|
Author
|
Topic: Why would the apostiles have lied?
|
frank
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 152 of 177 (20584)
10-23-2002 1:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 147 by nos482
10-22-2002 7:57 PM
|
|
Nos, I agree that the history of this box is somewhat tainted. I was brought up believing Jesus was an only child but I do not know if this is Catholic (or any other denomination's) doctrine. I'll see if I can find some time to research this. Frank
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 147 by nos482, posted 10-22-2002 7:57 PM | | nos482 has not replied |
|
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2783 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: 01-08-2001
|
|
|
Message 153 of 177 (20669)
10-24-2002 2:21 AM
|
Reply to: Message 147 by nos482
10-22-2002 7:57 PM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
"'How could the Son of God have a brother?'"
Both David and his son Solomon were called "son of God" as were probably all kings of Israel. The appellation was employed by virtually every king, or would-be king and emperor of the ancient, and not so ancient, world. So, What's the big deal if one more calls himself that?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 147 by nos482, posted 10-22-2002 7:57 PM | | nos482 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 154 by nos482, posted 10-24-2002 8:11 AM | | doctrbill has replied |
|
nos482
Inactive Member
|
quote:
Originally posted by doctrbill:
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
"'How could the Son of God have a brother?'"
Both David and his son Solomon were called "son of God" as were probably all kings of Israel. The appellation was employed by virtually every king, or would-be king and emperor of the ancient, and not so ancient, world. So, What's the big deal if one more calls himself that?
Because Jesus was asserted to be the literal son of god. Joseph wasn't his genefather. And it is taught that Mary didn't have anyother children.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 153 by doctrbill, posted 10-24-2002 2:21 AM | | doctrbill has replied |
|
John
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 155 of 177 (20696)
10-24-2002 9:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 154 by nos482
10-24-2002 8:11 AM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
Because Jesus was asserted to be the literal son of god. Joseph wasn't his genefather. And it is taught that Mary didn't have anyother children.
It is taught in some sects of Christianity, but the good book itself is silent on the issue. It doesn't say one way or the other whether Mary had other kids. ------------------ http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 154 by nos482, posted 10-24-2002 8:11 AM | | nos482 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 156 by nos482, posted 10-24-2002 10:24 AM | | John has not replied |
|
nos482
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 156 of 177 (20701)
10-24-2002 10:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 155 by John
10-24-2002 9:15 AM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
Because Jesus was asserted to be the literal son of god. Joseph wasn't his genefather. And it is taught that Mary didn't have anyother children.
It is taught in some sects of Christianity, but the good book itself is silent on the issue. It doesn't say one way or the other whether Mary had other kids.
Like I had said elsewhere, much is being taught of the bible which isn't actually in the bible. It is the same with Adam and Eve as well with their children. [This message has been edited by nos482, 10-24-2002]
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 155 by John, posted 10-24-2002 9:15 AM | | John has not replied |
|
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2783 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: 01-08-2001
|
|
|
Message 157 of 177 (20760)
10-25-2002 12:12 AM
|
Reply to: Message 154 by nos482
10-24-2002 8:11 AM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
"'How could the Son of God have a brother?'"
quote:
Originally posted by doctrbill: What's the big deal if one more calls himself that (Son of God)?
quote:
Originally posted by nos482: Because Jesus was asserted to be the literal son of god. Joseph wasn't his genefather. And it is taught that Mary didn't have anyother children.
As I have pointed out, every king or would-be king was called "Son of God". David, Solomon, and the Caesar's were called, "Son of God". In the political climate of 30 A.D. it was particularly unsafe to make such claim to royalty. Jesus requested that his disciples not even repeat the expression in relation to himself. Make no mistake, the Romans knew exactly what it meant. Why do you suppose they bothered to review his case? Can a son of god have brothers? I ask you, Who are they whom the scripture calls, "the sons of god"? When someone came up to Jesus at a meeting and said, "Your mother and your brothers are outside." He responded. "Who are my mother and my brothers? . . . Those who do the will of my father". db
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 154 by nos482, posted 10-24-2002 8:11 AM | | nos482 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 158 by nos482, posted 10-25-2002 7:41 AM | | doctrbill has replied |
|
nos482
Inactive Member
|
quote:
Originally posted by doctrbill:
As I have pointed out, every king or would-be king was called "Son of God".
David, Solomon, and the Caesar's were called, "Son of God". In the political climate of 30 A.D. it was particularly unsafe to make such claim to royalty. Jesus requested that his disciples not even repeat the expression in relation to himself. Make no mistake, the Romans knew exactly what it meant. Why do you suppose they bothered to review his case? Can a son of god have brothers?
I ask you, Who are they whom the scripture calls, "the sons of god"? When someone came up to Jesus at a meeting and said, "Your mother and your brothers are outside." He responded. "Who are my mother and my brothers? . . . Those who do the will of my father". db
If he was such an important person why aren't there any records of his trial and execution? The Romans were very good record keepers.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 157 by doctrbill, posted 10-25-2002 12:12 AM | | doctrbill has replied |
|
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2783 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: 01-08-2001
|
|
|
Message 159 of 177 (20788)
10-25-2002 11:22 AM
|
Reply to: Message 158 by nos482
10-25-2002 7:41 AM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
If he was such an important person why aren't there any records of his trial and execution? The Romans were very good record keepers.
I was arguing within the myth. I have no doubt, however, that a real Jesus lived and died in Palestine during that time. In fact there were probably several. The New Testament narratives, however, appear to be embellished as historical fictions often are. It's a great story but is probably a compilation of the lives of several Jewish Messiah's rather than the true story of one man's life. I think I could safely say that it is, "Based on a True Story." db
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 158 by nos482, posted 10-25-2002 7:41 AM | | nos482 has replied |
|
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: 08-09-2002
|
|
|
Message 160 of 177 (20789)
10-25-2002 11:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 159 by doctrbill
10-25-2002 11:22 AM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by doctrbill:
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
If he was such an important person why aren't there any records of his trial and execution? The Romans were very good record keepers.
I was arguing within the myth. I have no doubt, however, that a real Jesus lived and died in Palestine during that time. In fact there were probably several. The New Testament narratives, however, appear to be embellished as historical fictions often are. It's a great story but is probably a compilation of the lives of several Jewish Messiah's rather than the true story of one man's life. I think I could safely say that it is, "Based on a True Story." db
***************************** Monty Python's Life of Brian would be consistent with this as well 
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 159 by doctrbill, posted 10-25-2002 11:22 AM | | doctrbill has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 167 by doctrbill, posted 10-25-2002 5:00 PM | | Mammuthus has not replied |
|
nos482
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 161 of 177 (20795)
10-25-2002 11:55 AM
|
Reply to: Message 159 by doctrbill
10-25-2002 11:22 AM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by doctrbill:
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
If he was such an important person why aren't there any records of his trial and execution? The Romans were very good record keepers.
I was arguing within the myth. I have no doubt, however, that a real Jesus lived and died in Palestine during that time. In fact there were probably several. The New Testament narratives, however, appear to be embellished as historical fictions often are. It's a great story but is probably a compilation of the lives of several Jewish Messiah's rather than the true story of one man's life. I think I could safely say that it is, "Based on a True Story." db
No one named Jesus ever lived back then. Jesus is a later translation of the name Yoshua and this is a very common name.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 159 by doctrbill, posted 10-25-2002 11:22 AM | | doctrbill has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 162 by John, posted 10-25-2002 12:06 PM | | nos482 has replied |
|
John
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 162 of 177 (20799)
10-25-2002 12:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 161 by nos482
10-25-2002 11:55 AM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
No one named Jesus ever lived back then. Jesus is a later translation of the name Yoshua and this is a very common name.
So it is a later translation of a hebrew name? Big deal, even if this is correct. I haven't tried to verify your claim, and, as usual, you haven't posted reference. I'm with DrBill. The Jewish community of the time was overflowing with messiahs. Christianity grew out of these movements. Marvin Harris-- Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches-- if you want to read a book on the subject. ------------------ http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 161 by nos482, posted 10-25-2002 11:55 AM | | nos482 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 163 by nos482, posted 10-25-2002 2:16 PM | | John has replied |
|
nos482
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 163 of 177 (20805)
10-25-2002 2:16 PM
|
Reply to: Message 162 by John
10-25-2002 12:06 PM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
No one named Jesus ever lived back then. Jesus is a later translation of the name Yoshua and this is a very common name.
So it is a later translation of a hebrew name? Big deal, even if this is correct. I haven't tried to verify your claim, and, as usual, you haven't posted reference.
Whatever turns your crank.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 162 by John, posted 10-25-2002 12:06 PM | | John has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 164 by John, posted 10-25-2002 3:06 PM | | nos482 has replied |
|
John
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 164 of 177 (20806)
10-25-2002 3:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 163 by nos482
10-25-2002 2:16 PM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
No one named Jesus ever lived back then. Jesus is a later translation of the name Yoshua and this is a very common name.
So it is a later translation of a hebrew name? Big deal, even if this is correct. I haven't tried to verify your claim, and, as usual, you haven't posted reference.
Whatever turns your crank.
Are you serious? This is your idea of a reply? This is the best defense you can dream up? This is your answer to evidence? And to my request for evidence? LOL......... you get funier by the day. Attending the Wordswordsman school of debate perhaps? You and he show about the same reguard for evidence. ------------------ http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 163 by nos482, posted 10-25-2002 2:16 PM | | nos482 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 165 by nos482, posted 10-25-2002 3:37 PM | | John has replied |
|
nos482
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 165 of 177 (20807)
10-25-2002 3:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 164 by John
10-25-2002 3:06 PM
|
|
Originally posted by John: Are you serious? This is your idea of a reply? This is the best defense you can dream up? This is your answer to evidence? And to my request for evidence? LOL......... you get funier by the day. Attending the Wordswordsman school of debate perhaps? You and he show about the same reguard for evidence. With your attitude lately with regards to anything I say you will just be contrary. I'd say day and you will say night.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 164 by John, posted 10-25-2002 3:06 PM | | John has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 166 by John, posted 10-25-2002 4:05 PM | | nos482 has replied |
|
John
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 166 of 177 (20810)
10-25-2002 4:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 165 by nos482
10-25-2002 3:37 PM
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
With your attitude lately with regards to anything I say you will just be contrary. I'd say day and you will say night.
Feeling persecuted, Nos? This is bullshit. I have never once disagreed with you simply because it is you. I disagree when I think you are wrong, and I tell you why I think so. This is how people learn. But you can't get past being told you're wrong. You don't like it. You react emotionally and viciously, and damn the evidence. Never mind defending the position, just attack or dismiss. This is straight from the Fundie 101 textbook. Now drop this childish crap and actually contribute something to this board. ------------------ http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 165 by nos482, posted 10-25-2002 3:37 PM | | nos482 has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2