Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The Text Josephus Never Wrote


Ben Masada

Recommended Posts

The Son of God, according to the only Scriptures that Jesus used to refer to as the Word of God, is Israel. See Exodus 4:22,23. "Israel is My Son; so, let My Son go that he may serve Me." Jesus was son of God for his part with Israel, and not on an individual basis. That's not my saying. It is written. Then, for John 3:16, here is another version to the same text:

ANOTHER ASPECT OF JOHN 3:16

And God so loved the world that, to teach Mankind what love is, He became a Jew. That's a truth that every single Christian believes in it, but refuses to behave as such. To start with, because of the NT false charge that Jews have killed Jesus, a serial persecution has been developed since the Church got organized by Constatine in 310 ACE and up to this very day, through pogroms, blood libels, Crusades, Inquisition, and last but not least, the Holocaust of only 70 years ago, when millions of Jewish lives have been destroyed. I guess God made a mistake. Mankind was not ready to be taught what love is.

Ben

Spot-on Ben. Once again you've managed to make me pause at your eloquence and wisdom. Excellent work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Son of God, according to the only Scriptures that Jesus used to refer to as the Word of God, is Israel. See Exodus 4:22,23. "Israel is My Son; so, let My Son go that he may serve Me." Jesus was son of God for his part with Israel, and not on an individual basis. That's not my saying. It is written. Then, for John 3:16, here is another version to the same text:

ANOTHER ASPECT OF JOHN 3:16

And God so loved the world that, to teach Mankind what love is, He became a Jew. That's a truth that every single Christian believes in it, but refuses to behave as such. To start with, because of the NT false charge that Jews have killed Jesus, a serial persecution has been developed since the Church got organized by Constatine in 310 ACE and up to this very day, through pogroms, blood libels, Crusades, Inquisition, and last but not least, the Holocaust of only 70 years ago, when millions of Jewish lives have been destroyed. I guess God made a mistake. Mankind was not ready to be taught what love is.

Ben

What a paraphrase... where do I find the original?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fences around the Torah, as I have told you, is the way I look at these little things in the tradition of the Mishnah. Little things without the power of a commandment. But, with regards to the offensive attitude of Jesus against the Pharisees, I do not believe it was from Jesus, as this was of the line of the Pharisees himself. Paul was the one who had a grudge against the Pharisees for having set the Land of Israel out of Paul's reach under penalty of being arrested if he was ever caught around. Hence, Paul never succeeded to raise a church in the whole of the Land of Israel. He did have some disciples in Israel who would gather in private houses. But a church was forbidden to be raised in Israel. Hence his imprecations against the Pharisees in the gospels.

You have mentioned above, supposedly from Jesus, that what defiles a person is what comes out from inside and not what comes in. I do not fully agree with that. Poison comes in and does defile a person, whereas physically. But since the text means spiritually, Lustful thoughts occur by what comes in through the eyes. Therefore, it is from outside. As well as through the touch, which, of course comes from outside. It means that if Jesus was a wise Jew, he could not have said those words as an intelligent proverb.

Ben

So basically Jesus' comments disagree with your Jewish outlook and you therefore take the view that Jesus never said these words. But in another part, if Jesus' words do match up to Jewish teachings, you'll happily quote them to me.

I think I'm starting to understand how you work out your idea as to what in the New Testament is 80% inaccurate and the 20% that is accurate. The stuff that agrees with you, you embrace and accept. The parts that disagree are additions by Paul. If you're going to dismiss everything that disagrees with you on that basis, is there any point in continued discussion?

~ PA

Edited by Paranoid Android
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically Jesus' comments disagree with your Jewish outlook and you therefore take the view that Jesus never said these words. But in another part, if Jesus' words do match up to Jewish teachings, you'll happily quote them to me.

I think I'm starting to understand how you work out your idea as to what in the New Testament is 80% inaccurate and the 20% that is accurate. The stuff that agrees with you, you embrace and accept. The parts that disagree are additions by Paul. If you're going to dismiss everything that disagrees with you on that basis, is there any point in continued discussion?

~ PA

Question: Are you a Christian?

Question: Are you a Jew?

Question: what is YOUR bias in claiming that Ben's view is skewed?

I would of course, as a Hindu and atheist, say that 0% of the New Testament is accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question: Are you a Christian?

Question: Are you a Jew?

Question: what is YOUR bias in claiming that Ben's view is skewed?

I would of course, as a Hindu and atheist, say that 0% of the New Testament is accurate.

Yes, I am a Christian.

No, I am not a Jew,

I did not say Ben's view is skewed, I said that if he is going to accept the parts of the New Testament that support orthodox Judaism and then arbitrarily throw out the rest, then there is no way either of us can ever have a two-way discussion. Ben's quoted Jesus to me on several occasions to support his view. This time I quoted Jesus to him and he said that it was more likely an anti-Pharisee thing from Paul and therefore Jesus probably never said these words. How can either of us ever have an intelligent discussion if our quotes are accepted or rejected entirely on the basis of whether they line up with what we believe. On my side of the debate, I accept all scripture as the word of God and therefore if I disagree with Ben it is on a basis of interpretation, not a dismissal of the text. Hence we're either at a wall where the discussion just stops, or we get back on the merry-go-round and start going around in the same circles over and over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I am a Christian.

No, I am not a Jew,

I did not say Ben's view is skewed, I said that if he is going to accept the parts of the New Testament that support orthodox Judaism and then arbitrarily throw out the rest, then there is no way either of us can ever have a two-way discussion. Ben's quoted Jesus to me on several occasions to support his view. This time I quoted Jesus to him and he said that it was more likely an anti-Pharisee thing from Paul and therefore Jesus probably never said these words. How can either of us ever have an intelligent discussion if our quotes are accepted or rejected entirely on the basis of whether they line up with what we believe. On my side of the debate, I accept all scripture as the word of God and therefore if I disagree with Ben it is on a basis of interpretation, not a dismissal of the text. Hence we're either at a wall where the discussion just stops, or we get back on the merry-go-round and start going around in the same circles over and over again.

One more question: why do you believe that the Christian Bible is the word of God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more question: why do you believe that the Christian Bible is the word of God?

After reading the Bible, it made sense to me, and so I committed myself to Christ. Twelve years later, I've read the Bible constantly and consistently. I have plenty of reasons to believe that God is behind it, and absolutely no reason to believe that God was not behind it. Therefore, I believe that it is the word of God. I guess when I first became there was a dose of faith involved in accepting the Bible as God's word, but at the time the story of Jesus made perfect sense to me and therefore I was willing to accept the Bible. And since then I have seen no reason to doubt my initial decision.

Hope that helps :tu:

~ PA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading the Bible, it made sense to me, and so I committed myself to Christ. Twelve years later, I've read the Bible constantly and consistently. I have plenty of reasons to believe that God is behind it, and absolutely no reason to believe that God was not behind it. Therefore, I believe that it is the word of God. I guess when I first became there was a dose of faith involved in accepting the Bible as God's word, but at the time the story of Jesus made perfect sense to me and therefore I was willing to accept the Bible. And since then I have seen no reason to doubt my initial decision.

Hope that helps :tu:

~ PA

At least you're honest.

I would be very interested to see what these 'reasons' you have are. I'd like to see if there are any arguments you have that I haven't heard before; and heard debunked over, and over, and over again.

More questions perhaps: Have you read the Koran? Have you read the Vedas? Have you studied the history of the authorship of the Bible? Have you studied the origins of Christianity? The origins of Judaism? The origins of religion? And, perhaps most importantly: why do you believe that there is a God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least you're honest.

I would be very interested to see what these 'reasons' you have are. I'd like to see if there are any arguments you have that I haven't heard before; and heard debunked over, and over, and over again.

More questions perhaps: Have you read the Koran? Have you read the Vedas? Have you studied the history of the authorship of the Bible? Have you studied the origins of Christianity? The origins of Judaism? The origins of religion? And, perhaps most importantly: why do you believe that there is a God?

One of the reasons that non-believers have difficulty understanding God is that they leave out the spiritual aspect of a relationship with Him. Belief in God is not purely an intellectual exercise. It is a very real day-by-day experience of interaction with Him.

We all know that humans have the five senses with which we interact with our environment: touch, taste, sight, hearing, smell. Christians have the added sense of spiritual perception. We don't have words which adequately define spiritual interaction. We hear God, but it's not an audible sensation through our ears. We see God at work, but it's not a vision that comes through our eyes. We feel God's presence, but it's not a tactile use of our hands. These interactions occur on a spiritual level. It's difficult to explain it in mere words. How do you describe sight to a blind man? How does a deaf man understand what hearing is? To a non-believer, spiritual interaction makes no sense because the non-believer lacks the spirit to interact with.

I believe in God because of the very real ways in which He has changed my life for the better. I believe in God because I have read the Bible and its words have been verified through my experiences. I pray and interact with God on a daily basis. I have seen evidence of His works in my life, and in the lives of others.

I have not read the Vedas, although I have read portions of the Quran as well as a smattering of other religious texts. The Bible that I read speaks about these other texts, but I hesitate to elaborate on that lest I be reprimanded for disrespecting others' beliefs. The Bible also speaks about non-believers in a similar way, but I will not mention that as well, as it can be interpreted as derogatory.

Yes, there is faith involved in belief, but it is not blind faith. It is faith born of numerous prior experiences which indicate that the road I am on is steady and secure. The bridge I am crossing is sound and has born my weight successfully thus far, and I see that the bridge continues ahead of me. There is no indication that the bridge becomes faulty ahead, so I continue on in my belief.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the reasons that non-believers have difficulty understanding God is that they leave out the spiritual aspect of a relationship with Him. Belief in God is not purely an intellectual exercise. It is a very real day-by-day experience of interaction with Him.

We all know that humans have the five senses with which we interact with our environment: touch, taste, sight, hearing, smell. Christians have the added sense of spiritual perception. We don't have words which adequately define spiritual interaction. We hear God, but it's not an audible sensation through our ears. We see God at work, but it's not a vision that comes through our eyes. We feel God's presence, but it's not a tactile use of our hands. These interactions occur on a spiritual level. It's difficult to explain it in mere words. How do you describe sight to a blind man? How does a deaf man understand what hearing is? To a non-believer, spiritual interaction makes no sense because the non-believer lacks the spirit to interact with.

I believe in God because of the very real ways in which He has changed my life for the better. I believe in God because I have read the Bible and its words have been verified through my experiences. I pray and interact with God on a daily basis. I have seen evidence of His works in my life, and in the lives of others.

I have not read the Vedas, although I have read portions of the Quran as well as a smattering of other religious texts. The Bible that I read speaks about these other texts, but I hesitate to elaborate on that lest I be reprimanded for disrespecting others' beliefs. The Bible also speaks about non-believers in a similar way, but I will not mention that as well, as it can be interpreted as derogatory.

Yes, there is faith involved in belief, but it is not blind faith. It is faith born of numerous prior experiences which indicate that the road I am on is steady and secure. The bridge I am crossing is sound and has born my weight successfully thus far, and I see that the bridge continues ahead of me. There is no indication that the bridge becomes faulty ahead, so I continue on in my belief.

And I can understand your position; after all, it was mine for more than forty years. However, please don't try to tell me that your beliefs are based on more than blind faith. Mine weren't. I do not believe that 'spiritual' things exist, so you would first please have to demonstrate to me that they do. I once believed they did, but I have since come to realize I was deluding myself. I often use what I like to call the 'Acid Analogy': Someone is on LSD, and they are trying to tell everyone that they now know what the world actually looks like. Everyone else however, can see that the one on LSD is simply, demonstrably wrong, and that LSD has distorted their view of reality. I think of myself as one who was reared on acid, but has since learned to stop taking it, and see the world for what it is.

Quick questions: Do you believe the entire Bible? Are you a creationist? Are you a geocentrist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I can understand your position; after all, it was mine for more than forty years. However, please don't try to tell me that your beliefs are based on more than blind faith. Mine weren't. I do not believe that 'spiritual' things exist, so you would first please have to demonstrate to me that they do. I once believed they did, but I have since come to realize I was deluding myself.

It would be rather difficult to demonstrate to you that spiritual things do exist, as you believe they don't and Christianity is based merely on blind faith. I could cite numerous instances in my life which are evidence of spiritual workings, but you would probably label them as coincidence.

I often use what I like to call the 'Acid Analogy': Someone is on LSD, and they are trying to tell everyone that they now know what the world actually looks like. Everyone else however, can see that the one on LSD is simply, demonstrably wrong, and that LSD has distorted their view of reality. I think of myself as one who was reared on acid, but has since learned to stop taking it, and see the world for what it is.

That argument can be claimed by anyone. You say I am wrong; I would say that you are wrong, and we are both convinced we are right. Being convinced of one's rightness does not guarantee rightness.

Quick questions: Do you believe the entire Bible? Are you a creationist? Are you a geocentrist?

I believe that the document known as the Holy Bible is a collection of historical, theological, and poetical writings which may be used as a source document for Christianity.

I am a creationist, although the study of creation and evolution does not occupy my entire existence. It would be a bit more defining to label me as a Christian.

I am not a geocentrist.

Edited by J. K.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be rather difficult to demonstrate to you that spiritual things do exist, as you believe they don't and Christianity is based merely on blind faith. I could cite numerous instances in my life which are evidence of spiritual workings, but you would probably label them as coincidence.

That argument can be claimed by anyone. You say I am wrong; I would say that you are wrong, and we are both convinced we are right. Being convinced of one's rightness does not guarantee rightness.

I believe that the document known as the Holy Bible is a collection of historical, theological, and poetical writings which may be used as a source document for Christianity.

I am a creationist, although the study of creation and evolution does not occupy my entire existence. It would be a bit more defining to label me as a Christian.

I am not a geocentrist.

Although, that is sort of interesting... I'm not necessarily saying that I'm right, apart from the fact that I think I'm right that you're wrong. I'm not trying to convert you to Hinduism, for instance; that would be against my dharma. But I am intrigued that you are a creationist... yet curiously not a geocentrist. The Bible provides support for both views, does it not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although, that is sort of interesting... I'm not necessarily saying that I'm right, apart from the fact that I think I'm right that you're wrong. I'm not trying to convert you to Hinduism, for instance; that would be against my dharma. But I am intrigued that you are a creationist... yet curiously not a geocentrist. The Bible provides support for both views, does it not?

I think it depends on how you view what the Bible says. There's a lot of writing in the Old Testament that, while describing attributes of God and His work, is written more in the form of poetry than as a scientific analysis; at least, that's my take on it.

Example: "And you forget the Lord your Maker, Who stretched out the heavens And laid the foundations of the earth; You have feared continually every day Because of the fury of the oppressor, When he has prepared to destroy. And where is the fury of the oppressor?" Isaiah 51:13

The context of this statement precludes it from being much other than a poetic description of God's power. I will say that I have seen the phrase "stretched out the heavens" used to support the idea that God created the big bang which spread the universe. It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it's the point of that verse.

I think the Christians who might be geocentric would be those I would term as Fundamentals, who believe in a very strict literal reading of all Scripture, I don't run in those circles, so I've never met more than a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it depends on how you view what the Bible says. There's a lot of writing in the Old Testament that, while describing attributes of God and His work, is written more in the form of poetry than as a scientific analysis; at least, that's my take on it.

Example: "And you forget the Lord your Maker, Who stretched out the heavens And laid the foundations of the earth; You have feared continually every day Because of the fury of the oppressor, When he has prepared to destroy. And where is the fury of the oppressor?" Isaiah 51:13

The context of this statement precludes it from being much other than a poetic description of God's power. I will say that I have seen the phrase "stretched out the heavens" used to support the idea that God created the big bang which spread the universe. It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it's the point of that verse.

I think the Christians who might be geocentric would be those I would term as Fundamentals, who believe in a very strict literal reading of all Scripture, I don't run in those circles, so I've never met more than a few.

Of course, it's my opinion that Bronze Age Palestinian herdsman didn't have any idea at all about the origins of the world, about morality, or any scientific subjects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although, that is sort of interesting... I'm not necessarily saying that I'm right, apart from the fact that I think I'm right that you're wrong. I'm not trying to convert you to Hinduism, for instance; that would be against my dharma. But I am intrigued that you are a creationist... yet curiously not a geocentrist. The Bible provides support for both views, does it not?

It also provides support for numerous other views....

Young Earth creationism

Old Earth creationism

  • Gap creationism
  • Day-Age creationism
  • Progressive creationism

Neo-Creationism

Intelligent design

Creation science

Theistic evolution (evolutionary creation)

Modern geocentrism

Omphalos hypothesis

Edited by Jor-el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also provides support for numerous other views....

Young Earth creationism

Old Earth creationism

  • Gap creationism
  • Day-Age creationism
  • Progressive creationism

Neo-Creationism

Intelligent design

Creation science

Theistic evolution (evolutionary creation)

Modern geocentrism

Omphalos hypothesis

Precisely. ALL of which are patently absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least you're honest.

I would be very interested to see what these 'reasons' you have are. I'd like to see if there are any arguments you have that I haven't heard before; and heard debunked over, and over, and over again.

My reasons cannot be put into an easy statement or sentence. It is the entire sum of my experience and my existence. It's not as simple as making a statement, but going by your answer I guess you were expecting me to say something like "look how amazing the human eye is", or some creationist flim-flam. Sorry, I can't provide that for you, my reasons are personal.

More questions perhaps: Have you read the Koran? Have you read the Vedas? Have you studied the history of the authorship of the Bible? Have you studied the origins of Christianity? The origins of Judaism? The origins of religion? And, perhaps most importantly: why do you believe that there is a God?

Koran - I've read parts of it, and spoken to Muslims about their beliefs, but I have not read the entirety of it.

Vedas - snippets here and there, usually in compilations of spiritual sayings. I have thought about these in some detail, though I admit I have not read a great deal of them.

Authorship of the Bible - yes, in great detail.

Origins of Christianity - yes, in great detail.

Origins of Judaism - yes, in great detail.

The origins of religion - yes, though not as great a detail as the others.

Why do I believe in God? Honestly, I've always believed a creator exists, though it was only after I turned 20 that I came to believe that this creator was the Christian God. I had always believed the creator to be too big to fit into any one world view, and the religions of the world were simply mankind's way of attempting to understand the divine. In times of doubt during my teenage years, I would occasionally slip into agnosticism, but I would eventually always come back to the core idea that there was a creator. When I was 20 years old, I came to the understanding that the God I believed in my whole life was not just any God, but that God wanted us to get to know him through the text we today call the Bible. Since then I have read the Bible many times, looked into its history and authorship, and in the 12 years since that time I have not been let down or shown anywhere that my decision was wrong.

Hope that helps :tu:

~ Regards, PA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My reasons cannot be put into an easy statement or sentence. It is the entire sum of my experience and my existence. It's not as simple as making a statement, but going by your answer I guess you were expecting me to say something like "look how amazing the human eye is", or some creationist flim-flam. Sorry, I can't provide that for you, my reasons are personal.

Koran - I've read parts of it, and spoken to Muslims about their beliefs, but I have not read the entirety of it.

Vedas - snippets here and there, usually in compilations of spiritual sayings. I have thought about these in some detail, though I admit I have not read a great deal of them.

Authorship of the Bible - yes, in great detail.

Origins of Christianity - yes, in great detail.

Origins of Judaism - yes, in great detail.

The origins of religion - yes, though not as great a detail as the others.

Why do I believe in God? Honestly, I've always believed a creator exists, though it was only after I turned 20 that I came to believe that this creator was the Christian God. I had always believed the creator to be too big to fit into any one world view, and the religions of the world were simply mankind's way of attempting to understand the divine. In times of doubt during my teenage years, I would occasionally slip into agnosticism, but I would eventually always come back to the core idea that there was a creator. When I was 20 years old, I came to the understanding that the God I believed in my whole life was not just any God, but that God wanted us to get to know him through the text we today call the Bible. Since then I have read the Bible many times, looked into its history and authorship, and in the 12 years since that time I have not been let down or shown anywhere that my decision was wrong.

Hope that helps :tu:

~ Regards, PA

That does help. I for one am pleasantly surprised that you haven't take the more... aggressive approach other Christians here do. Although, I would still ask: why believe in a creator? You state that you have always believed in a creator: why?

PS ~ THANK YOU for acknowledging the asininity of creationist arguments.

Edited by Arbitran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Precisely. ALL of which are patently absurd.

Actually one or two are not absurd...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually one or two are not absurd...

Wow. Really? That would be news to me.

Which ones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Really? That would be news to me.

Which ones?

Well that is a loaded question isn't it? ;)

That would depend after all on ones paradigm of reality, would it not?

If one is an atheist, none will ever serve under any circumstances.

If one accepts the possibility of evolution they would choose Intelligent design or Theistic evolution.

Pesonally I'm not so inclined.

I would choose Old Earth Creationism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that is a loaded question isn't it? ;)

That would depend after all on ones paradigm of reality, would it not?

If one is an atheist, none will ever serve under any circumstances.

If one accepts the possibility of evolution they would choose Intelligent design or Theistic evolution.

Pesonally I'm not so inclined.

I would choose Old Earth Creationism.

Okay, creationism, in any form, is just the most asinine idea I've ever heard. I've written five full books debunking every single creationist claim. Have any new ones? Maybe I can start a sixth book...

And no, 'paradigms' have nothing to do with it. The key word is reality.

Edited by Arbitran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, creationism, in any form, is just the most asinine idea I've ever heard. I've written five full books debunking every single creationist claim. Have any new ones? Maybe I can start a sixth book...

And no, 'paradigms' have nothing to do with it. The key word is reality.

Your reality...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your reality...

Ha, mine is the same as everyone else's. Why don't you join us? Reality is quite nice this time of year.

You don't get to have your own reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha, mine is the same as everyone else's. Why don't you join us? Reality is quite nice this time of year.

You don't get to have your own reality.

Of course we do... you choose the type of universe you want to live in... you made your choice I made mine.

We may inhabit the same physcial plane of existence, but my reality far exceeds your own, since you are absolutely and utterly grounded in the material... much like the eagle who never flew because it never looked up into the sky...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.