Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53

Thread: Jesus Christ: Real Person or Mythical Fad?

  1. #21

    Re: Jesus Christ: Real Person or Mythical Fad?

    Harvard scholar's discovery suggests Jesus had a wife



    BOSTON – A Harvard University professor on Tuesday unveiled a fourth-century fragment of papyrus she said is the only existing ancient text quoting Jesus explicitly referring to having a wife.

    Karen King, an expert in the history of Christianity, said the text contains a dialogue in which Jesus refers to "my wife," whom he identifies as Mary. King says the fragment of Coptic script is a copy of a gospel, probably written in Greek in the second century.

    King helped translate and unveiled the tiny fragment at a conference of Coptic experts in Rome. She said it doesn't prove Jesus was married but speaks to issues of family and marriage that faced Christians.

    Four words in the 1.5-by-3-inch (3.8-by-7.6-centimeter) fragment provide the first evidence that some early Christians believed Jesus had been married, King said. Those words, written in a language of ancient Egyptian Christians, translate to "Jesus said to them, my wife," King said in a statement.

    King said that in the dialogue the disciples discuss whether Mary is worthy and Jesus says "she can be my disciple."

    Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was unmarried even though there was no reliable historical evidence to support that, King said. The new gospel, she said, "tells us that the whole question only came up as part of vociferous debates about sexuality and marriage."

    "From the very beginning, Christians disagreed about whether it was better not to marry," she said, "but it was over a century after Jesus's death before they began appealing to Jesus's marital status to support their positions."

    King presented the document at a six-day conference being held at Rome's La Sapienza University and at the Augustinianum institute of the Pontifical Lateran University. While the Vatican newspaper and Vatican Radio frequently cover such academic conferences, there was no mention of King's discovery in any Vatican media on Tuesday. That said, her paper was one of nearly 60 delivered Tuesday at the vast conference, which drew 300 academics from around the globe.

    The fragment belongs to an anonymous private collector who contacted King to help translate and analyze it. Nothing is known about the circumstances of its discovery, but it had to have come from Egypt, where the dry climate allows ancient writings to survive and because it was written in a script used in ancient times there, King said.

    The unclear origins of the document should encourage people to be cautious, said Bible scholar Ben Witherington III, a professor and author who teaches at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. He said the document follows the pattern of Gnostic texts of the second, third and fourth centuries, using "the language of intimacy to talk about spiritual relationships."

    "What we hear from the Gnostic is this practice called the sister-wife texts, where they carried around a female believer with them who cooks for them and cleans for them and does the usual domestic chores, but they have no sexual relationship whatsoever" during the strong monastic periods of the third and fourth centuries, Witherington said. "In other words, this is no confirmation of the Da Vinci Code or even of the idea that the Gnostics thought Jesus was married in the normal sense of the word."

    These kinds of doubts, King said, should not stop scholars from continuing to examine the document.

    Those who conducted initial examination of the fragment include Roger Bagnall, a papyrologist who's the director of the New York-based Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, and AnneMarie Luijendijk, a scholar of the New Testament and early Christianity from Princeton University. They said their study of the papyrus, the handwriting and how the ink was chemically absorbed shows it is highly probable it's an ancient text, King said.

    Another scholar, Ariel Shisha-Halevy, professor of linguistics at Hebrew University and a leading expert on Coptic language, reviewed the text's language and concluded it offered no evidence of forgery.

    King and Luijendijk said they believe the fragment is part of a newly discovered gospel they named "Gospel of Jesus's Wife" for reference purposes. King said she dated the time it was written to the second half of the second century because it shows close connections to other newly discovered gospels written at that time, especially the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Philip.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2012/...#ixzz26wkKRKUp
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #22

    Re: Jesus Christ: Real Person or Mythical Fad?

    Is it necessary to present obvious forgeries to confuse the faithful Christians? Egyptian Copts are known for lying and forging documents throughout Egypt. You can see their lies in the new movie about prophet Mohammed, falsely testifying that prophet Mohammed who fought perversion all his life was a homosexual. Lord Jesus Christ has only one spotless bride, his faithful wife, his church, he had no earthly wife: the Word of God that created man needed no wife to create billions of sons of God out of stone if Lord Jesus Christ so wished.

    Shame on Karen King, who well knowing the forgiving nature of Son of Man chose to lie about Lord Jesus Christ for money. Hopefully, a humanist whore will earn the whore's recompense.
    Last edited by Crossman; 01-16-2016 at 11:36 PM.

  3. #23

    Re: Jesus Christ: Real Person or Mythical Fad?

    I agree. Jesus' only "bride" is His beloved people.

  4. #24

    Jesus, God or Not?

    Please note this thread is automatically generated whenever new uploads become available on talkshoe.com - we invite you to discuss this sermon here. All threads with zero replies after thirty days will be merged in The TalkShoe Consolidated Thread. -admin

    Jesus, God or Not?
    - This 25 minute study covers even more scriptures that prove Jesus is Yahweh, the God of Israel. Pastor Visser again shows Biblical proofs that Christ gave the Mosaic Law and has ties to Melchisedec 'the king of Salem.' We further examine how Jesus dealt with the jews, His divine prerogative and show why He asked "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

    More...

  5. #25

    Re: Jesus, God or Not?

    We know that in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    2 The same was in the beginning with God.
    3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.


    So who knows what WORD is being referenced here? I will give a clue, it is in Genesis 1:1.

    If you look at Gen 1:1 in the Hebrew you will find a word listed twice that is NOT translated into English. There is no need for it in English because in Hebrew it is a pointer to the object of the action of the verb.

    That word is spelled 'aleph-tav' the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet. When translated into Greek it would be 'alpha-omega', the beginning and the end.

    The Paleo-hebrew word picture is interesting. Aleph was the 1st letter of all the titles of Yah prior to His name YHVH being given to Moses. Elohyim, El, Elowah all start with aleph. It is also the picture of the head of a bull symbolizing strenth. A bull was also a sacrifical animal. The tav symbol is a cross and means covenant. The paleo-hebrew meaning has several options like 'strenght of the covenant' or 'God/sacrifice on the cross'.

    In Gen 1:1 'aleph-tav' is the pointer to the action of creation for the heavens and the earth. By him and through Him all things were created, the alpha-omega. He is also identified as such in Rev 22, the end of the bible. So this concept is presented at the very beginning and the end of scripture as well.

    Aleph-tav is the WORD! It is a symbol of Yeshua Himself. John knew the Hebrew and knew Yeshua was the 'aleph-tav' of Genesis.

    B'rshyt (in front/beginning) bara (created) Elohyim (Yah) et ('aleph-tav') hashamayim (the heavens) vet ('and aleph-tav') haerats (the earth).

    Now the location of 'aleph-tav' within the verse has two occurances just as Yeshua has two comings. It is also positioned in the passage to show the timing of His coming if you take each word to be a prepresentation of a 1000 year day of the week of 1000 years with the 7th day being the millennium Sabbath. He came at the 4000 point and comes at the end of the 6000 year point just prior to the 1000 year Sabbath, ie the millennium kingdom.

    It also shows that Yah was already planning on the need for Yeshua on the cross at the creation itself.

  6. #26

    Jesus's Sermon

    I was part of the Judeo Christian church for years and if I needed advice or had a question I could go to my pastor. Of course that has changed now. I will NEVER deny Jesus but since becoming C.I. I have had questions and this is the only place I know to ask them. So here goes:

    "If someone hits you on one cheek then turn the other to them"

    You know all the teachings. Are they literal? Who do they refer to? If a negro hits you in the face will you turn the other cheek? If I am a Christian brother/neighbor and hit you will you turn the other cheek?

    Resist not Evil? Really?
    If a thief wants you shirt then give him your jacket too? What thief is this? A negro? A Jew? A brother?

    I am just asking. Understand that I am believing in something that when taken LITERAL makes no sense. Can anyone help?

  7. #27
    Hardcore DSCI seedliner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hell On Earth!
    Posts
    1,953

    Re: Jesus's Sermon

    Hey, Bill. You living in Tennessee now?
    “The righteous mother of the seven children spake also as follows to her offspring: I was a pure virgin, and went not beyond my father’s house; but I took care of the built-up rib. No destroyer of the desert, or ravisher of the plain, injured me; nor did the destructive, deceitful, snake, make spoil of my chaste virginity; and I remained with my husband during the period of my prime.” (4 Maccabees 18:7-8)

  8. #28

    Re: Jesus's Sermon

    From Dr. Swift:

    "Now, I want to point out to you the Tenets. This is called the GREAT TEMPLE OF UNIVERSAL UNDERSTANDING which is to have its large room known as the MEDITATION ROOM, the HALL OF ILLUMINATION. Here the Illuminati, Masters of Wisdom and leaders of the TEMPLE OF UNDERSTANDING are going to train the public in the NEW HUMANISTIC DEVELOPMI~ OF RELIGION FOR ALL THE WORLD AND THE U.N. LISTEN TO THIS! The Illuminati, the Illuminated Masters are going TO TRAIN THE WORLD AND ALL THAT IS PUBLIC IN THIS NEW RELIGION, it's going to replace all the "SIX PHASE they say and in this they put on Christianity at the same level in this Country with the SIX IMPORTANT STEPS, they say, of the New Religion which, of course, as they develop it here is to be HINDUISM, JUDAISM, BUDDHISM, CONFUCIANISM, CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM. Now, let me point out the SIX POINTS, this is why I tell you that CHRISTIAN POINT doesn't mean a thing. This Christian Point is a point for the philosophy of a teacher named JESUS, but not for INCARNATE GOD who told His Kingdom that they were to occur the earth. They only want those points of the philosophy that surrender the Kingdom into the hands of the enemy and so one of the most important phase facets of this, and we have the material concerning this, is the teachings of Christ as interpreted by the ILLUMINATED MASTERS who say, RESIST NO MAN, TURN THE OTHER CHEEK and all of these things. The only thing they can see is the disarmament pacifist program.

    Now, I want to say this; Jesus Christ never taught you to turn the other cheek to the Soviet Union. He never taught you to love all these pagans that hate your God. He never told you, my friends that you were not to resist. You say, why, what about the Sermon on the Mount? The Sermon on the Mount is the rule of the Kingdom for Christians, brothers and sisters of the same race and of the same household, inside their own Nation. Their enemies are of their own household; those that would despitefully use them and have spiritual responsibility and can be shamed and moved on by the Spirit of God. You can1t take the Laws of the Kingdom and try to work with the Anti-Christ on them, or he'll cut your throat all the time. Jesus never instructed that, but inside of this, they are trying even to take Christianity down to just a sort of a moralization of how to surrender your independence, don't resist, don't fight, be a pacifist and so forth."

    http://israelect.com/ChurchOfTrueIsr.../swiftbab.html

  9. #29

    Re: Jesus, God or Not?

    From

    http://www.christianidentitychurch.net/

    The Anglo-Saxon Jesus

    By Jason Robb, J.D.

    EDITORS NOTE: The term Anglo-Saxon in this article is used generically . The white race has kindred people who do not necessarily identify themselves as Anglo-Saxon. All white people are related by blood and share common ancestry. The term Anglo-Saxon therefore would be interchangeable with any word used for identifying those of our European kindred such as Germanic or Scandinavian (among others)

    For centuries Jesus Christ was depicted by Europeans as one of their own. Images of Jesus Christ whether in paint or upon stained glass clearly showed Him (including the apostles, His mother Mary, the women who labored for Christ, and his followers) as white.

    However, today there is an attempt to undermine the factual evidence that Jesus was white. Instead we are told that Jesus is a mixture of all races. Many modern artists attempt to portray Jesus with all of the various racial characteristics. The Judeo-Christian preachers today and their anti-Christ rabbi counterparts argue that Jesus probably had black, tight curly, perhaps even kinky hair. The historians and archaeologists of today, excluding the ones in the past, argue he would look like a typical "Israeli" in which he would look neither black or white, but a dark brown mixture of the two.

    The question is what did Jesus Christ really look like? The traditional view of Europeans hold that he had blond or auburn hair and blue or hazel eyes. His face was long with high cheek bones (note: The Shroud of Turin), and he was tall and muscular. This traditional view has been depicted in Western art for centuries such as in "The Pantocrator" or "Creator of All," a sixth-century mosaic. Now, however, many are saying that this white "view" of Jesus by Europeans was only a testament of the ancient racism of Europeans.

    This past Easter, when millions of Christians celebrated Jesus’ resurrection, scientists, historians, and Judeo-Christians collaborated to create a "new model" for Jesus, which aired around Easter on the Discovery Channel and PBS. Joe Zias, one of the leading archaeologists in Israel, who worked on the project, said, "in reconstructing this head, we are not claiming that this is exactly Jesus’ face, but we are trying to counteract all of those bad images of blond-haired , blue-eyed Jesus running around Hollywood productions." He continued and said, " we know he didn’t have long hair and it wasn’t blond. And he wasn’t blue eyed." How does he know that?

    John Dominic Crossan, a "scholar" based in Florida said, "this is a country of immigrants and now our ethnicity is changing once again. We have a growing population of Latinos and others. What will Jesus look like in the future? He certainly will look darker."

    Even Rev. D. James Kennedy, the Presbyterian pastor from Ft. Lauderdale, Florida and T.V. evangelist said, "Nobody really knows what Christ looked like, and to a very real extent it is irrelevant… The important thing is that he is the Redeemer and Son of God".

    The problem with all these reconstructions of Jesus and these Judeo-Christian ministers such as Dr. Kennedy is it is relevant what he looked like. Jesus was the Redeemer - but to whom? (Note Matt. 1:23 and others)

    Although the description of Jesus in some respects is not important, such as his height, weight, or how long his hair is, what is important is that He was the Kinsmen Redeemer (Kinsmen: of the same blood) to a certain people – Israel, who now comprises the Anglo-Saxon -Teutonic and kindred people of Europe. And Jesus’ racial description identifies the people He belonged to. So in asking what Jesus looked like is actually asking what does the race he belonged to by physical birth look like? There is Biblical and historical evidence that informs us exactly what he (by race) looked like. And THAT is important. It is the reason the genealogy of Jesus is given in Matthew and Luke.

    BIBLICAL EVIDENCE

    Jesus was the direct descendent of Kind David and therefore the rightful heir of the Israel’s kingdom throne. In I Samuel 16:12, when Samuel went to anoint David to be the new King of Israel it states, "And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy…" In Webster’s dictionary, ruddy is defined as … redness; akin to red; having a healthy reddish color. (Even Adam means to "blush" or " to show redness in the face." This identifies only one race. I’ll let you figure out which race.) Therefore King David would have been fair skinned with reddish hair. Not the typical dark Jew or Arab, as some are now being led to believe. (Some will cite Rahab (wrongly called a prostitute instead of the important position she held) and Ruth who are counted among the genealogy of Jesus - claiming that these two women of God were not Israelites and thus additional proof that Jesus was not racially pure. Those who make this erroneous claim have been deceived into believing that the countries in which these women lived characterize their race. It does not. Both women were Israelites and followers of Jehovah)

    HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

    The vast majority of the world is ignorant of the fact that there were actually eye-witnesses and written accounts of Jesus, His earthly father Joseph, and His mother Mary. Many of these written accounts are kept in the Vatican library, which describes what Jesus and Joseph looked like. These written accounts were compiled in The Archko Volume.

    In The Archko Volume, we can read where Gamaliel was sent by the Sanhedrin to interrogate Joseph and Mary in regard to the child Jesus. He says in regard to Joseph, "his hair looks as though it might have been dark auburn when young." Later, he talks about Jesus’ description. "His hair is a little more golden than hers (his mother Mary), though it is as much from sunburn as anything else… His eyes are large and soft blue, his eyebrows very large." This is a description of a people that does not represent the people we know as Jews today. This is not the description of Arabs, blacks, or any other type of people. This is the description of our ancestors – the white Europeans.

    Valleus Paterculus, a Roman Historian, met and interviewed Jesus and made a report to Pilate, who in return made a report to Caesar. Paterculus states, "One day in passing by the place of Siloe, where there was a great concourse of people, I observed in the midst of the group a young man who was leaning against a tree, calmly addressing the multitude. I was told it was Jesus… His golden-colored hair and beard gave his appearance a celestial aspect… "

    Lastly, as we can see, Jesus was a person who resembled a particular race of people. Only one race has blond, auburn, or red hair, with blue, green, and hazel eyes. All these characteristics identify the white race, the true Israel. However, as our nation becomes more Judiazed and non-white, no longer will our ancestors in the Bible be depicted as a reflection of us, but will be depicted as a typical dark mideastern Jew.

    Tom Roberts, editor of the Catholic Reporter said, "artists should feel free to reinterpret Jesus for each new era." The era that is approaching and coming upon us is a Jewish era, an era that does not reflect the traditional Christian morals and values of our people, but is an attempt to change the core values of our people in preparation of the one world church.

    The fact is Jesus Christ was a white man. He came to the lost sheep of the House of Israel as their Kinsman Redeemer. Can anyone of any race follow the teachings of Jesus Christ? Yes, but it doesn't make them kinsmen. It doesn't give them the authority to change the historical and correct image of Jesus' white racial background into their own. And saying that Jesus Christ is white doesn't make a person an evil hater any more than it would were they to say that George Washington or Queen Elizabeth is white. They are merely stating the facts.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    "Beyond the rivers of Ethiopia."
    Posts
    868

    Re: Jesus, God or Not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahweh's Chosen View Post
    We know that in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    2 The same was in the beginning with God.
    3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.


    So who knows what WORD is being referenced here? I will give a clue, it is in Genesis 1:1.

    If you look at Gen 1:1 in the Hebrew you will find a word listed twice that is NOT translated into English. There is no need for it in English because in Hebrew it is a pointer to the object of the action of the verb.

    That word is spelled 'aleph-tav' the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet. When translated into Greek it would be 'alpha-omega', the beginning and the end.

    The Paleo-hebrew word picture is interesting. Aleph was the 1st letter of all the titles of Yah prior to His name YHVH being given to Moses. Elohyim, El, Elowah all start with aleph. It is also the picture of the head of a bull symbolizing strenth. A bull was also a sacrifical animal. The tav symbol is a cross and means covenant. The paleo-hebrew meaning has several options like 'strenght of the covenant' or 'God/sacrifice on the cross'.

    In Gen 1:1 'aleph-tav' is the pointer to the action of creation for the heavens and the earth. By him and through Him all things were created, the alpha-omega. He is also identified as such in Rev 22, the end of the bible. So this concept is presented at the very beginning and the end of scripture as well.

    Aleph-tav is the WORD! It is a symbol of Yeshua Himself. John knew the Hebrew and knew Yeshua was the 'aleph-tav' of Genesis.

    B'rshyt (in front/beginning) bara (created) Elohyim (Yah) et ('aleph-tav') hashamayim (the heavens) vet ('and aleph-tav') haerats (the earth).

    Now the location of 'aleph-tav' within the verse has two occurances just as Yeshua has two comings. It is also positioned in the passage to show the timing of His coming if you take each word to be a prepresentation of a 1000 year day of the week of 1000 years with the 7th day being the millennium Sabbath. He came at the 4000 point and comes at the end of the 6000 year point just prior to the 1000 year Sabbath, ie the millennium kingdom.

    It also shows that Yah was already planning on the need for Yeshua on the cross at the creation itself.

    If correct this interesting information also confirms the 4th and 6th day 1st and 2nd Advents of Christ !

    The attachment below seems to confirm that around the three full nights and three full days in the dark tomb:


    • Christ's 1st Advent occurred near the very end of the 4th thousand years since Adam !
    • The pre-Christian era only ended on the weekly-Sabbath-day resurrection of Christ !
    • The following day Omer of Christ Himself started the 1st 1000 years of the Christian ere !
    • We are therefore only now near the very end of the 2nd 1000 years of the Christian era !
    • Christ's 2nd advent will be at the end of this 6th thousand years since Adam !


    The pending fulfilment of most outstanding prophesies will precede the finalgreat and dreadful day of Yahwehwhen Hisindignationpasses over - while we are safely inside Hisstrong tower


    (see: “Tower of the Flock)


    When we emerge from thetower of the flockthe wicked will beashes under the soles of your feet!


    It seems that at the changing of this age:

    • His indignation will correspond to the three full nights and three full days in the dark tomb !
    • His second advent will correspond to His weekly Sabbath day resurrection !
    • His millennium reign start on Earth will correspond with the Omer of Christ Himself !



    Establishing the day of Christ's crucifixion will determine where we are in this Timeline:

    Each week of this timeline is also 1000 years since Adam.

    One day of it equals 1/7th of 1000 years
    .

    Fixin
    g the crucifixion day of Christ will determine the day of His Omer after the weekly-Sabbath-day resurrection.

    This will allow us to calculate exactly where we are in the last day of this 6th week/6th thousand years since Adam
    !

    His 2nd Advent ends the 2nd thousand years of the Christian era and His millennium rei
    gn starts the next day !


    See the attachment:
    Attached Files Attached Files

Similar Threads

  1. Why Yahweh/Yahshuah vs. of God/Jesus Christ?
    By Obadiah 1:18 in forum New Testament
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-22-2010, 10:21 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •