• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Antisemitic beliefs spreading among evangelical Christians in America

JustHanging said:
They were afraid of death? And they chose to believe in an almost certainly imaginary being, rather than face their own mortality? It's pretty common, billions of people still do it today.
Click to expand...

Jesus imaginary? Have you done your homeworK? Recommended reading for you:

"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;
“The Historical Jesus of the Gospels,” by Dr. Craig Keener
"New Evidence that Demands a Verdict," by former skeptic Josh McDowell;
"The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel," and
"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.
 
Somerville said:
The matter of interpolations is far more difficult to discern though there are instances where modern scientific methods have been able to find erasures and interpolations in ancient manuscripts.

Now changes from the oldest manuscripts that are known today just require a bit of comparison.

The two oldest 'complete' New Testaments are found in the Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, both of which are dated to the first half of the 4th century CE. The Codex Alexandrinus is believed to have been written during the 5th century. All three have multiple differences from the text most Christians know today.

"In any event, none of [the original manuscripts of the books of the Bible] now survive. What do survive are copies made over the course of centuries, or more accurately, copies of the copies of the copies, some 5,366 of them in the Greek language alone, that date from the second century down to the sixteenth. Strikingly, with the exception of the smallest fragments, no two of these copies are exactly alike in their particulars. No one knows how many differences, or variant readings, occur among the surviving witnesses, but they must number in the hundreds of thousands."
The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, pp. 27

Examples:
Codex Vaticanus: Verses not found in this codex that are present in the KJV
Matthew 12:47;16:2b-3;*17:21;*18:11;*23:14;
Mark 7:16; 9:44.46;*11:26;*15:28
Luke 17:36,22:43–44
John 5:4,Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11);
Acts 8:37; 15:34, 24:7; 28:29;
Romans 16:24.
1 Peter 5:3.

This info found in the following book
Metzger, Bruce M.*(2001).*A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament.

Codex Sinaiticus
Mark 16 which tells of the three women, Mary Magdalene, Mary – mother of James and Salome going to the tomb to anoint Jesus body. Codex Sinaiticus ends the chapter at verse 8
“Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.” Modern Bibles continue the tale with verses 9 to 20

The Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9–13)
Father, Hallowed be thy name,
Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so upon earth.
Give us day by day our daily bread
And forgive us our sins, as we ourselves also forgive every one that is indebted to us.
And bring us not into temptation.

John 8: 3–11 is not found in the codex, nor are the verses Luke 9:55–56
Luke 24:51 does not have the phrase “and was taken up into heaven”

These and other verses missing from the oldest texts were evidently viewed by the interpolators and editors as providing some justification for the beliefs of the Gnostics, Docetics, Arians and Adoptionists.
Click to expand...

Bart Ehrman? An agnostic and one who cast colored beads to vote on New Testament scriptures at the loony-tune, left-wing, liberal Jesus Seminar? The Jesus Seminar that operated on an a priori anti-supernatural bias?

"Raymond E. Brown in An Introduction to the New Testament is critical of the methodology: “It [the Jesus Seminar] has operated to a remarkable degree on a priori principles, some of them reflecting an anti-supernatural bias. For instance the bodily resurrection had no real chance of being accepted as having taken place. The session dealing with the authenticity of Jesus’ predictions of his passion and death was dominated by the initial refusal of most of the participants to allow the possibility that Jesus could have spoken of his impending death by virtue of “super-ordinary” (prophetic) powers; accordingly they voted black (he did not say it) on eleven Synoptic passion predictions.”

Being Skeptical of the Skeptics: a Critique of the Jesus Seminar - The Rev Charlie Holt

Please spare us your spiritually-challenged liberal theologians and their liberal horse manure. Liberals screw up everything - morality, economics, theology, etc., etc.
 
Somerville said:
The matter of interpolations is far more difficult to discern though there are instances where modern scientific methods have been able to find erasures and interpolations in ancient manuscripts.

Now changes from the oldest manuscripts that are known today just require a bit of comparison.

The two oldest 'complete' New Testaments are found in the Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, both of which are dated to the first half of the 4th century CE. The Codex Alexandrinus is believed to have been written during the 5th century. All three have multiple differences from the text most Christians know today.

"In any event, none of [the original manuscripts of the books of the Bible] now survive. What do survive are copies made over the course of centuries, or more accurately, copies of the copies of the copies, some 5,366 of them in the Greek language alone, that date from the second century down to the sixteenth. Strikingly, with the exception of the smallest fragments, no two of these copies are exactly alike in their particulars. No one knows how many differences, or variant readings, occur among the surviving witnesses, but they must number in the hundreds of thousands."
The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, pp. 27

Examples:
Codex Vaticanus: Verses not found in this codex that are present in the KJV
Matthew 12:47;16:2b-3;*17:21;*18:11;*23:14;
Mark 7:16; 9:44.46;*11:26;*15:28
Luke 17:36,22:43–44
John 5:4,Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11);
Acts 8:37; 15:34, 24:7; 28:29;
Romans 16:24.
1 Peter 5:3.

This info found in the following book
Metzger, Bruce M.*(2001).*A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament.

Codex Sinaiticus
Mark 16 which tells of the three women, Mary Magdalene, Mary – mother of James and Salome going to the tomb to anoint Jesus body. Codex Sinaiticus ends the chapter at verse 8
“Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.” Modern Bibles continue the tale with verses 9 to 20

The Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9–13)
Father, Hallowed be thy name,
Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so upon earth.
Give us day by day our daily bread
And forgive us our sins, as we ourselves also forgive every one that is indebted to us.
And bring us not into temptation.

John 8: 3–11 is not found in the codex, nor are the verses Luke 9:55–56
Luke 24:51 does not have the phrase “and was taken up into heaven”

These and other verses missing from the oldest texts were evidently viewed by the interpolators and editors as providing some justification for the beliefs of the Gnostics, Docetics, Arians and Adoptionists.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, Bart Ehrman and his teacher. Thank you for posting this, I'll take a closer look at it when I have more time.
 
Logicman said:
Jesus imaginary? Have you done your homeworK? Recommended reading for you:

"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;
“The Historical Jesus of the Gospels,” by Dr. Craig Keener
"New Evidence that Demands a Verdict," by former skeptic Josh McDowell;
"The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel," and
"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.
Click to expand...

Those are horrendously bad pop apologists. I notice you have gone to a cut/paste list again, with no evidence you actually read them. What do you think is convincing out of that?
 
SheWolf said:
I don’t hate Israel. I support its right to exist, but I also support the human rights of people in Palestine. Many proud Jewish people feel the same way
Click to expand...

"Palestine" was a name created by the Romans, and actually referred to an ancient Mediterranean culture that came out of the sea from the northwest (probably an ancient branch of Cypriots). In other words, "Palestinians" are an extinct ancient culture.


OM
 
Logicman said:
Bart Ehrman? An agnostic and one who cast colored beads to vote on New Testament scriptures at the loony-tune, left-wing, liberal Jesus Seminar? The Jesus Seminar that operated on an a priori anti-supernatural bias?

"Raymond E. Brown in An Introduction to the New Testament is critical of the methodology: “It [the Jesus Seminar] has operated to a remarkable degree on a priori principles, some of them reflecting an anti-supernatural bias. For instance the bodily resurrection had no real chance of being accepted as having taken place. The session dealing with the authenticity of Jesus’ predictions of his passion and death was dominated by the initial refusal of most of the participants to allow the possibility that Jesus could have spoken of his impending death by virtue of “super-ordinary” (prophetic) powers; accordingly they voted black (he did not say it) on eleven Synoptic passion predictions.”

Being Skeptical of the Skeptics: a Critique of the Jesus Seminar - The Rev Charlie Holt

Please spare us your spiritually-challenged liberal theologians and their liberal horse manure. Liberals screw up everything - morality, economics, theology, etc., etc.
Click to expand...

I quoted Professor Ehrman in regards to the interpolations and editing of the New Testament text and NOT in regards to his beliefs on the historicity and divinity of Jesus. Also, Ehrman was never a member of the Jesus Seminar: membership list

I was not discussing theology directly, although Christian beliefs in some cases are based on words added to what they see as the canonical New Testament.

While researching this matter I found a reference to another 5th century codex that I had never read about previously – Codex Washingtonianus Though the article says the Codex is the third oldest, other academics argue that the Codex Alexandrinus is the third oldest, both of them apparently put together in the early 5th century

The mysterious insertion referenced in the article, found in no other ancient text follows Mark 16:14:
“This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits [or: does not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to understand the truth and power of God]. Therefore reveal thy righteousness now" - thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, "The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was delivered over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more in order to inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness which is in heaven.”

In 1 John 5, verses 7 and 8 are not found in any known text dated prior to the 14th century:
“7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Other than this passage, there is little in the New Testament which confirms the concept of the Trinity.
 
Somerville said:
I quoted Professor Ehrman in regards to the interpolations and editing of the New Testament text and NOT in regards to his beliefs on the historicity and divinity of Jesus. Also, Ehrman was never a member of the Jesus Seminar: membership list

I was not discussing theology directly, although Christian beliefs in some cases are based on words added to what they see as the canonical New Testament.

While researching this matter I found a reference to another 5th century codex that I had never read about previously – Codex Washingtonianus Though the article says the Codex is the third oldest, other academics argue that the Codex Alexandrinus is the third oldest, both of them apparently put together in the early 5th century

The mysterious insertion referenced in the article, found in no other ancient text follows Mark 16:14:
“This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits [or: does not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to understand the truth and power of God]. Therefore reveal thy righteousness now" - thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, "The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was delivered over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more in order to inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness which is in heaven.”

In 1 John 5, verses 7 and 8 are not found in any known text dated prior to the 14th century:
“7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

Other than this passage, there is little in the New Testament which confirms the concept of the Trinity.
Click to expand...

The link / article below - "The Sacred Mystery of the Trinity" - contains:

The Trinity As Taught by the Ancient Jewish Sages

"Another famous Jewish scholar, Rabbi Eliezer Hakkalir, who lived at the time of Rabbi Simeon ben Jochai, also taught the scriptural doctrine that there were three distinct Beings revealed in the one unified Godhead. In his commentary on Genesis 1:1, Rabbi Hakkalir wrote the following: 'When God created the world, He created it through the Three Sephiroth, namely, through Sepher, Sapher and Vesaphur, by which the Three twywh (Beings) are meant . . . The Rabbi, my Lord Teacher of blessed memory, explained Sepher, Sapher, and Sippur, to be synonymous to Ja, Jehovah, and Elohim meaning to say, that the world was created by these three names.'"12

"Rabbi Bechai, in his commentary on Genesis 1:1 (p. 1, col. 2) explained that the word Elohim Myhla is compounded of two words, Mh and la, that is, "These are God." The plural is expressed by the letter jod (y)".

More examples below.

Grant R. Jeffrey Ministries
 
Logicman said:
The link / article below - "The Sacred Mystery of the Trinity" - contains:

The Trinity As Taught by the Ancient Jewish Sages

"Another famous Jewish scholar, Rabbi Eliezer Hakkalir, who lived at the time of Rabbi Simeon ben Jochai, also taught the scriptural doctrine that there were three distinct Beings revealed in the one unified Godhead. In his commentary on Genesis 1:1, Rabbi Hakkalir wrote the following: 'When God created the world, He created it through the Three Sephiroth, namely, through Sepher, Sapher and Vesaphur, by which the Three twywh (Beings) are meant . . . The Rabbi, my Lord Teacher of blessed memory, explained Sepher, Sapher, and Sippur, to be synonymous to Ja, Jehovah, and Elohim meaning to say, that the world was created by these three names.'"12

"Rabbi Bechai, in his commentary on Genesis 1:1 (p. 1, col. 2) explained that the word Elohim Myhla is compounded of two words, Mh and la, that is, "These are God." The plural is expressed by the letter jod (y)".

More examples below.

Grant R. Jeffrey Ministries
Click to expand...

Oh boy, not this nonsense again. First of all. Eliezer Hakkalir was a poet, not a scholar. Stop lying. This points how that claim is miusing Jewish sources sophiee's blog - Jesus is not for Jews
 
RAMOSS said:
Oh boy, not this nonsense again. First of all. Eliezer Hakkalir was a poet, not a scholar. Stop lying. This points how that claim is miusing Jewish sources sophiee's blog - Jesus is not for Jews
Click to expand...

More on the rabbi from sophiee's blog One point that I thought notable - we aren't actually sure who the man was.
R' Elazar (also known as Eliezer Hakalir) was a Kabbalist - a mystic, a poet. His writings are "drash" -- mystical commentary.
(. . .)
Torah.org states "It is certain that R' E' lived before the time of Rashi (died 1105) as Rashi quotes R' E's poems many times in both his Tanach and Talmud commentaries. Some say that the paytan / liturgist was R' Elazar the son of R' Shimon bar Yochai, one of the sages of the Mishnah in the second century. Others contend that he lived in the fifth century and is the R' Eliezer ben R' Shimon who is mentioned in Midrash Rabbah to Vayikra 23:40. Still others identify him as R' Elazar ben Arach, a member of the generation which saw the destruction of the Bet Hamikdash (the Second Temple) in the first century C.E. "
Click to expand...
 
Logicman said:
Bart Ehrman? An agnostic and one who cast colored beads to vote on New Testament scriptures at the loony-tune, left-wing, liberal Jesus Seminar? The Jesus Seminar that operated on an a priori anti-supernatural bias?

"Raymond E. Brown in An Introduction to the New Testament is critical of the methodology: “It [the Jesus Seminar] has operated to a remarkable degree on a priori principles, some of them reflecting an anti-supernatural bias. For instance the bodily resurrection had no real chance of being accepted as having taken place. The session dealing with the authenticity of Jesus’ predictions of his passion and death was dominated by the initial refusal of most of the participants to allow the possibility that Jesus could have spoken of his impending death by virtue of “super-ordinary” (prophetic) powers; accordingly they voted black (he did not say it) on eleven Synoptic passion predictions.”

Being Skeptical of the Skeptics: a Critique of the Jesus Seminar - The Rev Charlie Holt

Please spare us your spiritually-challenged liberal theologians and their liberal horse manure. Liberals screw up everything - morality, economics, theology, etc., etc.
Click to expand...
Na, that’s Conservatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom