
May He help your non belief with the gift of faith!
https://search.brave.com/search?q=Book+of+Jasher
https://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/jasher/index.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Jasher_(biblical_references)
Does it contain the last 5 commandments?
This overwriting of a rubbed-out text means that it was so bad a rendering that it was not worth keeping.
I wasn’t referring to that. I was talking about what was the real story of Jesus and his life, the Myth of things we are told vs the reality of time he lived in.
Jesus existed, there is no doubt of that. The questions are what was the reality of his life in that era as opposed to the number of the myths that have arisen over the last 2000 years. There is just a lot not really known about Jesus.
Even in my lifetime JFK, Martin Luthor King, Jr,. Bobby Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan have taken on a lot of Myth as to the reality and those are very documented people. Yet we have historians and people who attribute all manner of things to them that are not true.
Not at all. The Ignorance is what we don’t know about everything in his time. Over time, certainly 2000 years, Myth overtakes reality along with embellishment. I am only asking what was the reality of Jesus life in the era he lived in, what exactly happened. There is a staggering amount of information that is unknown about Jesus life before he became a prophet and founded Christianity.
Amazing find - Maranatha! :)
LOL. You when he was discovered a Marxist? Or the one where they have him confirmed homo? Please don't share any more. Deception is written into their code.
plus the translation would take place over many years which means a bazillion different people translating.
You say neether I say nyther.
dat rite dere is funny
Those things have been suggested haven’t they. You see Marx and Engels went back in time and coverted Jesus!
But what does it say?
The scribes in the ancient world were very careful about the accuracy of the scriptures. For example, before the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in Qumran, the oldest source for the book of Isaiah came from the Masoretic Text, circa 1000 AD. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1947 in the caves of Qumran, the scroll in the best condition was an almost complete copy of Isaiah (c. 200 BC).
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls pushed back the oldest known text of Isaiah by 1,200 years. Compared to the Masoretic Texts, the accuracy was astonishing: Except for a few minor variations in vowel diacritical marks, the meaning of the Isaiah did not change in any significant way.
https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/dss/great-isaiah-scroll-and-the-masoretic-text.htm
The letters of Paul were written in the first century. Paul was acquainted by with the Apostles, the Disciples of Jesus so he had access to the their experience and teaching. (Available to you to read!)
Then there is this:
The Oldest Known Fragments of Matthew
"'The world of New Testament scholarship is facing its most serious challenge since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. At issue is a reassessment for the date of the Gospel of Matthew, based on five tiny papyrus fragments.
'Earlier this year (1995) Dr. Carsten Thiede published a reassessment of three papyrus fragments from the library at Magdalen College in Oxford, England. His article appeared in German in the scholarly journal Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 105 (1995) and was subsequently reprinted in English in the Tyndale Bulletin 46.1 (1995). Thiede, a papyrologist and practicing Anglican, has marshalled some impressive arguments which are challenging long-held scholarly and theological beliefs.
'His conclusions are summarized as follows:
1. The three papyrus fragments from the Magdalen College library (P-64) are from the same manuscript as two other fragments at the Fundacion San Lucas in Barcelona, Spain (P-67). All are from the Gospel of Matthew.
2. All five scraps of papyrus, based on comparative epigraphy, should be dated to the SECOND HALF OF THE FIRST CENTURY AD. That suggests a copy of the Gospel of Matthew was in circulation in Egypt roughly one generation after the crucifixion. Accordingly, this is the earliest date for any known New Testament text and is much earlier than the majority of scholars had previously believed. The standard scholarly date for the original Gospel of Matthew's composition has been AD 80.
3. All five fragments are written on both sides, indicating they were sheets in a book and not sections of a scroll. That manuscript would also be the earliest known bound Christian book. Thiede suggests it may even signify a change in strategy among Christians. Changing from scroll to book might indicate a changed focus of missionary activity away from Jews.
4. The use of abbreviations for divine names (nomen sacrum), like the tetragrammaton (YHWH) for the name of God, had previously been the privilege of Jewish scribes. According to Thiede, such a palaeographic decision was clearly designed to put Jesus on par with YHWH."
And:
"On December 24, 1994, the Times of London ran a front-page story entitled “Oxford papyrus is ‘eyewitness record of the life of Christ.’” The article reported the claim that three papyrus fragments of Matthew’s Gospel in Magdalen College, Oxford, date to the mid-first century C.E. Instead of having been written a generation or more after Jesus’ death, as is—or was—the scholarly consensus, Matthew’s Gospel was written within a decade or so of the crucifixion by someone who was there at the time, so the article said. This, of course, would indeed be astounding and worthy of the treatment the Times gave it."
Also available to you!
Just looking at the synoptic versions of the Gospel compared with John’s, you can see that we are probably missing a lot.
John had a much more personal point of view in his writings, as neither Mark nor Luke were direct witnesses (Matthew uses Mark as a source). John was a direct witness. He was the friend of Jesus who was the closest to Him of all the disciples (”the one Jesus loved”), so it is not surprising that he provided his own personal viewpoint.
I think that John understood the gestalt, the head-space if you will, of where Jesus was coming from, better than anybody. This is why I recommend to new seekers that they read John first.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.