- Joined
- May 29, 2017
- Messages
- 721
- Reaction score
- 542
- Location
- N.C., originally from NYC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
anointing a body three days later doesn't fall in line with any Jewish tradition
Last edited:
anointing a body three days later doesn't fall in line with any Jewish tradition
They've gone back and forth a couple of times now in video form. Of course Paulogia is the more mature debater, with WLC sometimes launching into personal attacks as his "argument," instead of actually addressing the points Paulogia raised.
Paul is an ex-theist who knows his bible inside out, and has done a lot of research.
anointing a body three days later doesn't fall in line with any Jewish tradition
anointing a body three days later doesn't fall in line with any Jewish tradition
anointing a body three days later doesn't fall in line with any Jewish tradition
http://legacy.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Instone-Brewer/prepub/07_Instone_Brewer.pdfJESUS OF NAZARETH’S TRIAL IN THE UNCENSORED TALMUD
Summary
The Munich Talmud manuscript of b.San.43a preserves passages censored out of the printed editions, including the controversial trial of ‘Yeshu Notzri’. Chronological analysis of the layers in this tradition suggests that the oldest words are: ‘On the Eve of Passover they hung Jesus of Nazareth for sorcery and leading Israel astray.’
This paper argues that other words were added to this tradition in order to overcome three difficulties: a trial date during a festival; the unbiblical method of execution; and the charge of ‘sorcery’.
10. Conclusions
The traditions about the trials of Jesus and his disciples which were censored from b.San.43a were brought into the Talmudic discussions early in the Third Century and removed in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries. External evidence gives independent witness that the earliest core in this tradition was: ‘On the Eve of Passover, they hung Jesus of Nazareth for sorcery and enticing Israel [to idolatry].’
The least difficult explanation is that the earliest core of the censored tradition of Jesus’ trial came from the time of Jesus. Succeeding generations felt they could not change it, despite difficulties presented by the wording. Instead, later editors added explanatory phrases during the latter half of the Second Century to help readers understand the correct meaning of this tradition, as they saw it.
There are becoming an increasing number of scholars who, based on the evidence, are coming to the conclusion that the Jesus person never existed, let alone a god name Jesus.
Paul is an ex-theist who knows his bible inside out, and has done a lot of research.
Of course Paulogia is the more mature debater, with WLC sometimes launching into personal attacks as his "argument," instead of actually addressing the points Paulogia raised.
WMAP Site FAQsWhat happened before the Big Bang? What happened right at the moment of the Big Bang?
We don't know. To even address these questions we need to have a quantum theory of gravity. We have a quantum theory, and we have a gravity theory, but these two theories somehow need to be combined. We know that our current gravity theory does not apply to the conditions of the earliest moments of the Big Bang. This is exciting research now in progress!
Paul is an ex-theist who knows his bible inside out, and has done a lot of research. Here he is debunking the common argument that disciples gave their lives rather than recant that Jesus rose from the grave. William Lane Craig has responded to his videos with counter videos of his own.
The Empty Tomb | Reasonable FaithHistorians think they’ve hit historical paydirt when they have two independent sources for some event. If all we had for the empty tomb were just the pre-Markan Passion story and the pre-Pauline formula, that would be enough to convince most scholars of the historicity of Jesus’ burial and empty tomb. But, in fact, we have at least six sources, some of which are among the earliest material in the New Testament. No wonder most scholars are convinced!
Now, of course, even here I am summarizing. Much more can be (and has been) said. There’s no substitute for digging deeper and reading some good books on Jesus’ resurrection. But I trust that this is enough to move the debate beyond simple misunderstanding to a new level.
There are becoming an increasing number of scholars who, based on the evidence, are coming to the conclusion that the Jesus person never existed...
Where's your evidence for that flatulence?
Can you please provide the link to WLC's responses - just so we know what these alleged "personal attacks" are.
Btw, never heard of Paulogia - so thanks to you for these videos.
Cite, please. Provide something to support your claim.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...xist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/
When it comes down to it, the gospels are written decades after the events they are supposed to describe, the authors are anonymous, and there are major contradictions.
I've never heard of this guy until you brought him up. I googled about him.
He claims he's a former Christian. That's HIS claim.
I am a former Christian who takes a look at the claims of Christians. It is my mission to help those "still in the maze" of indoctrinated belief, those recently escaped and those who enjoy the exploration.
He talks about his life before and after in detail. He worked for George Lucas on Star Wars. If he was making it all up, I believe he would have been exposed long ago. In the end, that isn't relevant. His arguments stand or fall on their own merit.
Lol. Somehow....I think he's another Richard Dawkins who's trying to cash in by selling reassurances to desperate atheists
who want to be reassured that there is no God. :mrgreen: I say, to each his own. :shrug:
Wow, that's some projection you got going on there. Why would atheists be "desperate"? We have no god to offend. We don't need to be reassured that there is no God,
Atheists are as "desperate" for proof that god doesn't exist as you are desperate for reassurance that Leprechauns don't exist.
But going back to you citing him like as if he's the answer to someone like William lane Craig - lol, how can you even think that?
He debunked what WLC said in his video. Arguments stand or fall on their own merit, not on the letters after someone's name, or how popular they are.
I think, his real target market are atheists - his venture is more for atheists than to actually challenge or debate theists.
So, I question if he's even a real ex-theist. I mean, a serious ex-theist who was really into his religion.
Again, none of that matters. He debunked WLC's video. Arguments stand on their own merit.
Quite the contrary, I don't think Paulogia had demonstrated his maturity when he's admitted that dinosaurs and young earth had eroded his alleged Christian faith. Really?
He already has you resorting to Ad hominem attacks eh. Obviously he struck a nerve. Arguments stand on their own merit, your attempts at personal attacks fail.
I also highly question his intellect because of that.
Yet you believe in a magical invisible being who you think is all powerful and all knowing, yet the book he breathed into existence is full of contradictions, and nobody can understand what it means, as witnessed by the thousands of different sects of Christianity, each with a different interpretation.
Maybe you should look in the mirror?
The time people spend obsessing about something they think doesn't exist.
Here's part of the straight response of WLC on independent sources touched on that video
Historians think they’ve hit historical paydirt when they have two independent sources for some event. If all we had for the empty tomb were just the pre-Markan Passion story and the pre-Pauline formula, that would be enough to convince most scholars of the historicity of Jesus’ burial and empty tomb. But, in fact, we have at least six sources, some of which are among the earliest material in the New Testament. No wonder most scholars are convinced!
Historians think they’ve hit historical paydirt when they have two independent sources for some event.
They're in the video, you can just watch it.
You're welcome. He's really good, very calm and even handed.
Page not found | True FreethinkerRaphael Lataster’s book - There Was No Jesus, There Is No God
Having considered the latest, of a never ending, round of pop-research on the issue of the historical Jesus and Jesus mythicism, namely Michael Paulkovich and Raphael Lataster, I posted the following statement on Facebook:
I found Paulkovich's claims fascinating as a few years ago I personally conducted research on documents written 70 AD to 200-250 AD and chronicled 205 texts that reference Jesus.
The number refers to the texts themselves and not to the number of times that Jesus is referenced in each text.
Counting each reference would take us well beyond the 205 total.
Furthermore, the number refers to the texts and not to each manuscript behind each text.
Counting each manuscript would also take us well beyond the 205 total.
My evidence is here: Historical Jesus – two centuries worth of citations
Historical Jesus - Two Centuries Worth of Citations | True FreethinkerHistorical Jesus - Two Centuries Worth of Citations
The question as to how many early ancient texts there are which refer to Jesus is often proposed.
So if there are two independent sources for any event, you believe it occurred, is that correct?
So if I find two independent sources that saw Rah, you would agree Rah is real. If I find two independent sources that an Alien abduction occurred, you will agree that alien abductions are real. If I find two independent sources that saw a First Nations god, you would agree that this makes First Nation's gods real?
According to your quote, if I can find two independent sources for any super natural event ever happening, you will believe that even truly happened. Is that correct?
He talks about his life before and after in detail. He worked for George Lucas on Star Wars. If he was making it all up, I believe he would have been exposed long ago.
Arguments stand or fall on theirown merit, not on the letters after someone's name, or how popular they are.