The Text Josephus Never Wrote

[docyabut2]

TheText Josephus Never Wrote. I believe Josephus did write that text of Jesus, he wrote of other so called messiahs such as Simon in his time.

The specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers

[+Link of Hyrule]

Which I'm fine with. You can believe whatever you want. I'd just like to know why anyone else should believe it.

Hi Arbitran, sorry for the delay in my response. I'm not trying to convince you that I am right or that you (or anyone else) should believe it, I'm just stating why it is that I believe what I believe. I do believe that you should consider it, but I cannot convince you of anything nor would I presume that my oratory skills (or in this case, written skills) are anywhere near potent enough to convince someone who doesn't believe in God to suddenly shout EUREKA! and believe. That is up to God (if it exists).

[Arbitran]

Hi Arbitran, sorry for the delay in my response. I'm not trying to convince you that I am right or that you (or anyone else) should believe it, I'm just stating why it is that I believe what I believe. I do believe that you should consider it, but I cannot convince you of anything nor would I presume that my oratory skills (or in this case, written skills) are anywhere near potent enough to convince someone who doesn't believe in God to suddenly shout EUREKA! and believe. That is up to God (if it exists).

Very well.

[Jor-el]

Again, I don't believe in your God; or any god. Of course we should make use of our cognitive faculties; but you cannot simply assert that a god gave us brains without presenting a decent argument.

My cognitive abilies have led me to the certainty of God. Yours have not.

It is not faith I'm talking about but certainty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Oh? In what way?

In that even after having read what is there, after having had the experiences you have claimed to have, you have let yourself be decieved by your senses and have not trusted in God or in the message he has sent us through his living word. In fact it has become worthless to you... all the years you put in studying his word and it didn't lead you to have faith in him. To you it is a dead text... It doesn't speak to your heart and your soul anymore. It has all become meaningless.

[Arbitran]

My cognitive abilies have led me to the certainty of God. Yours have not.

It is not faith I'm talking about but certainty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

It is definitely faith you're talking about; no amount of belief can ever become a certainty or a truth unless it is demonstrated to be so. There is a definite cleft between knowing and believing.

In that even after having read what is there, after having had the experiences you have claimed to have, you have let yourself be decieved by your senses and have not trusted in God or in the message he has sent us through his living word. In fact it has become worthless to you... all the years you put in studying his word and it didn't lead you to have faith in him. To you it is a dead text... It doesn't speak to your heart and your soul anymore. It has all become meaningless.

I do not believe that I am deceived by my senses. And I do not trust in something which I don't believe exists. Again, I would ask you to present some evidence of the claim that the Bible is "God's word"; you can believe it all you like, but that doesn't make it true. All texts are "dead" by your definition; books don't have magical powers, and they aren't alive. The Bible never did speak to my soul; perhaps I thought it did at one time, but I've managed to repent of my mistake and realize I was simply deluding myself.

[Jor-el]

It is definitely faith you're talking about; no amount of belief can ever become a certainty or a truth unless it is demonstrated to be so. There is a definite cleft between knowing and believing.

I do not believe that I am deceived by my senses. And I do not trust in something which I don't believe exists. Again, I would ask you to present some evidence of the claim that the Bible is "God's word"; you can believe it all you like, but that doesn't make it true. All texts are "dead" by your definition; books don't have magical powers, and they aren't alive. The Bible never did speak to my soul; perhaps I thought it did at one time, but I've managed to repent of my mistake and realize I was simply deluding myself.

That is why you lost your faith...

[Arbitran]

That is why you lost your faith...

Bingo. Because faith is unjustified.

[Jor-el]

Bingo. Because faith is unjustified.

For you Arbitran... please qualify your stament.. it makes so much more sense when you do so...

[Arbitran]

For you Arbitran... please qualify your stament.. it makes so much more sense when you do so...

Okay, let me rephrase. Faith, being without evidence is therefore unjustified, since justification for propositions comes in the form of demonstrable evidence. In other words: things that are true/real, give evidence of their truth/reality.

[J. K.]

I take it you believe in the Devil as well? Well, why couldn't he have been deceiving you simultaneously, to create the illusion that it was divinely-guided truth? That's what the Devil does, right? Or why couldn't it have been a spontaneous telepathic, quantum-entangled exchange of information at a distance? Scientists speculate that might be possible. Or why couldn't it have been Reptilians, implanting the same information into both of your brains at once; or why couldn't it have been a malfunction in the Matrix, whereby data was unintentionally copied into both of your cognitive systems? There are literally infinite possible explanations. I just happen to go with the most probable one: coincidence acting upon predictable laws of probability, based on the finite number of passages in the Bible, interpretations thereof, and common ideology.

As you stated, we find what we look for. (And the Reptilians are too busy shapeshifting into news anchors to bother with me.)

[Jor-el]

As you stated, we find what we look for. (And the Reptilians are too busy shapeshifting into news anchors to bother with me.)

That about says it all...

[Ben Masada]

Well-stated once again, Ben. Hats off.

To rephrase for our friend Jor-el, I don't actually ignore any of the gospels; I don't trust their claims to historical accuracy or supernatural events, but that it entirely contingent on analysis of their farcical and incoherent narrative.

We are of the same mind on that one.

[Ben Masada]

Which merely demonstrates your lack of knowledge regarding Judaism as it existed before Yavneh.

The Judaism of before Yavneh is Biblical Judaism. That's what we are discussing. I don't claim to know every thing but, have I said anything wrong about it?

Ben

[Jor-el]

The Judaism of before Yavneh is Biblical Judaism. That's what we are discussing. I don't claim to know every thing but, have I said anything wrong about it?

Ben

Yes a number of things... and if you want I can quote what the Talmud says on those subjects, none of which agree with your position.

[Ben Masada]

TheText Josephus Never Wrote. I believe Josephus did write that text of Jesus, he wrote of other so called messiahs such as Simon in his time.

The specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers

IMHO, Josephus did not write that text because there is no record that he ever converted to Christianity; and the words used by the author of that text don't match those which could be written by a Jew, but a Christian.

Ben

[Ben Masada]

Yes a number of things... and if you want I can quote what the Talmud says on those subjects, none of which agree with your position.

They will agree with my position if they are not taken literally. Don't forget that mostly the Talmud is composed of midrashim, which is the Jewish word for parables, and parables cannot be taken literally. A great deal is made out of commentaries to the Tanach, and more commentaries to those commentaries.

Ben

[Jor-el]

They will agree with my position if they are not taken literally. Don't forget that mostly the Talmud is composed of midrashim, which is the Jewish word for parables, and parables cannot be taken literally. A great deal is made out of commentaries to the Tanach, and more commentaries to those commentaries.

Ben

My friend I am a plain sort of person, I don't delve into hidden meanings and esoteric explanations, what you see is what you get, and that is exactly how the ancients viewed the world. They did have deeper meanings yes, but never did they actively contradict the literal one, so, when God is said to have created the world an all that is in it, in 6 days, that is what I read and accept is written.

Later sages really needed to create meanings where there were none, and that is how some of your particular views came about. I shudder to think of what they would have made of your views back then. Rambam is a perfect example of this. Everybody reveres him, but he literally reinvented Judaism with his views, Many of which actively contradict the Talmud itself and the Tanakh is shredded to pieces in his hands...

[Ben Masada]

My friend I am a plain sort of person, I don't delve into hidden meanings and esoteric explanations, what you see is what you get, and that is exactly how the ancients viewed the world. They did have deeper meanings yes, but never did they actively contradict the literal one, so, when God is said to have created the world an all that is in it, in 6 days, that is what I read and accept is written.

Later sages really needed to create meanings where there were none, and that is how some of your particular views came about. I shudder to think of what they would have made of your views back then. Rambam is a perfect example of this. Everybody reveres him, but he literally reinvented Judaism with his views, Many of which actively contradict the Talmud itself and the Tanakh is shredded to pieces in his hands...

This is for your first paragraph above: If I understand you correctly, you see the Scriptures with the same eyes of the ancient and unlearned ones did; without any notion of metaphorical language. And for contradicting the Scriptures by going for the truth in the metaphorical realm of reality, do you, perhaps, mean that you interpret the talking serpent in the Garden of Eden and the talking mule of Balaam are to be interpreted literally? Please, have mercy! That's why atheists laugh at such theists.

And for your second paragraph, I agree with you as you say that Rambam is a perfect example. Now, go ahead and read his "Guide for the Perplexed" and you will find out what a perfect example he is of. There has never been one among the wise men of Israel more addicted to metaphorical interpretation than the Rambam was. And for the six days of creation, which you interpret literally, you might learn a thing or two by checking my thread about "The Six Days of Creation" in this forum.

Ben

Edited June 1, 2012 by Ben Masada

[Jor-el]

This is for your first paragraph above: If I understand you correctly, you see the Scriptures with the same eyes of the ancient and unlearned ones did; without any notion of metaphorical language. And for contradicting the Scriptures by going for the truth in the metaphorical realm of reality, do you, perhaps, mean that you interpret the talking serpent in the Garden of Eden and the talking mule of Balaam are to be interpreted literally? Please, have mercy! That's why atheists laugh at such theists.

Gods book has no need for active reinterpretation, he can defend himself quite well thank you. We don't have to invent new ways to justify what to the modern eye may seem unjustifible... Can't explain the red sea crossing, sure, it is a metaphor... can't explain God appearing to men, hey it must have been a dream or a vision. Please, what are you possibly trying to explain away? Any day now you justify God away...

The bible deals with supernatural acts by a supernatural God, it deals with Gods active intervention on our behalf (mankind) it deals with Gods character... you start explaining things away you rob the very word of God of it power. And it is Powerful.

I have had occasion to explain what I think of your talking snake and mule... I notice that you didn't bother posting a response to that.

And for your second paragraph, I agree with you as you say that Rambam is a perfect example. Now, go ahead and read his "Guide for the Perplexed" and you will find out what a perfect example he is of. There has never been one among the wise men of Israel more addicted to metaphorical interpretation than the Rambam was. And for the six days of creation, which you interpret literally, you might learn a thing or two by checking my thread about "The Six Days of Creation" in this forum.

Ben

Ben,

The bible uses allegories and metaphores, and they are easily identified by the language and grammar they use, we cannot interpret metaphorically what was never meant to be so. Anyone who does that falls into major error. Philo did something similar and Judaism rejected him and his views, many of which are then repeated by Rambam, yet he is seen almost as a holy man. Doesn't that strike you as somehow strange and nonsensical?

Christianity had a number of these too, Origen and Augustine were the culprits for this view and it caused no end of cinfusion and strife. If you need to blame christian arttitudes toward Jews throughout the centuries, these are the men to indict. They are the motivators of replacement theology... because they used allegory in much the same way that Rambam did.

What you fail to realize, is that the use of allegory within the interpretative structure you yourself claim to use, is a distinctive Hellenisitic concept, something you have accused the church of being, Well Judaism as used by Rambem falls into this category as well.

Augustine and Origen gave christianity Marian worship, Original sin and a host of other non-biblical beliefs, only with the reformation did a part of christianity reject these and many other non-biblical beliefs. All because of allegory... think about that.

[Erudite Celt]

You are right. Indeed, many Jews accepted Jesus, hence he had twelve apostles and 70 disciples, let alone crowds of jews who would listen to him. (Mat. 7:28) But they all did not accept Jesus in the Hellenistic fashion that Paul and his disciples did. While to the real Jews Jesus was but a loyal Jew who had come to confirm the Law down to the letter, according to Matthew 5:19, to the disciples of Paul, Jesus was akin to a Greek demigod, which is the son of a god with an earthly woman. (Mat. 1:20) Besides, that Jesus was the Messiah and had resurrected, Paul himself confessed to his disciple Timothy, that it was all according to his gospel. (2 Tim. 2:8) It means that Paul was the one who had fabricated that idea about Jesus.

Ben

Oh Ben Oh Ben were would you be without the protection of Western Christian Support? Can I make a suggestion that you direct your hatred towards the hoards of Islamic fundamentalists that surround your tiny little state!

[Erudite Celt]

Since you have raised the issue of historical accuracy and authenticity can I ask you do you know what percentage of the Israeli population can trace their genetic ancestry back to the Holy Lands? For instance did you know that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are Jews only by conversion in the 11th century, and that they are genetically less Jewish than the population of Afghanistan! The origins of the Ashkenazi are in the central Caucasus of what was the Scythian regions and then later into the Slavic territories! Ultimately settling along the Rhineland in Germany. Did you know that the Yiddish Language is pure High German and only uses the Hebrew alphabet as a script? 80% of the worlds Jews are of Ashkenazi decent. 92% of the Israeli population are Ashkenazi and so never had at any time Hebrew ancestors living in the Middle east never mind Israel!

The Sephardic Jews of Israel 4% of the population are in their entirety the genetic population who's ancestors roamed in the desert for 40 years in the Exodus. So when a Ashkenazi Jew says he is making Aliyah ie returning to his ancestral homeland it simply ain't true. In anticipation of being called anti-Semitic or a liar the majority of Sephardic Jews only regard someone as truly Jewish if there ancestors sojourned in the great Exodus with Moses and more specifically they had to have been present when the law was handed down at Mount Sinai. I love Israel very much and all it's peoples but Zionism is a political movement and has more to do with political alliances than religion.

Revelation 3:9

I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars--I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.

The above prophesy likely refers to Zionists bowing down to the real Jews. The Sephardic Jews!

But of course you call Jesus Christ the Son of G*d a liar. You also stated in another of your Pseudohistoric posts that Jesus was the b****** child of a Roman solder who raped Mary!

You are so full of venom that I can smell it here in Ireland!

Edited June 1, 2012 by Erudite Celt

[Ben Masada]

Gods book has no need for active reinterpretation, he can defend himself quite well thank you. We don't have to invent new ways to justify what to the modern eye may seem unjustifible... Can't explain the red sea crossing, sure, it is a metaphor... can't explain God appearing to men, hey it must have been a dream or a vision. Please, what are you possibly trying to explain away? Any day now you justify God away...

God's book is man's book. God is not like a man to write books. You are unthropomorphizing God. (Num. 23:19)

The bible deals with supernatural acts by a supernatural God, it deals with Gods active intervention on our behalf (mankind) it deals with Gods character... you start explaining things away you rob the very word of God of it power. And it is Powerful.

God does not deal with any one on a personal basis. Only man deals with another on a personal basis. The method of God to deal with man is through dream/visions, Nature and the Scriptures, if they speak according to the Law and the Prophets. (Isa. 8:20)

I have had occasion to explain what I think of your talking snake and mule... I notice that you didn't bother posting a response to that.

I did post a response to that. Thank you.

The bible uses allegories and metaphores, and they are easily identified by the language and grammar they use, we cannot interpret metaphorically what was never meant to be so. Anyone who does that falls into major error. Philo did something similar and Judaism rejected him and his views, many of which are then repeated by Rambam, yet he is seen almost as a holy man. Doesn't that strike you as somehow strange and nonsensical?

Philo was a Hellenistic Jew just as Paul was. And major errors incurr those who interpret the Scriptures literally. Errors bordering on contradictions.

Christianity had a number of these too, Origen and Augustine were the culprits for this view and it caused no end of cinfusion and strife. If you need to blame christian arttitudes toward Jews throughout the centuries, these are the men to indict. They are the motivators of replacement theology... because they used allegory in much the same way that Rambam did.

IMHO, it is even an insult to compare Origen and Augustine with the Rambam.

What you fail to realize, is that the use of allegory within the interpretative structure you yourself claim to use, is a distinctive Hellenisitic concept, something you have accused the church of being, Well Judaism as used by Rambem falls into this category as well.

Now, you are talking nonsense.

Augustine and Origen gave christianity Marian worship, Original sin and a host of other non-biblical beliefs, only with the reformation did a part of christianity reject these and many other non-biblical beliefs. All because of allegory... think about that.

And Paul gave Christianity the idolatry of the demigo and the Trinity.

Ben

[Ben Masada]

Oh Ben Oh Ben were would you be without the protection of Western Christian Support? Can I make a suggestion that you direct your hatred towards the hoards of Islamic fundamentalists that surround your tiny little state!

Muslems do not use a Jew to vandalize Judaism with Greek Mythology. Only Christianity does.

Ben

[Ben Masada]

Since you have raised the issue of historical accuracy and authenticity can I ask you do you know what percentage of the Israeli population can trace their genetic ancestry back to the Holy Lands? For instance did you know that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are Jews only by conversion in the 11th century, and that they are genetically less Jewish than the population of Afghanistan! The origins of the Ashkenazi are in the central Caucasus of what was the Scythian regions and then later into the Slavic territories! Ultimately settling along the Rhineland in Germany. Did you know that the Yiddish Language is pure High German and only uses the Hebrew alphabet as a script? 80% of the worlds Jews are of Ashkenazi decent. 92% of the Israeli population are Ashkenazi and so never had at any time Hebrew ancestors living in the Middle east never mind Israel!

The Sephardic Jews of Israel 4% of the population are in their entirety the genetic population who's ancestors roamed in the desert for 40 years in the Exodus. So when a Ashkenazi Jew says he is making Aliyah ie returning to his ancestral homeland it simply ain't true. In anticipation of being called anti-Semitic or a liar the majority of Sephardic Jews only regard someone as truly Jewish if there ancestors sojourned in the great Exodus with Moses and more specifically they had to have been present when the law was handed down at Mount Sinai. I love Israel very much and all it's peoples but Zionism is a political movement and has more to do with political alliances than religion.

Revelation 3:9

I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars--I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.

The above prophesy likely refers to Zionists bowing down to the real Jews. The Sephardic Jews!

But of course you call Jesus Christ the Son of G*d a liar. You also stated in another of your Pseudohistoric posts that Jesus was the b****** child of a Roman solder who raped Mary!

You are so full of venom that I can smell it here in Ireland!

You are completely mistaken about a lot of points in this post of yours above. I have heard that the Ashkenazy Jews come from the Khazars in the south of Russia. It does not matter if they converted to Judaism, as long as it was according to Halachah or Jewish Law. But that's not verified. Another thing you are mistaken about is to reduce the Sephardic population to 4% in Israel. I live here and I can assert with precision that it is the opposite of it. The Sephardic Jewish population make the majority of the Israeli population. I would know, considering that I am a Sephardic Jew myself.

What's the point about being the Yisdish language of German origin with Hebrew characters? The same is with Ladino. Spanish in Hebrew characters. I can see that your point is to discard the Jews from their right to the Land of our fathers. It doesn't help though. We have had this land for over 4000 years. and we have all the right in the world to have it back, considering that we did not abandon it but were expelled from it. That's quite different from the Americans who dispossessed the native American Indians from their land when there was never a native European in America for even a year of his life in the land before 1492.

And by quoting Revelation to claim that we are not Jews, all you are doing is promoting the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology. And the biggest mistake you have made above is to say that I call God a liar by denying that Jesus was a demigod, which is the son of a god with an earthly woman. And to consider Jesus to have

been a b******, I am not the one who does, but you and all Christians, when you guys deny that Joseph was a biological father to Jesus. He was a Jew, for heaven's sake! A Jew cannot be born like a Greek demigod. There is no such a thing in Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus. Have I made myself clear? Yes, Great! Now, commit it to memory. Paul should chosen a Greek to spread his Hellenistic gospel.

Ben

Edited June 1, 2012 by Ben Masada

[Jor-el]

God's book is man's book. God is not like a man to write books. You are unthropomorphizing God. (Num. 23:19)

God does not deal with any one on a personal basis. Only man deals with another on a personal basis. The method of God to deal with man is through dream/visions, Nature and the Scriptures, if they speak according to the Law and the Prophets. (Isa. 8:20)

I did post a response to that. Thank you.

Philo was a Hellenistic Jew just as Paul was. And major errors incurr those who interpret the Scriptures literally. Errors bordering on contradictions.

IMHO, it is even an insult to compare Origen and Augustine with the Rambam.

Now, you are talking nonsense.

And Paul gave Christianity the idolatry of the demigo and the Trinity.

Ben

Who gave Moses the words Ben?

Who gave the Prophets the words Ben?

Why do you consider the book sacred Ben?

If its mans words, it has no authority.

As for the rest... you talk of christians and their preconcieved notions but you treat your own scripture with less respect than we do. At least we take what is written as it was meant to be read. Sure not all christians do that, but I do, and you are wrong.