Skip to Content

Jesus was a communist

194 posts / 0 new
Last post
Marcos
Offline
Joined: 23/04/2017

roman wrote:

ALB, if you really want to learn about textual criticism, go to a University, or Seminary Library, and look up some textual criticism on Paul's Epistles, you don't go to the daily mail writing about a guy who looked at one codex ... these silly news stories are plenty and cheap, go to real scholarship.

The biggest biblical liars come out from the divinity schools and the religious seminary., one of the biggest biblical liars was Paul

The Bible is full of statements which indicate that the first one who rejected women is the so-called god of Israel.

Many of the epistles were not written by Paul,  He suffered from syphilis and he was not  able to write, and he uses opium to stand the pain, and opium produce hallucination

In the Congregations of the Jehovah Witness women are the more active one doing door to door preaching and working for the organizations, and men have all the privileges, men are allowed to talk standing up, but women must sit on a table, they must obey their husbands like slaves, 

According to the New Testaments women were the first one to see Jesus after his resurrection, and according to the Bible the apostles of Jesus were the ones who were  able to be witness of his resurrection, therefore, they had the same privileges as men, but Paul one of the founders of the Catholic church  changed everything. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ALB
Offline
Joined: 22/06/2011

Dave B wrote:
I didn’t think Josephus mentioned the Nasoreans or Nazzoreans.
No, but he does mention the "Nazarites". Just checked, as taking time off from selling Socialist Standards and pamphlets at the West London Peace Fair yesterday I bought a copy of The Works of Josephus, a 19th century reprint (1875) of William Whiston's classic 1737 translation  in a local bookshop for only £9. So, I'm equipped to re-enter the fray.

Here's the notorious passage (from Antiquities, Book XVIII, chapter 3) where some pious fraudster has made Josephus write:

Quote:
Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, -- a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him ; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Josephus was writing around 93/94 AD (as the christians put it). The tampering with what Josephus might originally written (some reference to the christians and their beliefs perhaps) is blatant. A religious Jew such as Josephus would never have called Jesus "the Christ" (the Greek for Messiah) nor doubted that he would have been a man.

Only a christian would have, so giving away that one of them had tampered with the text. Whiston himself, in  an appendix entitled "The Testimonies of Josephus concerning Jesus Christ, John the Baptist, and James the Just vindicated",  concedes the point that it could only have been written by a christian, and uses this as evidence that Josephus himself must have secretly been "a Nazarene or Ebionite Jewish Christian". I don't think Roman's "modern scholars" set much credence to this theory (do they?)

Marcos
Offline
Joined: 23/04/2017

ALB wrote:

Dave B wrote:
I didn’t think Josephus mentioned the Nasoreans or Nazzoreans.
No, but he does mention the "Nazarites". Just checked, as taking time off from selling Socialist Standards and pamphlets at the West London Peace Fair yesterday I bought a copy of The Works of Josephus, a 19th century reprint (1875) of William Whiston's classic 1737 translation  in a local bookshop for only £9. So, I'm equipped to re-enter the fray.

Here's the notorious passage (from Antiquities, Book XVIII, chapter 3) where some pious fraudster has made Josephus write:

Quote:
Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, -- a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him ; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Josephus was writing around 93/94 AD (as the christians put it). The tampering with what Josephus might originally written (some reference to the christians and their beliefs perhaps) is blatant. A religious Jew such as Josephus would never have called Jesus "the Christ" (the Greek for Messiah) nor doubted that he would have been a man.

Only a christian would have, so giving away that one of them had tampered with the text. Whiston himself, in  an appendix entitled "The Testimonies of Josephus concerning Jesus Christ, John the Baptist, and James the Just vindicated",  concedes the point that it could only have been written by a christian, and uses this as evidence that Josephus himself must have secretly been "a Nazarene or Ebionite Jewish Christian". I don't think Roman's "modern scholars" set much credence to this theory (do they?)

The Nazarites are mentioned on Judges 13.5 of the Old Testament, and they were the peoples dedicated to God who had long hairs

Judges 13:5New International Version (NIV)

You will become pregnant and have a son whose head is never to be touched by a razor because the boy is to be a Nazirite, dedicated to God from the womb. He will take the lead in delivering Israel from the hands of the Philistines.”

And then Mathew changed it to indicate that he was from Nazareth ( a city that did not exist at

 

that time )

Matthew 2:23American Standard Version (ASV)

23 and came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, a]" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 0.625em; line-height: 22px; position: relative; vertical-align: top; top: 0px;">[a]that he should be called a Nazarene..

 

Original prophecy said that he was going to be born in Belen

Micah 5:2New International Version (NIV)

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
    though you are small among the clansa]" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 0.625em; line-height: 22px; position: relative; vertical-align: top; top: 0px;">[a] of Judah,
out of you will come for me
    one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
    from ancient times.”

 The Bible is a book full of craps and contradictions. They contradict each other. it does not make any difference if the teaching come from university or seminary and the best universities are owned by Jesuits, Salesian and Dominicos  many of them have a doctorate degree in Theology and doctoral degree in Medicine, Psychology, Sociologist and Economics. Those 3 congregations are called the Doctors of the Church. There were many sects in Israel who tried to be the real Christians and follower of Judaism, there was a group of Christrian who rejected the teaching of Paul  Evyionim-Nosrim  establish themselves  in the region known as Nazareth, and they called it  the city of the poor, because they had a bow of poverty, like the  Trapenses in Spain

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Login or register to post comments