ANY contemporary evidence for Jesus ?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-03-2013, 10:48 AM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2013 09:38 AM by ralphellis.)
RE: ANY contemporary evidence for Jesus ?
(13-03-2013 08:27 AM)EGross Wrote:  Some of the fragmnents of some early Toldot yeshu are in the Russian National Library. While doing an internet search for the frament group marked "Evr. I 274" I came across a good paper on Toldot Yeshu at this site It is well written, delivered at a symposium at Princeton, and some of Dr. Deutsch's work is included, and titled "Judeo-Arabic Versions of Toldot Yeshu".

Arabic?

Ah, the fun never ends. Here is a snippet from the end of the document, noting a bit of the the Arabic version - the preface anyhow:


To be honest, I despair with these academic discussions of texts. They see so many trees in such fine detail, but never see the forest.

The most crucial element in these many versions of the Toledoth, is the change between Pilate and Queen Helena being the governor of Jerusalem, and yet they never ponder this question. Why would the Jews want to base the trial of Jesus in the AD 50s? Why would they want to admit that the governor of Jerusalem was a woman? In what way was Jesus related to Queen Helena (for her to be invoked). The point is ignored.

However, the possibility that the Helena version of Toledoth only surfaced after the Crusades may be worth exploring. It is worth noting that the first Eastern city to be liberated from Muslim rule, was Edessa.

It is also worth noting that in the 2nd century (and 1st century?) the Shetiyya stone mentioned in the web-text you referenced was in the posession of the kings of Edessa. This is why the biblical Simon was called Peter Cephas (the stone, stone). It is also why the Jewish sacred day is Yom Kippur (the Day of the Sone). There is an inscription at Edessa saying that the sacred stone was on the Edessan sacred hill at Sogmatar.

And you are wrong about the difference in spellings. If you read the inscriptions, you will find that there were numerous spelling differences between Jerusalem Aramaic and Edessan Parthio-Aramaic.



.





.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 08:30 AM
RE: ANY contemporary evidence for Jesus ?
Quote:I am not convinced, since I hold that Jesus never existed, and that the only inserts seem to be centuries later. As far as Josephus goes, his writings are to be taken with a few grains of salt due to his relationship with Vespasian, the primary editor. Josephus also wrote of the great suicide at Masada (which is also not mentioned by the sages), which has been shown to have no evidence of ever having happened, and his description of the place does not match the archeological remains that we have today. While he does provide some good information where it is lacking, when it comes to unverified history-makers, a bit of confirmation is always good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_jesus
"Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed,[1][2][3][4] and biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[5][6][7] While there is little agreement on the historicity of gospel narratives and their theological assertions of his divinity[8][9][10][11] most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30–36 AD."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 10:29 AM
RE: ANY contemporary evidence for Jesus ?
bibliotecapleyades.net/ Tongue


I was there all day yesterday. What a bunch of crazy stuff. Big Grin

[Image: 10339580_583235681775606_5139032440228868471_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2013, 11:55 AM
RE: ANY contemporary evidence for Jesus ?
(14-03-2013 08:30 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30–36 AD."


But most scholars are not nearly skeptical or enquiring enough.

In reality Jesus was not a Galilean, but a Gali. The Nazarene castrated were called Gali, and Jesus was a Nazarene and he asked for his disciples to become castrated Gali in Math 19:12.

In other words, Jesus was a forrunner of Emperor Elagabalus, and this puts a completely new spin on the reality of Jesus political 'ministry'.



.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2013, 12:29 AM
RE: ANY contemporary evidence for Jesus ?
(14-03-2013 11:55 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  
(14-03-2013 08:30 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30–36 AD."



But most scholars are not nearly skeptical or enquiring enough.

In reality Jesus was not a Galilean, but a Gali. The Nazarene castrated were called Gali, and Jesus was a Nazarene and he asked for his disciples to become castrated Gali in Math 19:12.



In other words, Jesus was a forrunner of Emperor Elagabalus, and this puts a completely new spin on the reality of Jesus political 'ministry'.



.


Ah...so that's why he said "blessed are the meek"...he didn't have any balls.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-03-2013, 06:10 AM
RE: ANY contemporary evidence for Jesus ?
(15-03-2013 12:29 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Ah...so that's why he said "blessed are the meek"...he didn't have any balls.

Wink Wink

.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: