292 responses to “The Lucifer Project”

1. 

   Georgie Porgie

   November 29, 2015 at 10:28 pm

   
   

   ZOE IT SEEMS I HAVE LOST THE PIECE ON LUKE

   Loading…
2. 

   ac

   November 29, 2015 at 10:38 pm

   
   

   i do respect and understand your fanaticism with the bible ,However modern man is more intelligent and those things that seem acceptable are now brought into question guided by knoweldge and understanding seeking for truth.,
   ”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

   the above excerpt clearly alerts the disciples what to except with a clear than clear indication/ observation of what the disciples should expect before and even after his death
   Yet the disciples were confounded and wanted better proof, Amazing

   Loading…
3. 

   Simple Simon

   November 30, 2015 at 1:17 am

   
   

   @Zoe November 28, 2015 at 4:22 AM “If baptism were necessary for salvation, Paul surely would have insisted that ALL who BELIEVE should be baptized.”

   But Zoe: I NEVER said that baptism [is] necessary for salvation,

   Why do you think that I think so?

   Loading…
4. 

   Simple Simon

   November 30, 2015 at 1:32 am

   
   

   Dear Georgie Porgie and Zoe:

   If wunna two unbelievers choose to think that a first century household did not contain children then what can I say but guh ‘long.

   Loading…
5. 

   Zoe

   November 30, 2015 at 6:02 am

   
   

   The Roman historian and senator Tacitus referred to Christ, his execution by Pontius Pilate, and the existence of early Christians in Rome in one page of his final work, Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.[1]

   The context of the passage is the six-day Great Fire of Rome that burned much of the city in AD 64 during the reign of Roman Emperor Nero.[2] The passage is one of the earliest non-Christian references to the origins of Christianity, the execution of Christ described in the canonical gospels, and the presence and persecution of Christians in 1st-century Rome.

   Loading…
6. 

   Zoe

   November 30, 2015 at 6:04 am

   
   

   Thanks GP, this great exposition and teaching!

   Loading…
7. 

   Simple Simon

   November 30, 2015 at 9:22 am

   
   

   But Georgie Porgie:

   I did not ask for the meaning of the Greek word for baptism.

   My question was/is about whether or not the word household include children.

   Just remember that most of us believers will never get a Barbados Exhibition or the international equivalent.

   So to save our poor simple souls from eternal damnation we need a simple explanation that simple people can understand.

   Simple Simon is the kinda fella who at age 11 put up he han’a and ask the science teacher “please teacher why you only pickin’ on the brown skin children to answer the science questions”

   That question got Simple thrown out of that teacher’s classes for life.

   More than 50 years on the teacher hasn’t answered the Simple’s simple question and still sharply averts head when meeting Simple in public.

   So my question to you is “DOES THE WORD HOUSEHOLD INCLUDE CHILDREN?”

   Loading…
8. 

   millertheanunnaki

   November 30, 2015 at 9:40 am

   
   

   @ Zoe November 29, 2015 at 9:23 PM #

   “No other World religion, has anything even remotely close, to the Prophecies declared in the OT, and exactly FULFILLED by Jesus in the New Testament.”
   “Isn’t that statement a paradox of complete contradictions?”

   “Miller, the context of my above statement, is, that NO other World religion has ANY prophecies relating to their supposed saviour’s, and historic fulfillment, as Christianity does.”

   “Because they are ALL MYTHS, whereas, Christianity IS* an Historically grounded FAITH!”

   Now what can be more sanctimoniously arrogant than what you wrote above?
   Who are you to judge other people’s religions describing them as “ALL MYTHS”? Are you deputizing for your god? Nothing about the Jesus story is original; just a concoction of myths borrowed from other religions and cultures, especially Egyptian.

   Since you are so cocksure about your Christianity being the only True Religion, why don’t you take a trip to Saudi Arabia and publicly ‘acclaim’ Islam to a false religion based on MYTH and that the Prophet Muhammad is a fake?

   “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”

   Loading…
9. 

   Zoe

   November 30, 2015 at 11:36 am

   
   

   Miller, Did you think before you WRITE; or are just plain downright INTELLECTUALLY dishonest!?

   “Now what can be more sanctimoniously arrogant than what you wrote above?
   Who are you to judge other people’s religions describing them as “ALL MYTHS”? Are you deputizing for your god? Nothing about the Jesus story is original; just a concoction of myths borrowed from other religions and cultures, especially Egyptian.”

   “….Nothing about the Jesus story is original; just a concoction of MYTHS BORROWED FROM other religions and cultures, especially Egyptian.”

   Miller, ….just a concoction of MYTHS BORROWED from other religions…” “…Myths BORROWED…” Really Miller, here you ADMIT that the other religions are MYTHOLOGICAL, as they WERE!!! As there WAS, IS NO historical basis in FACT, nor evidence, for these OTHER religions of mythological, FANTASY, lies and FABLES!!!

   So, IF the Jesus story, BORROWED these MYTHS, from other PAGAN religions, it is absolutely amazing, supernaturally AMAZING, that all of the MYTHS, (Borrowed) became a LIVING, FACTUAL, HISTORICAL, REALITY, IN* the LIFE, of The Lord Jesus Christ, confirmed beyond reasonable doubt, BY, internal EVIDENCE, and external EVIDENCE, through Roman Historians, et al, with NO other ancient DOCUMENTS, coming CLOSE, to the ATTESTATION of the New Testament manuscripts.

   The following is taken from GP’s submission on a portion of Mark’s Gospel; again, amazing TESTIMONY from those who WITNESSED Jesus ministry!

   All this is so few chapters, with such energetic rapidity – and punctuated by references of the effect on the people:

     "They were astonished at His doctrine" (1:22). 
     "And they were all amazed" (1:27). 
     "His frame spread abroad throughout all the region" (1:28). 
     "They came to Him from every quarter" (1:45). 
     "Many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them" (2:2). 
     "They were all amazed.. .We never saw it on this fashion (2:12). 
     "All the multitude resorted unto Him" (2:13). 
     "A great multitude from Galilee followed Him, and from Judea, and from Jerusalem and from Idumea, and from   beyond Jordan, and they about Tyre and Sidon; a great Multitude, when they had heard what great things He did"   (3:7,8). 
     "The multitude . . . lest they should throng Him" (3:9). 
     "And unclean spirits . . . fell down before Him, and cried, Thou art the Son of God!" (3:11). 
     "The multitude cometh together again, so that they could not so much as eat bread" (3:20). 
     "He began again to teach... and there was gathered unto Him a great multitude" (4:1) 
     "What manner of Man is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?" (4:41). 
     "Much people gathered unto Him" (5:21). 
     "They were astonished with a great astonishment" (5:42). 
     "The people ran afoot out of all cities , and came together unto Him" (6:33) - verse 44 shows they were thousands. 
     "They.. ran through that whole region round about, and began to carry about in beds those that were sick, where  they heard He was. And whithersoever He entered, into villages or cities or country, they laid the sick in the streets,  and besought Him that they might touch if it were but the border of His garment; and as many as touched Him were  made whole!" (6:55,56). 
     "They were beyond measure astonished, saying, He hath done all things well!" (7:37). 
   

   So runs the incomparable story. The like had never been witnessed from the foundation of the world. THIS TRULY IS THE SON OF GOD, THE MESSIAH, THE CHRIST OF ISRAEL! At long last the KING had come. All are flocking to Him. The healed, the blessed, the grateful, the applauding are everywhere. Public acclaim has reached high-tide. SURELY THE KING will now take up the crown and septre which rightly belong to Him and establish the long awaited everlasting kingdom of which Daniel the prophet spoke. (Daniel 2:44; 714, 27).

   Loading…
10. 

    millertheanunnaki

    November 30, 2015 at 12:08 pm

    
    

    @ Zoe November 30, 2015 at 11:36 AM
    “Miller, ….just a concoction of MYTHS BORROWED from other religions…” “…Myths BORROWED…” Really Miller, here you ADMIT that the other religions are MYTHOLOGICAL, as they WERE!!! As there WAS, IS NO historical basis in FACT, nor evidence, for these OTHER religions of mythological, FANTASY, lies and FABLES!!!”

    Bingo!! You got that right, alright! All religions are based on myths, legends and fables.
    Ask Zeus or Vishnu if you want to.

    Do you really feel you have a monopoly on the cut and paste art of an arrogant unthinking fool? Well here is your nemesis:

    “Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too inconsistent for practice, t renders the heart torpid or produces only atheists or fanatics. As an engine of power, it serves the purpose of despotism, and as a means of wealth, the avarice of priests, but so far as respects the good of man in general it leads to nothing here or hereafter. [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]

    “The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the sun, in which they put a man called Christ in the place of the sun, and pay him the adoration originally payed to the sun.”~ Thomas Paine

    “Take away from Genesis the belief that Moses was the author, on which only the strange believe that it is the word of God has stood, and there remains nothing of Genesis but an anonymous book of stories, fables, and traditionary or invented absurdities, or of downright lies. [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]

    “Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistant that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.” [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]

    “All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”

    “I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church.” [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]

    Loading…
11. 

    Vincent Haynes

    November 30, 2015 at 1:29 pm

    
    

    @millertheanunnaki November 30, 2015 at 12:08 PM #

    Skippah……….like you want the twins to drop down dead from a heart attack.

    Chuckle……..If the truth was to slap them in the face they would not recognise it,as I said all that they spout is their crutch which they need in order to live.

    Loading…
12. 

    ac

    November 30, 2015 at 2:00 pm

    
    

    There are several rational reasons why Jesus was not ressurrected.1The last supper as a commemorative ceremony to remember him
    2. His identity which none of his disciples recognized aftermore than thirty years of being in his presence 3. His reply to the thief acknowledging that they would be in paradise with him.
    All of the above signify that Jesus death would have been a permanent state

    Loading…
13. 

    Simple Simon

    November 30, 2015 at 3:01 pm

    
    

    @millertheanunnaki November 30, 2015 at 9:40 AM “why don’t you take a trip to Saudi Arabia and publicly ‘acclaim’ Islam to a false religion based on MYTH and that the Prophet Muhammad is a fake?”

    Ahhh!!! Because Zoe don’t like the idea of being separated from his head…empty though it is.

    Loading…
14. 

    Zoe

    November 30, 2015 at 3:52 pm

    
    

    The Uniqueness of The Bible.

    Professor M. Montiero-Williams, former Boden Professor of Sanskrit, spent 42 years studying Eastern books and said in comparing them with the Bible:

    “Pile them, if you will, on the left side of your study table; but place your Holy Bible on the right side- all by itself, all alone – and with a WIDE gap between them. For…there is a gulf between it and so-called sacred books of the East which severs the one from the other UTTERLY, hopelessly, forever…a veritable gulf which CANNOT be bridged over by any science of religious thought. (EVIDENCE That Demands a Verdict, Historical Evidences For The Christian Faith, Josh McDowell, Chapter 1,p.15)

    UNIQUE IN ITS SURVIVAL

    “Being written on material that perishes (see p. 25), having to be copied and recorded for hundreds of years before the invention of the printing press, did not diminish its style, correctness nor existence. The Bible compared with other ancient writings, has MORE manuscript EVIDENCE than any 10 pieces of classical literature combined.”

    John Warwick Montgomery says that “to be skeptical of the resultant text of the New Testament books is to allow ALL of classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for NO documents of the ancient period are as well ATTESTED bibliographically as the New Testament.” 64/29 (Ibid. p.19)

    Israel, covering about five centuries. The Cambridge Ancient History, (Vol.1, p.222) says: “The Israelites certainly manifest a genius for historical construction, and the Old Testament embodies the OLDEST history writing extant.”

    The distinguished archaeologist, Professor Albright, begins his classic essay, The Biblical Period:

    “Hebrew national tradition excels ALL others in its clear picture of tribal and family origins. In Egypt and Babylonia, in Assyria and Phoenicia, in Greece and Rome, we look in VAIN for anything comparable. There is nothing like it in the tradition of Germanic peoples. Neither India nor China can produce anything similar, since the earliest historical memories are literary deposits of distorted dynastic tradition, with NO trace of the herdsman pr peasant behind the DEMIGOD or king with whom their records begin. Neither in the oldest Indic historical writings (the Puranas) nor the earliest Greek historians is there a hint of the fact that both Indo-Aryans and Hellenes were once nomads who immigrated into their later abodes from the north. The Assyrians to be sure, remembered vaguely that their earliest rulers,whose names they recalled without details about their dead, were tent dwellers, but whence they came had long been forgotten.” 27/3

    “The Table of Nations” in Genesis 10 is an ASTONISHINGLY accurate historical account. According to Albright:

    “It stands ABSOLUTELY ALONE in ancient literature without a REMOTE parallel even among the Greeks…’The Table of Nations’ remains an astonishingly accurate document…(It) shows such remarkably modern understanding of the ethnic and linguistic situation in the modern world, in spite of all its complexity, that scholars never fail to be impressed with the author’s knowledge of the subject.” 7/70ff

    UNIQUE IN ITS INFLUENCE ON SURROUNDING LITERATURE.

    The Historian Philip Schaff ( The Person of Christ) American Tract Society, 1913( vividly describes its uniqueness along with its Savior:

    “This Jesus of Nazareth, WITHOUT money and arms, conquered MORE millions than Alexander, Caesar, Mohammed, and Napoleon; WITHOUT science and learning, He shed MORE light on things human and divine that ALL philosophers and scholars combined; WITHOUT the eloquence of schools, He spoke such words of life as were NEVER spoken before or since, and produced effects which lie beyond the reach of orator or poet; WITHOUT writing a single line, he set MORE pens in motion, and furnished themes for more sermons, orations, discussions, learned volumes, works of art, and songs of praise, THAN the whole army of great men of ancient and modern times.” (Ibid, pp. 23,24

    Loading…
15. 

    Zoe

    November 30, 2015 at 5:20 pm

    
    

    The Reliability of The Bible. Confirmation by Historical Text.

    C. Sanders in ‘Introduction to Research in English Literary History, list and explains the THREE basic principles of historiography. They are the BIBLIOGRAPHICAL test, the INTERNAL evidence test, and the EXTERNAL evidence test. 81/143 11.

    The Bibliographical Test for the Reliability of the New Testament.

    The bibliographical test is an examination of the textual transmission by which documents reach us. In other words, since we do not have the original documents, how reliable are the copies we have in regard to the number of manuscripts (MSS) and the time interval between the original and the extant copy? 64/26

    F.F. Peters points out that “on the basis of manuscript tradition ALONE, the works that made up the Christians New Testament were the MOST frequently copied and widely circulated books of antiquity.” 69/50.

    MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

    There are now more than 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. Add over 10,000 Latin Vulgate, and at least 9,300 other early versions (MSS) and we have more than 24,000 manuscripts copies or portions of the New Testament in existence today.

    NO OTHER Document of antiquity EVEN BEGINS to approach such numbers and attestation. In comparison, the ‘Iliad’ by Homer is second with only 643 manuscripts that still survive. The first complete preserved text of Homer dates from the 13th century. 58/145

    Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, who was the director and principal librarian of the British Museum and second to none in authority for issuing statements about MSS, says,”…besides numbers, the manuscripts of the New Testament differ from those of classical authors, and this time the difference is clear gain. In NO OTHER case, is the interval of time between the composition of the book and the date of the earliest extant manuscripts SO SHORT as in that of the New Testament. The books of the New Testament were written in the latter part of the first century; the earliest extant manuscripts (trifling scraps excepted) are of the fourth century- say from 250-300 later.

    “This may sound a considerable interval, but it is nothing to that which parts most of the great classical authors from their earliest manuscripts. We believe that we have in all essentials an ACCURATE text of the seven extant plays of Sophocles; yet the earliest substantial manuscript upon which it is based was written more than 1400 years after the poets death.” 48/4

    Kenyon continues in The Bible and Archaeology: “The interval then between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes SO SMALL as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established. ” 46/288

    F. J. A. Hort rightfully adds that “In the variety and fullness of the evidence on which it rest the text of the New Testament stands ABSOLUTELY and UNAPPROACHABLY ALONE among ancient prose writings.” 43/561

    J. Harold Greenlee states “…the number of available MSS of the New Testament is OVERWHELMINGLY greater than those of any other work of ancient literature. In the third place, the earliest extant MSS of the N. T. were written much closer to the date of the original writings than is the case in almost any other piece of ancient literature.” 37/15
    (EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT, Vol. 1, pp. 39, 40, 41)

    Loading…
16. 

    Georgie Porgie

    November 30, 2015 at 6:00 pm

    
    

    zoe
    Seems you are hated on BU becuse you have had exposure to good literature
    You have cited some heavy hitters in your last post

    Loading…
17. 

    Zoe

    November 30, 2015 at 6:11 pm

    
    

    Miller, Paine, must be your twin-brother, in “The Age of Ignorance”!

    “Take away from Genesis the belief that Moses was the author, on which only the strange believe that it is the word of God has stood, and there remains nothing of Genesis but an anonymous book of stories, fables, and traditionary or invented absurdities, or of downright lies.” (Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason)

    “The Table of Nations” in Genesis 10 is an ASTONISHINGLY accurate historical account. According to Albright:

    “It stands ABSOLUTELY ALONE in ancient literature without a REMOTE parallel even among the Greeks…’The Table of Nations’ remains an astonishingly accurate document…(It) shows such remarkably modern understanding of the ethnic and linguistic situation in the modern world, in spite of all its complexity, that scholars never fail to be impressed with the author’s knowledge of the subject.” 7/70ff

    I am only now warming up for you, Miller- NAKI, and the likes of your IGNORANT Thomas Paine, haters of TRUTH!

    Remember, Miller, when you first tried confronting me here on BU a few years ago, and I soundly REFUTED ALL of your baseless nonsense arguments…do you recall what you said to me in response to my REFUTATIONS? I’ll remind you Miller-NAKI,

    You said, “…You are one in a billion…” You got me feeling like a PYTHON that has swallowed a JACKASS…”

    Well, Miller-NAKI, you obviously have NOT done so well in DIGESTING that JACKASS, that’s why you are writing such ABJECT NONSENSE! It GONE to your BRAIN!

    Wheel and come again, Miller, I waiting for your Python-ated mind!

    Loading…
18. 

    Exclaimer

    November 30, 2015 at 6:29 pm

    
    

    @ GP,

    You do not seem to be contributing much these days.

    I use to appreciate your medical posts.

    Loading…
19. 

    ac

    November 30, 2015 at 8:14 pm

    
    

    Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead?

    by Dan Barker

    During the 19 years I preached the Gospel, the resurrection of Jesus was the keystone of my ministry.[1] Every Easter I affirmed the Apostle Paul’s admonition: “If Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation has been in vain and your faith has been in vain.”[2] I wrote a popular Easter musical called “His Fleece Was White As Snow” with the joyous finale proclaiming: “Sing Hosanna! Christ is Risen! The Son has risen to shine on me!”[3]
    But now I no longer believe it. Many bible scholars[4] and ministers–including one third of the clergy in the Church of England[5]–reject the idea that Jesus bodily came back to life. So do 30% of born-again American Christians![6]
    Why? When the Gospel of John portrays the post-mortem Jesus on a fishing trip with his buddies and the writer of Matthew shows him giving his team a mountain-top pep talk two days after he died, how can there be any doubt that the original believers were convinced he had bodily risen from the grave?
    There have been many reasons for doubting the claim, but the consensus among critical scholars today appears to be that the story is a “legend.” During the 60-70 years it took for the Gospels to be composed, the original story went through a growth period that began with the unadorned idea that Jesus, like Grandma, had “died and gone to heaven” and ended with a fantastic narrative produced by a later generation of believers that included earthquakes, angels, an eclipse, a resuscitated corpse, and a spectacular bodily ascension into the clouds.

    to be continued

    Loading…
20. 

    Georgie Porgie

    November 30, 2015 at 9:20 pm

    
    

    R Exclaimer November 30, 2015 at 6:29 PM #
    @ GP,

    You do not seem to be contributing much these days.

    I use to appreciate your medical posts.

    APPARENTLY WHAT I USED TO CONTRIBUTE VIA MY PPTS CAN EASILY BE FOUND ON WICKEPEDIA I WAS TOLD

    Loading…
21. 

    millertheanunnaki

    November 30, 2015 at 9:34 pm

    
    

    @ Zoe November 30, 2015 at 6:11 PM
    You said, “…You are one in a billion…” You got me feeling like a PYTHON that has swallowed a JACKASS…”

    Well, Miller-NAKI, you obviously have NOT done so well in DIGESTING that JACKASS, that’s why you are writing such ABJECT NONSENSE! It GONE to your BRAIN!
    Wheel and come again, Miller, I waiting for your Python-ated mind!”

    LOL!!! I must say you do have a memory of an elephant.
    But it is yet to be established whether you are of the African variety or of the Asian species. both of which certainly could not have been in Noah’s Ark at the same time creating the first rumble in the jungle as the two bulls came into musk.

    Let us say to you that after much tortuous periods of agonizingly convoluted digestion the python’s intellectual gall has managed to transmogrify you into a reproductive mule of intellectual dishonesty and subterfuge.

    If ,as you assert with ‘factual’ conviction the book of Genesis is not a parody of tall tales, ‘stolen’ legends and unscientific ‘literary’ mutterings of Hebrew charlatans and conjurors out to make a fast buck (or should it be shekel), then we are still awaiting a ‘convincingly’ enunciated response to the query regarding the presence of the polar bear, the kangaroo and the penguin in Noah’s Ark.

    “…but the Bible is such a book of lies and contradictions there is no knowing which part to believe or whether any…” [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]

    The declaration which says that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice. [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]

    Zoe, you ought to thank your god you have been spared such a curse. For , unlike Jesus aka Horus aka Krishna you were born the ‘sun’ of a virgin from a black hole of intellectual naïveté.

    Loading…
22. 

    ac

    November 30, 2015 at 9:55 pm

    
    

    Can history prove a miracle?

    Philosopher Antony Flew, in a 1985 debate on the resurrection[7], pointed out that history is the wrong tool for proving miracle reports. “The heart of the matter,” said Flew, “is that the criteria by which we must assess historical testimony, and the general presumptions that make it possible for us to construe leftovers from the past as historical evidence, are such that the possibility of establishing, on purely historical grounds, that some genuinely miraculous event has occurred is ruled out.”
    When examining artifacts from the past, historians assume that nature worked back then as it does today; otherwise, anything goes. American patriot Thomas Paine, in The Age of Reason, asked: “Is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course; but we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time; it is, therefore, at least millions to one, that the reporter of a miracle tells a lie.”
    It is a fact of history and of current events that human beings exaggerate, misinterpret, or wrongly remember events. They have also fabricated pious fraud. Most believers in a religion understand this when examining the claims of other religions.
    A messiah figure coming back to life–appearing out of thin air and disappearing–is a fantastic story, by anyone’s standard, and that is what makes it a miracle claim. If dead people today routinely crawled out of their graves and went back to work, a resurrection would have little value as proof of God’s power. The fact that it is impossible or highly unlikely is what makes it a miracle
    And that is what removes it from the reach of history.

    to be contiued

    Loading…
23. 

    Zoe

    November 30, 2015 at 11:30 pm

    
    

    The New Testament Compared with other works of Antiquity.

    The Manuscript Comparison

    F.F. Bruce in The New Testament Documents vividly pictures the comparison between the New Testament and ancient historical writings: “Perhaps we can appreciate how WEALTHY the New Testament is in manuscript attestation if we compare the textual material for the other ancient historical works. For Caesar’s Gallic Wars (composed between 58 and 50 B.C) there are several extant MSS, but only nine or ten are good, and the oldest is some 900 years later than Caesar’s day. Of the 142 books of the Roman history of Livy (50 B.C – A.D.), only 35 survive; these are known to us from not more than 20 MSS of any consequence, only one of which, and that contains fragments of Books 111-V1, is as old as the fourth century. Of the 14 books of the Histories of Tacitus (ca A.D. 100) only four and a half survive; of the 16 books of his Annals, 10 survive in full and two in part. The text of these extant portions of his two great historical works depends entirely on two MSS, one of the ninth century and one of the eleventh.

    “The extant MSS of his minor works (Dialogus de Oratoribus, Agricola, Germania) all descend from a codex of the tenth century. The History of Thucydides ( ca. 460-400 B.C.) is known to us from eight MSS, the earliest belonging to ca A.D. 900, and few papyrus scraps, belonging to about the beginning of the Christian era. The same is true the History of Herodotus ( B.C. 488-428). Yet, NO CLASSICAL SCHOLAR WOULD LISTEN to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is IN DOUBT because the earliest MSS of their works are of any use to us are over 1,300 years later than the originals.” 16/16/17)

    In contrast with these figures, the textual critic of the New Testament IS EMBARRASSED by the wealth of its material. 62/34.

    F.F. Bruce continues, “There is NO BODY of ancient literature IN THE WORLD which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament.” 15/178.

    Bruce Metzger observes: “Of all the literary compositions by the Greek people, the Homeric poems are the best suited for comparison with the Bible.” 61/144 He adds: “In the entire range of ancient Greek and Latin literature, the ‘Iliad’ ranks next to the New Testament in possessing the greatest amount of manuscript testimony.” 61/144.

    E.G. Turner points out that Homer was no doubt the most widely read author in antiquity. 92/87.

    WORK WHEN WRITTEN EARLIEST COPY TIME SPAN NO. OF COPIES
    Homer (Iliad) 900 B.C. 400 B.C 500 Yrs 643
    New Testament 40-100 A.D. 125 A.D. 25 Yrs. Over 24,000

    Geisler and Nix make a comparison of the textual variation between the New Testament documents and ancient works. “Next to the New Testament, there are more extant manuscripts of the Iliad (643) than any other book. Both it and the Bible were considered ‘sacred’ and both underwent textual changes and criticism of their Greek manuscripts. The New Testament has about 20,000 lines.” 32/366.

    They continue by saying that “The Iliad (has) about 15,600. Only 40 lines (or 400 words) of the New Testament are in doubt., whereas 764 lines of the Iliad are questioned. This five percent textual corruption compares with one-half of one percent of similar emendations in the New Testament. 32/367

    Benjamin Warfield in Introduction to Textual Criticism of the New Testament, quotes Ezra Abbot’s opinion about nineteen-twentieths of the New Testament textual variations, saying that they: “…have SO LITTLE support…although there are various readings; and nineteen-twentieths of the remainder are of SO LITTLE IMPORTANCE, that their adoption or rejection would cause NO appreciable difference in the sense of the passage where they occur.” 100/14

    Warfield, boldy declares that the FACTS show that the great majority of the New Testament “has been transmitted to us with NO, or next to NO, variations; and even in the most corrupt form in which it has ever appeared, to use the oft-quoted words of Richard Bentley, ‘the real text of the sacred writers is competently EXACT;…nor is ONE article of faith or moral precept either perverted or lost…choose as awkwardly as you will, choose the worst by design, out of the whole lump of readings.” 100/14; 85/163

    Schaff quotes both Tregelles and Scrivener: “we posses SO MANY MSS, and we are aided by SO MANY versions, that we are NEVER left to the need of conjecture as the means of removing errata.”

    That the textual variations DO NOT endanger DOCTRINE is emphatically stated by Sir Frederic Kenyon (one of the great authorities in the field of New Testament textual criticism): ” ONE word of warning already referred to, must be emphasized in conclusion. NO FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINE of the Christian faith rest on a disputed reading…It cannot be too strongly asserted that IN SUBSTANCE with the New Testament, of early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the Church, is so large that it is practically certain that the TRUE reading of EVERY doubtful passage is PRESERVED in some one or the other of these ancient authorities. THIS CAN BE SAID OF NO OTHER ANCIENT BOOK IN THE WORLD.

    “Scholars are satisfied that they possess substantially the true text of the principle Greek and Roman writers whose works have come down to us, of Sophocles, of Thucydides, of Cicero, of Virgil; YET our knowledge of their writings depends on a MERE HANDFUL of manuscripts, whereas the manuscripts of the New Testament are counted by HUNDREDS, and even THOUSANDS. ” 49/23

    Gleason Archer, in answering the question about objective EVIDENCE, shows that variants or errors in transmission of the text DO NOT affect God’s revelation:

    “A careful study of the variants (different readings) of the various earliest manuscripts reveals that NONE of them affects a single doctrine of Scripture. The system of spiritual TRUTH contained in the standard Hebrew text of the Old Testament IS NOT in the slightest altered or compromised by any of the variant readings found in the Hebrew manuscripts of earlier date, found in the Dead Sea caves or anywhere else. All that is needed to verify this is to cjeck the register of well-attested variants in Rudolf Kittel’s edition of the Hebrew Bible. It is very evident that the vast majority of them are so inconsequential as to leave the meaning of each clause doctrinally UNAFFECTED.” 10/25

    Benjamin Warfield said, “If we compare the present state of the New Testament text with that of ANY other ancient writing, we MUST…DECLARE it to be MARVELOUSLY correct. Such has been the care with which the New Testament has been copied for its Holy Words- such has been the providence of God in preserving for His Church in each and every age a competently EXACT text of the Scriptures, that not only IS the New Testament UNRIVALLED among ancient writings in its PURITY of its text as actually transmitted and kept in use, but also in the abundance of TESTIMONY which has come down to us for castigating its comparatively infrequent blemishes.” 100/12,13

    Frederic G. Kenyon continues in The Story of the Bible: “t is reassuring at the end to find that the general result of ALL these discoveries (of manuscripts) and all this study is to strengthen the PROOF of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and our conviction that WE HAVE in our hands, in substantial integrity, the VERITABLE Word of God.” 50/113
    (EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT, Historical Evidences For The Christian Faith, Vol/ 1, pp. 41-46).

    Loading…
24. 

    ac

    December 1, 2015 at 12:29 am

    
    

    History is limited; it can only confirm events that conform to natural regularity. This is not an anti-supernaturalistic bias against miracles, as is sometimes claimed by believers. The miracles may have happened, but in order to know they happened, we need a different tool of knowledge. Yet except for faith (which is not a science), to make a case for the resurrection of Jesus, history is the only tool Christians have
    Examining a miracle with history is like searching for a planet with a microscope.
    David Hume wrote: “No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless that testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish.”[8] Carl Sagan liked to say, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Such evidence is exactly what we do not have with the resurrection of Jesus.
    At best (or worst), this should convince us not that the resurrection is disproved, but that disbelief in the resurrection is rationally justified. The incompatibility of miracles with the historical method is persuasive, especially to those not committed a priori to the truth of religious scripture, but we still need something more than this if we are to say with confidence that the bodily resurrection did not happen.

    Loading…
25. 

    Zoe

    December 1, 2015 at 12:30 am

    
    

    millertheanunnaki November 30, 2015 at 9:34 PM #
    @ Zoe November 30, 2015 at 6:11 PM

    You said, “…You are one in a billion…” You got me feeling like a PYTHON that has swallowed a JACKASS…”

    Miller, I’m sure, you are NOT man enough to ADMIT that the above, said to me, WAS in fact a Compliment from you, that’s why I remember it so well; and the latter part,

    “You got me feeling like a PYTHON that has swallowed a JACKASS…”,

    Was obviously in reference TO MY Refutations to all of your attempts at stumping me, which you simply could NOT get around, hence, the CONTENT of my sound refutations, had you “…feeling like a PYTHON that has swallowed a JACKASS.”

    Here, you NOW come with MORE ‘STERILE intellectual DISHONESTY; and utterly PARALYZED Mythical orthodoxy’

    When ARE YOU going to come and present something of SUBSTANCE, historical FACTS and evidence, NOT the vacuous, venomous, and malignant EMPTINESS, and SHALLOWNESS, that you come here with!!

    Any FOOL , with a modicum of intelligence, can WRITE the nonsense you post, BUT, to post sound, well founded, factual and historical truth, is an entirely different matter, that you are clearly and obviously NOT capable of doing re THIS vitally important subject matter!

    You know why you CANNOT do it, Miller, it is simply NOT possible to REFUTE, the FACTS and EVIDENCE I have presented!

    Loading…
26. 

    ac

    December 1, 2015 at 5:22 am

    
    

    Naturalistic explanations for the resuurection

    Some critics have offered naturalistic explanations for the face-value New Testament stories of the empty tomb. Maybe Jesus didn’t actually die on the cross; he just passed out, and woke up later–the “swoon theory”[19]. Or perhaps the disciples hallucinated the risen Jesus. (They and “five hundred” others.) Or Mary went to the wrong tomb, finding it empty, mistaking the “young man” for an angel. Or perhaps the body was stolen–the “conspiracy theory,” an idea that boasts a hint of biblical support in that the only eye-witnesses (the Roman soldiers) said that was exactly what happened[20]. Or perhaps Jesus’ body was only temporarily stored in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (possibly with the two thieves) and was later reburied in a common grave, the usual fate of executed criminals.[21] Or perhaps someone else, such as Thomas, was crucified in Jesus’s place.[22]
    These hypotheses have various degrees of plausibility. In my opinion, none of them seem overly likely, but they are at least as credible as a corpse coming back to life, and they fit the biblical facts.
    If a believer asks, “Why have you ruled out the supernatural?” I will say I have not ruled it out: I have simply given it the low probability it deserves along with the other possibilities. I might equally ask them, “Why have you ruled out the natural?”
    The problem I have with some of the natural explanations is that they give the text too much credit. They tend to require almost as much faith as the orthodox interpretation. Combined with the historical objection and the mythicists’ arguments (above), the existence of a number of plausible natural alternatives can bolster the confidence of skeptics, but they can’t positively disprove the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

    Loading…
27. 

    ac

    December 1, 2015 at 5:34 am

    
    

    Internal Discrepancies

    The resurrection of Jesus is one of the few stories that is told repeatedly in the bible–more than 5 times–so it provides an excellent test for the orthodox claim of scriptural inerrancy and reliability. When we compare the accounts, we see they don’t agree.

    What time did the women visit the tomb?
    Matthew: “as it began to dawn” (28:1)

    Mark “very early in the morning . . . at the rising of the sun” (16:2, KJV); “when the sun had risen” (NRSV); “just after sunrise” (NIV)

    Luke: “very early in the morning” (24:1, KJV) “at early dawn” (NRSV)

    John: “when it was yet dark” (20:1)

    Who were the women?
    Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (28:1)
    Mark: Mary Magdalene, the mother of James, and Salome (16:1)
    Luke: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and other women (24:10)
    John: Mary Magdalene (20:1)

    What was their purpose?
    Matthew: to see the tomb (28:1)
    Mark: had already seen the tomb (15:47), brought spices (16:1)
    Luke: had already seen the tomb (23:55), brought spices (24:1)
    John: the body had already been spiced before they arrived (19:39,40)

    and there are more

    Loading…
28. 

    Zoe

    December 1, 2015 at 7:54 am

    
    

    Quotations and Observations on the Reliability of The Old Testament.

    Robert Dick Wilson’s brilliant observations take the VERACITY and TRUSTWORTHINESS of Scriptures back to Old Testament times: “In 144 cases of transliteration from Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian and Moabite into Hebrew, and in 40 cases of the opposite, or 184 in all, the EVIDENCE shows that for 2300 to 3900 years the text of proper names in the Hebrew Bible has been transmitted with the MOST MINUTE accuracy. That the original scribes should have written them with such close conformity to correct philological principles is a wonderful PROOF of their thorough care and scholarship by copyists through so many centuries is a PHENOMENON unequaled in the history of literature.” 102/71

    Wilson adds: “There are about forty of these kings living from 2,000 B.C to 400 B.C. Each appears in chronological order…with references to the kings of the same country and with respect to kings of other countries…NO STRONGER evidence for the substantial accuracy of the Old Testament records could possibly be imagined, than this collection of kings,” Mathematically, it is one chance in 750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, that this accuracy is mere circumstance.” 102/70/71.

    F.F. Bruce states that “the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible which the Massoretes edited had been handed down to their time with CONSPICUOUS fidelity over a period of nearly a thousand years.” 15/178

    William Green concludes that “it may safely be said that NO other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.” 36/181

    Concerning the accuracy of the transmission of the Hebrew text, Atkinson, who was Under-Librarian of the library at Cambridge University, says it is “LITTLE short of MIRACULOUS.”

    The Internal Test for the Reliability of the Scriptures

    BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT

    On this test John Warwick Montgomery writes that literary critics still follow Aristotle’s dictum that “the benefit of the doubt is to be given to the document itself, NOT arrogated by the critic to himself.”

    Therefore, “one must listen to the claims of the document under analysis, and not assume fraud or error unless the author disqualified himself by contradictions of known factual inaccuracies.” 64/29

    “…Difficulties do not constitute objections,” adds Robert Horn. “Unresolved problems are not of necessity errors. This is not to minimize the are of difficulty; it is to see it in perspective. Difficulties are to be grappled with and problems are to drive us to seek clearer light; but until such time as we have total and final light on any issue we are in no position to affirm, ‘Here is a proven error; an unquestionable objection to an infallible Bible. It is common knowledge that countless ‘objections’ have been FULLY resolved since this century began.” 43/86.87 (EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT, Historical Evidences For The Christian Faith, Vol. 1, pp. 55,60, 61).

    Loading…
29. 

    Zoe

    December 1, 2015 at 9:03 am

    
    

    PRIMARY SOURCE VALUE

    They wrote as EYEWITNESSES or from first-hand information.

    Luke 1: 1-3 – “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among US, just as those who from the BEGINNING were EYEWITNESSES and servants of the Word have handed down to us, it seemed fitting for me as well, having INVESTIGATED everything CAREFULLY from the BEGINNING, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus.”

    11 Peter 1:16 -“For we DID NOT follow cleverly devised tales when we made KNOWN to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were EYEWITNESSES of His majesty.”

    1John 1:3 – “…What we have SEEN and HEARD we proclaim to you also, that you also may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.”

    Acts 2:22 – “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man ATTESTED to you by God with MIRACLES and WONDERS and SIGNS which God performed through Him in your MIDST, just as yourselves KNOW…”

    John 19:35 – “And he who has SEEN has borne WITNESS, and his WITNESS is TRUE; and he KNOWS that he is telling the TRUTH, so that you also may believe.”

    Luke 3:1 – “Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetarch of Galilee, and his brother Phillip was tetarch of the region of Ituraes and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene…”

    Acts 26: 24-26 – “And while Paul was saying this in defense, Festus said in a loud voice, ‘Paul, you are out of your mind: Your great learning is driving you mad.’ But Paul said, ‘I am not out of my mind, most excellent Festus, but I utter words of sober TRUTH. For the king KNOWS about these matters, and I speak to him also with confidence, since I am persuaded that NONE of these things escape his notice: for this has NOT been done in a corner.”

    F.F. Bruce,k the Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester, says, concerning the ‘primary-source value of the New Testament:

    “The earliest preachers of the Gospel knew the value of…first-hand testimony, and appealed to it time and again. ‘We are WITNESSES of these things,’ was their constant and confident assertion. And it can have been by no means so easy as some writers seem to think to invent words and deeds of Jesus in those early years, when so many of His disciples were about, who could remember what had and what had not happened.”

    “And it was not only friendly eyewitnesses that the early preachers had to reckon with; there were others less well disposed who were also conversant with the main facts of the ministry and death of Jesus. The disciples could not afford to risk inaccuracies (not to speak of willful manipulation of the facts). which would at once be expossed by those who would be only too glad to do so. On the contrary, one of the strong points in the original apostolic preaching is the confident appeal to the knowledge of the hearers; they not only said, ‘We are WITNESSES of those things,’ but also, ‘As you yourselves also KNOW’ (Acts 2:22). Had there been and tendency to depart from the FACTS in any material respect, the possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served as a further corrective.” 16/33, 44-46 (Ibid, pp. 61,52)

    Loading…
30. 

    ac

    December 1, 2015 at 10:42 am

    
    

    Intellectual dishonesty is the worst of all evils. It denies the mind the freedom to express itself and breeds and cultivates in baren soil

    Loading…
31. 

    millertheanunnaki

    December 1, 2015 at 12:16 pm

    
    

    @ Zoe December 1, 2015 at 12:30 AM
    “Here, you NOW come with MORE ‘STERILE intellectual DISHONESTY; and utterly PARALYZED Mythical orthodoxy’

    When ARE YOU going to come and present something of SUBSTANCE, historical FACTS and evidence, NOT the vacuous, venomous, and malignant EMPTINESS, and SHALLOWNESS, that you come here with!!
    Any FOOL , with a modicum of intelligence, can WRITE the nonsense you post, BUT, to post sound, well founded, factual and historical truth, is an entirely different matter, that you are clearly and obviously NOT capable of doing re THIS vitally important subject matter!
    You know why you CANNOT do it, Miller, it is simply NOT possible to REFUTE, the FACTS and EVIDENCE I have presented!”

    Well my python-swallowed enemy of Reason and History here is the antidote to your own venomous of spiel of lies and contradictions you refer to as “FACTS and EVIDENCE” with further doses to come to stop the cancerous spread of brainwashing and deceit of the innocent and intellectually naïve:

    “The sun-god Horus was worshipped nearly 1,000 years before the story of Jesus. Check these parallels:”

    Both were conceived of a virgin.
    Both were the “only begotten son” of a god (either Osiris or Yahweh)
    Horus’s mother was Meri, Jesus’s mother was Mary.
    Horus’s foster father was called Jo-Seph, and Jesus’s foster father was Joseph.
    Both foster fathers were of royal descent.6.Both were born in a cave (although sometimes Jesus is said to have been born in a stable).
    Both had their coming announced to their mother by an angel.
    Horus; birth was heralded by the star Sirius (the morning star). Jesus had his birth heralded by a star in the East (the sun rises in the East).
    Ancient Egyptians celebrated the birth of Horus on December 21 (the Winter Solstice). Modern Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus on December 25.
    Both births were announced by angels (this is the same as number 7).
    Both had shepherds witnessing the birth.
    Horus was visited at birth by “three solar deities” and Jesus was visited by “three wise men”.
    After the birth of Horus, Herut tried to have Horus murdered. After the birth of Jesus, Herod tried to have Jesus murdered.
    To hide from Herut, the god That tells Isis, “Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child.” To hide from Herod, an angel tells Joseph to “arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt.”
    When Horus came of age, he had a special ritual where his eye was restored. When Jesus (and other Jews) come of age, they have a special ritual called a Bar Mitzvah.
    Both Horus and Jesus were 12 at this coming-of-age ritual.
    Neither have any official recorded life histories between the ages of 12 and 30.
    Horus was baptized in the river Eridanus. Jesus was baptized in the river Jordan.
    Both were baptized at age 30.
    Horus was baptized by Anup the Baptizer. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.
    Both Anup and John were later beheaded.
    Horus was taken from the desert of Amenta up a high mountain to be tempted by his arch-rival Set. Jesus was taken from the desert in Palestine up a high mountain to be tempted by his arch-rival Satan.
    Both Horus and Jesus successfully resist this temptation.
    Both have 12 disciples.
    Both walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, and restored sight to the blind.
    Horus “stilled the sea by his power.” Jesus commanded the sea to be still by saying, “Peace, be still.”
    Horus raised his dead father (Osiris) from the grave. Jesus raised Lazarus from the grave. (Note the similarity in names when you say them out loud. Further, Osiris was also known as Asar, which is El-Asar in Hebrew, which is El-Asarus in Latin.)
    Osiris was raised in the town of Anu. Lazarus was raised in Bethanu (literally, “house of Anu”).
    Both gods delivered a Sermon on the Mount.
    Both were crucified.
    Both were crucified next to two thieves.
    Both were buried in a tomb.
    Horus was sent to Hell and resurrected in 3 days. Jesus was sent to Hell and came back “three days” later (although Friday night to Sunday morning is hardly three days).
    Both had their resurrection announced by women.
    Both are supposed to return for a 1000-year reign.
    Horus is known as KRST, the anointed one. Jesus was known as the Christ (which means “anointed one”).
    Both Jesus and Horus have been called the good shepherd, the lamb of God, the bread of life, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, and the winnower.
    Both are associated with the zodiac sign of Pisces (the fish).
    Both are associated with the symbols of the fish, the beetle, the vine, and the shepherd’s crook.
    Horus was born in Anu (“the place of bread”) and Jesus was born in Bethlehem (“the house of bread”).
    “The infant Horus was carried out of Egypt to escape the wrath of Typhon. The infant Jesus was carried into Egypt to escape the wrath of Herod. Concerning the infant Jesus, the New Testament states the following prophecy: ‘Out of Egypt have I called my son.’”
    Both were transfigured on the mount.
    The catacombs of Rome have pictures of the infant Horus being held by his mother, not unlike the modern-day images of “Madonna and Child.”
    Noted English author C. W. King says that both Isis and Mary are called “Immaculate”.
    Horus says: “Osiris, I am your son, come to glorify your soul, and to give you even more power.” And Jesus says: “Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once.”
    Horus was identified with the Tau (cross).

    Loading…
32. 

    ac

    December 1, 2015 at 8:03 pm

    
    

    Did Jesus stay on earth for more than a day?

    Mark: No (16:19[23]) Compare 16:14 with John 20:19 to show that this was all done on Sunday
    Luke: No (24:50-52) It all happened on Sunday
    John: Yes, at least eight days (20:26, 21:1-22)
    Acts: Yes, at least forty days (1:3)

    Where did the ascension take place?
    Matthew: No ascension. Book ends on mountain in Galilee
    Mark: In or near Jerusalem, after supper (16:19[23])
    Luke: In Bethany, very close to Jerusalem, after supper (24:50-51)
    John: No ascension
    Paul: No ascension
    Acts: Ascended from Mount of Olives (1:9-12)

    It is not just atheist critics who notice these problems. Christian scholars agree that the stories are discrepant. Culver H. Nelson: “In any such reading, it should become glaringly obvious that these materials often contradict one another egregiously. No matter how eagerly one may wish to do so, there is simply no way the various accounts of Jesus’ post-mortem activities can be harmonized.”[24] A. E. Harvey: “All the Gospels, after having run closely together in their accounts of the trial and execution, diverge markedly when they come to the circumstance of the Resurrection. It’s impossible to fit their accounts together into a single coherent scheme.”[25] Thomas Sheehan agrees: “Despite our best efforts, the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ post-mortem activities, in fact, cannot be harmonized into a consistent Easter chronology.”[26] The religiously independent (though primarily Christian) scholars in the Westar Institute, which includes more than 70 bible scholars with Ph.D or equivalent, conclude: “The five gospels that report appearances (Matthew, Luke, John, Peter, Gospel of the Hebrews) go their separate ways when they are not rewriting Mark; their reports cannot be reconciled to each other. Hard historical evidence is sparse.”[27]
    I have challenged believers to provide a simple non-contradictory chronological narrative of the events between Easter Sunday and the ascension, without omitting a single biblical detail[28]. So far, without misinterpreting words or drastically rearranging passages, no one has given a coherent account. Some have offered “harmonies” (apparently not wondering why the work of a perfect deity should have to be harmonized), but none have met the reasonable request to simply tell the story

    this is one of the most detail and sterile articles to uncover the story of the resurrection. If one really wants to know the truth and Facts before and after the resurrection this is a must read, ‘
    Unfortunately too long to put here

    https://ffrf.org/legacy/about/bybarker/rise.php

    Loading…
33. 

    Zoe

    December 1, 2015 at 10:12 pm

    
    

    How to Quickly Debunk the Horus-Jesus Myth

    Broadly speaking, the story of Horus is as follows:

    Horus was born on December 25th of the virgin Isis-Meri. His birth was accompanied by a star in the east, which in turn, three kings followed to locate and adorn the new-born savior. At the age of 12, he was a prodigal child teacher, and at the age of 30 he was baptized by a figure known as Anup and thus began his ministry. Horus had 12 disciples he traveled about with, performing miracles such as healing the sick and walking on water. Horus was known by many gestural names such as The Truth, The Light, God’s Annointed Son, The Good Shepherd, The Lamb of God, and many others. After being betrayed by Typhon, Horus was crucified, buried for 3 days, and thus, resurrected.

    These attributes of Horus, whether original or not, seem to permeate in many cultures of the world, for many other gods are found to have the same general mythological structure.1

    Richard Carrier also believes that resurrection stories were “wildly popular among the pagans” and begat a something akin to the standard trope, with the Gospels simply following in this tradition:

    Among pagans, genuine sons of god who had to be murdered, buried, and then miraculously resurrected from the dead in order to judge and rule from heaven on high as our divine saviors were actually a common fad of the time, not a shocking novelty at all.

    Osirus and Romulus were widely worshipped to the tune of such sacred stories demonstrably before the rise of Christianity, and similar stories surrounded other dying-and-rising gods long before such as Zalmoxis, Adonis, and Inanna.2

    The Horus-Jesus Myth: Be Critical

    Just like the stolen kidney story, the Horus-Jesus connection myth has much of what makes an urban legend appealing: a moral tale that shows how one’s gullibility can result in one being taken in with serious consequences, the authoritative yet undefined source, a set of facts that on the surface are seemingly plausible, and the ability to shock others with a sensational revelation. Yet, just like the stolen kidney story, all you need to do is to think a bit and the paper-thin claims of Jesus’s stolen resurrection will quickly melt away. Here are five points to consider:

    1) Loaded Language

    Notice in the Zeitgeist story, all the terms used are ones taken from Christianity. Horus is called a “messiah” and was “baptized.” He had “disciples” and a “ministry.”

    All of these terms bias the listener because they are Jewish or Christian concepts. The Egyptians would never use these words to refer to their religious rites.

    The word messiah had a very specific meaning to the Jews, including being a descendant of David. It wasn’t any political figure. Christianity teaches that believers are baptized only once, not simply a pre-religious washing ceremony.

    By mislabeling other deities with Christian terms, the listener is deluded into believing the similarities are closer than they really are.

    2) “Can I read the source of these myths?”

    The single easiest way to debunk these supposed parallel accounts of Jesus and Horus are to simply ask for the source text of the myths themselves.

    Just as the stolen kidney tale can’t be verified since it comes from “a friend of a friend,” so you’ll find that the ancient tales that supposedly parallels the life of Jesus are an extended form of hearsay.

    In fact, all these claims are usually committing the same sin many atheists claim the Gospels commit: they are more like a game of telephone than real texts.

    Interestingly, if anyone actually bothers to look up the source texts, a very different picture arises.

    For Horus, there’s NO MENTION AT ALL of twelve disciples, three king visitations, and death by crucifixion and the three day entombment.

    In fact, Horus was stung by a scorpion and a magic incantation by the god of wisdom, Thoth, purges the venom from his body. This all happens while Horus was a young child, well before his adulthood and battle for the throne. It’s nothing like Jesus’s resurrection at all.3

    3) “What do you mean by “resurrection?”

    There’s a significant difference between Jesus’s resurrection and what you read in the ancient myths.

    Osirus, according to a late tradition recorded in the first century AD by the Roman Plutarch, was cut into fourteen pieces by his nemesis Typhon and they were scattered all along the Nile.

    Osirus’s wife Isis was able to gather thirteen of those to reassemble her husband. The tale tells us that unfortunately Osirus’s sexual organ was eaten by fish and so Isis assembled another out of gold in order for Osirus to impregnate her with Horus. Osirus, since he will never be a complete being again, now resides as the god of the underworld.4

    4)”What do you mean by virgin birth?”

    Certainly, given the events above, calling Horus’s conception a virgin birth strains the idea to its breaking point.

    Other fables, such as Zeus impregnating Semele with Dionysus. He had physical relations with her even though she couldn’t see him. Zeus took Dionysus ads a fetus and sewed him into his thigh and from there Dionysus was born. To say the virgin birth stories should be considered comparable is itself laughable.

    5) “Just which calendar were they using in ancient Egypt?”

    Lastly, the claims of December 25th are completely erroneous.

    Many myths don’t specify any date at all for the birth of the deities (again, read the originals!) For Horus, Plutarch tells us he was born “about the time of the winter solstice… imperfect and premature.” Beside the fact that Plutarch mixed many Greek ideas with the Egyptian myths, it is a huge stretch to assume an exact date for Horus’s birth. Taking Plutarch’s account, the term “about the time of the winter solstice” can be a swing of weeks in either direction.

    But if the Egyptians wanted to be more precise and attach Horus with the solstice, then his birthday would be the 21/22 of December in the modern calendar, not the 25th. As I’ve explained before,

    Jesus’s actual birth is not known, and celebrating Christmas on December 25 has nothing to do with the winter solstice whatsoever.

    But it should be evident by now that the supposed evidence of Christianity’s plagiarism of earlier myths is itself based on MYTHS and contrivances. Those that offer such views attempt to paint a picture that doesn’t exist. Don’t let these organ thieves steal your brain. Challenge them to think. http://www.apologetics-notes.com

    Loading…
34. 

    Zoe

    December 1, 2015 at 10:51 pm

    
    

    “The EVIDENCE points unmistakably to the FACT that on the third day Jesus rose. This was the conclusion to which former Chief Justice of England, Lord Darling, came. At a private dinner party the talk turned to the TRUTH of Christianity, and particularly to a certain book dealing with the RESURRECTION. Placing his fingertips together, assuming a judicial attitude, and speaking with a quit emphasis that was extraordinarily impressive, he said, ‘We, as Christians, are asked to take a very great deal on trust; the teachings, for example, and the miracles of Jesus. If we had to take all on trust, I, for one, should be sceptical. The crux of the problem of whether Jesus was, or was not, what He proclaimed Himself to be, must surely depend upon the truth or otherwiseof the RESURRECTION. On that greatest point we are not merely asked to have faith. In its FAVOUR as LIVING TRUTH, there exist such OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE, positive and negative, FACTUAL and CIRCUMSTANTIAL, that no intelligent JURY in the world could fail to bring in a verdict that the RESURRECTION story is TRUE.” 19/53,54.

    Armand Nicholi, of Harvard Medical School, speaks of J.N.D. Anderson as “…a scholar of international repute and one eminently qualified to deal with the subject of EVIDENCE. He is one of the world’s leading authorities on Islamic law…He is Dean of the faculty of law in the University of London, chairman of the department of Oriental law at the School of Oriental and African Studies, and director of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies in the University of London.” 3/4

    This outstanding British scholar who is today influential in the field of International jurisprudence says: “The EVIDENCE for the HISTORICAL basis of the Christian faith, for the essential validity of the New Testament WITNESS to the person and teaching of Christ Himself, for the FACT and significance of His atoning death, and for the HISTORICITY of the empty tomb, and the apostolic TESTIMONY to the RESURRECTION, is such as to provide an adequate foundation for the venture of faith.” 2/106. (EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT, Vol. 1, p.194) Emphasis added.

    Loading…
35. 

    millertheanunnaki

    December 1, 2015 at 11:15 pm

    
    

    @ Zoe December 1, 2015 at 10:12 PM
    “Jesus’s actual birth is not known, and celebrating Christmas on December 25 has nothing to do with the winter solstice whatsoever.”

    We can see you have spent a lot of time researching the whole Horus/Jesus similarities and which have brought some shock to your “belief” system.
    So if Jesus birth is not known how do you account for his death? Was he crucified on a Good Friday and rose on the Sunday following the first full moon after the vernal equinox?
    How do you know that the same Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey on the 6th April 32 AD.? What does your “AD” stand for ‘After Death’?

    So Jesus is not Horus. Ok, then he must be Krishna:

    Krishna was miraculously conceived and born of the Virgin Devaki (“Divine One”) as a divine incarnation.
    He was born at a time when his family had to travel to pay the yearly tax.
    His father was a carpenter yet Krishna was born of royal descent.
    His birth was attended by angels, wise men and shepherds, and he was presented with gifts.
    He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants who feared that the divine child would supplant his kingdom.
    His father was warned by a heavenly voice to flee the tyrant who sought the death of the child. The child was then saved by friends who fled with them in the night to a distant country. When the tyrant learned that his attempt to kill the child failed, he issued a decree that all the infants in the area be put to death. Writing about Krishna in the eighteenth century, Sir William Jones stated, “In the Sanskrit dictionary, compiled more than two thousand years ago, we have the whole history of the incarnate deity, born of a virgin, and miraculously escaping in infancy from the reigning tyrant of his country.” (Asiatic Researches, Vol. I, p. 273).
    The Bible states that Jesus and family fled to Egypt afterward to escape from King Herod. According to the Christian apocryphal text “the Gospel of the Infancy,” the family traveled to Maturea, Egypt. Krishna was born in Maturea, India, hundreds of years earlier.
    He was baptized in the River Ganges.
    The missions of Krishna and Jesus were the same – the salvation of humanity.
    Krishna worked miracles and wonders such as raising the dead and healing lepers, the deaf and the blind.
    Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love.
    Jesus taught his disciples about the possibility of removing a mountain by faith. According to tradition, Krishna raised Mount Goverdhen above his disciples to protect his worshipers from the wrath of Indra.
    “He lived poor and he loved the poor.”
    Krishna washed the feet of the Brahmins and transfigured before his disciples.
    Krishna’s teachings and Jesus’ teachings were very similar. The celebrated French missionary and traveler, Evarist-Regis Hucv, who made a journey of several thousand miles through China and Tibet, stated, “If we addressed a Mogul or Tibetan this question, ‘Who is Krishna?’ the reply was instantly ‘The savior of men.” According to Robert Cheyne, “All that converting the Hindoos to Christianity does for them is to change the object of their worship from Krishna to Christ.” Appleton’s Cyclopedia says this about the teachings of Krishna: “Its correspondence with the New Testament is indeed striking.”
    There is an extra-canonical Hindu tradition which states that Krishna was crucified. According to some traditions, Krishna died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
    He descended to hell, rose bodily from the dead, and ascended to heaven which was witnessed by many.
    Krishna is called the “shepherd god” and “lord of lords,” and was considered “the redeemer, firstborn, sin bearer, liberator, universal Word.”
    He is the second person of the trinity, and proclaimed himself the “resurrection” and the “way to the Father.”
    He was considered the “beginning, the middle and the end,” (“alpha and omega”), as well as being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent.
    His disciples bestowed upon him the title “Jezeus,” meaning “pure essence.”
    Krishna is to return again riding a white horse to do battle with the “prince of evil,” who will desolate the Earth.

    “How, if you hear that the man newly dead is, like the man newly born, still living man – one same, existent Spirit – will you weep? The end of birth is death; the end of death is birth: this is ordained!” – Bhagavad Gita (The Song Celestial: 2)
    “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again …
    no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.
    Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be
    surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going.
    So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.” – Jesus Christ (John 3:3-8)

    Loading…
36. 

    Zoe

    December 1, 2015 at 11:35 pm

    
    

    The Testimony of History and Law

    When an event takes place in history and there are enough people alive who were EYEWITNESSES of it, or had participated in the event, and when the information is published, one is able to VERIFY the VALIDITY of an historical event (circumstantial evidences) William Lyon Phelps, for more than 40 years Yale distinguished professor of English literature, author of some 20 volumes of literary studies, public orator of Yale, says:

    “In the whole story of Jesus Christ, the most important event, is the resurrection. Christian faith depends on this. It is encouraging to know that it is explicitly given by ALL four evangelist, and told also by Paul. The names of those who SAW Him after His triumph over death are recorded; it may be said that the HISTORICAL EVIDENCE for the Resurrection is STRONGER than for any other miracle anywhere narrated; for as Paul said, if Christ is not risen from the dead then is our preaching in vain, and your faith is also vain.” 57/18

    Ambrose Fleming asserts that there is nothing in the Gospels that would cause a man of science to have problems with the miracles contained therein, and concludes with a challenge to INTELLECTUAL HONESTY, asserting that if such a “…study is pursued with what eminent lawyers have called a WILLING MIND, it will engender a deep assurance that the Christian Church is NOT founded on fictions, or nourished on delusions, or, as St. Peter calls them, ‘cunningly devised fables, ‘ but on HISTORICAL and actual events, which, however strange they may be, are indeed, the GREATEST EVENTS which have ever happened in the history of the world.: 60/427.428

    Many impartial students who have approached the RESURRECTION of Christ with a JUDICIAL spirit have been compelled by the WEIGHT of the EVIDENCE to belief in the resurrection as a FACT of HISTORY. An example may be taken from a letter written by Sir Edward Clark, K.C. to Rev. E.L. Macassey:

    “As a lawyer I have made a prolonged study of the EVIDENCES for events of the first Easter Day. To me the EVIDENCE is conclusive, and over and over again in the High Court, I have secured the verdict on evidence not nearly so compelling. Inference follows EVIDENCE, and a truthful witness is always artless and disdains effect. The Gospel EVIDENCE for the RESURRECTION is of this class, as a lawyer I accept UNRESERVEDLY as the testimony of truthful men to FACTS they were able to substantiate.” 63/47 (Ibid, pp.189,190).

    Loading…
37. 

    millertheanunnaki

    December 2, 2015 at 12:20 am

    
    

    @ Zoe December 1, 2015 at 11:35 PM

    I see you are unable to give a Bible reference to corroborate the date of 6th April 32 AD when Jesus rode on a jackass into Jerusalem. The same obese jackass carrying the three (Horus, Krishna & Yeshua) on one bare back equus africanus asinus called ac the Dompey (which btw, was swallowed by Python Miller on Palm Sunday for lunch).

    A good secular precept for the moral zeitgeist is that you should never kick a man when he is down and out. As such, I will leave alone to be swallowed whole not by the python Nanki the Nuksie Chimpanzee but by any one of those two Australian salt-water crocodiles that escaped from Noah’s Ark before the flood subsided.

    Loading…
38. 

    Zoe

    December 2, 2015 at 12:28 am

    
    

    Miller, Man, you just WASTING your time, give up, and go and get a Bush- Bath, from Bushie, then you maybe, will have a Demonic visitation from Horus, or Utu, or Rah, or even NAKI-NAKI!!!

    Jesus & Krishna Parallels – A Christian Response

    It should be noted that a few of these claims originate with Louis Jacolliot (1837-1890), a Frenchman who lived in India. His claims have not been supported with any external evidence. If he is to be believed, we are taking only his word for it.

    No actual Buddhists in India appear to have ever professed the beliefs Jacolliot claimed. And even if, hypothetically, there were 19th century Buddhists who believe the things he claimed, it’s likely their beliefs were influenced by Christianity, since there is no record of these beliefs pre-dating Christianity.

    I’ve heard from a couple of followers of the Hindu religion (one named Manali, the other who will remain unnamed) who have provided much-appreciated feedback.

    Born of a Virgin on December 25

    Since, according to legend, Krishna had seven older siblings, it’s unlikely his mother, Devaki, was a virgin (and there’s no tradition saying she was). According toKrisna World, Krishna was born on the “8th day of the dark half of the month of Sravana. This corresponds to July 19th 3228 BC.”

    I’ve seen other sites say he was born in August. Skeptic Acharya S makes the claim that Krishna was born of a virgin in the book “The Christ Conspiracy”, but her footnotes for this merely say that “The orthodox legend of Krishna is that he was born of a married woman, Devaki; but like Maya, Buddha’s mother, she was considered to have had a miraculous conception.” How does having a miraculous conception equate to her being a virgin?

    Manali says “The reason this gets mentioned as a point of similarity, I guess, is not to point that mothers in both cases were a virgin. And its not said anywhere that Devaki the mother of Krishna was a virgin. I think the point of similarity is that like Jesus, Krishna was not Devaki’s child, but son of god, whom she conceived miraculously.”

    I agree that their both being conceived miraculously is a point of similarity, but the Christ-myther claim of Krishna being “born of a virgin on December 25” is still not true on either point.

    His human father was a carpenter

    No, his human father (his only father, for that matter) was a man named Vasuveda. I have found no sources suggesting that he was a carpenter. I even did internet searches on the combination of “Vasuveda” and “Carpenter” in Google, Yahoo and Infoseek, and got no hits except for articles written about Krishna by people whose last names were ‘Carpenter’. In fact, he was most likely a dairy farmer.

    Father was off paying taxes when Krishna was born

    No, his father, Vasuveda, was in prison with his mother when Krishna was born.

    Birth was signaled by a star in the East

    I’ve found no mention of this in any Krishna story.

    Birth was attended by angels and shepherds, was presented with spices

    I found this site, written by a follower of Krishna, which gives the story of the birth of Krishna, and even makes some general comparisons between Krishna and Jesus (that they were both born of a woman, born in this world and were ‘God-on-Earth’), yet it mentions nothing about angels, shepherds, or spices. I haven’t found such comparisons anywhere else, either. Manali points out that Krishna was visited by cowherds after his birth, since his family was in the dairy business.

    A ruling tyrant ordered the slaughtering of thousands of infants upon hearing of Krishna’s birth

    While there is a parallel here, it’s not the one the critics claim. Devaki’s brother, Kansa, was told by a voice from Heaven that Devaki’s 8th child would kill him. So he put Devaki and Vasuveda in a cell, so that he would be able to kill their children as they were born. Krishna is freed from prison through divine intervention, and Devaki tries to track him down. According to Manali, “after Kansa failed to kill Krishna, and came to know that the baby has been born and is living somewhere, he called upon his army to search the entire city of Mathura and its suburbs, to find and kill all the infants born in the same period as Krishna. Thus he ended up killing several infants, and there are several stories of how miraculously Krishna as a baby escaped the killings.” So it was “several” infants, not thousands. However, the earliest version of this story in the Krishna tradition probably dates from the 4th to 6th century A.D., well after the Jesus story had been in circulation. Some date the Krishna story as early as 2nd century A.D., but even this is after the Gospel accounts were written.

    Was anointed with oil on the head by a woman he healed

    I can’t find any such incident in any version of the Krishna story.

    Was depicted as having his foot on the head of a snake

    Again, this cannot be found in any version of the story.

    Worked miracles: raised the dead, healed lepers, healed the deaf, healed the blind

    He worked miracles, but I have yet to find any references to his raising the dead, or healing lepers, the deaf or the blind. Acharya S has no footnotes for this claim, so apparently she can’t find the references, either.

    Taught in parables

    One of the Hindu followers who responded says he knows the Krishna story very well, and he says that Krishna did not use parables.

    Krishna lived poor and loved the poor

    The two Hindu followers who responded to this page disagree slightly on this. The first one said that “Krishna never lived as a poor person. The Yadav Caste (of which Krishna was a member) are dairy farmers, and, since milk is an important commodity, they have always been quite wealthy by Indian standards”.

    The second responder, Manali, says that “Krishna did live poor during parts of his childhood, when he was under the care of foster parents. When Kansa’s reign ended and he was welcomed back into the royal family, he never lived poor again.”
    But when we say that Jesus “lived poor”, we’re talking about his entire life, childhood and adulthood, so this isn’t a comparison.

    Besides that, many people throughout history have lived poor and loved the poor, it’s not hard to believe that Krishna and/or Jesus may have been among them.

    Castigated the clergy and charged them with hypocrisy and ambition.
    Again, not found in any version.
    Was transfigured in front of his disciples
    Again, not found in any version
    Gave his disciples the ability to work miracles
    Ditto.
    Krishna’s path was “strewn with branches”
    Ditto.
    Some traditions held that he was crucified between two thieves

    Critics claim this, but never back it up. The only method of demise that I can find is his being shot in the foot by a hunter’s arrow, and then either died or disappeared. If anyone out there can give me an example of a tradition in which he is crucified, please let me know.

    Acharya S’s footnote on this one makes claims about other MYTHOLOGICAL figures being crucified, but makes no mention of Krishna being crucified.

    The forementioned Jacolliot does make the claim of Krishna being affixed to a tree with arrows after he was killed, but doesn’t mention anything about two thieves, and since Krishna was already dead and no crucifix was involved, this was hardly a crucifixion. And no one has ever been able to back up Jacolliot’s claim, anyway, making it likely fraudulent. And even if not fraudulent, this story postdates Christianity by over 1800 years and was thus certainly influenced by Christianity.

    Was killed around 30 yrs old and the sun darkened at his death

    According to tradition, Krishna was 125 when he died. Only off by 95 years! And there’s nothing about the sun darkening at his death.

    Rose from the dead and ascended to heaven

    The closest parallel comes in some later versions in which Krishna’s body turned into a log-like image which floated around the East coast of India, finally ending up in a temple in the town of Puri. But he neither rose from the dead or ascended to Heaven.

    Was depicted on a cross with nail-holes in his feet.

    Only in post-Christian times.

    Was called: Shepherd of God, Redeemer, Firstborn, Sin-Bearer, Liberator, and Universal Word

    He was called the “Shepherd God” (though not “Shepherd OF God”), only because, unlike Jesus, he actually WAS a shepherd. Jesus was a shepherd only metaphorically. I cannot find any record of the other names.

    Was deemed: Our Lord and Savior and Son of God, who came to earth to die for the salvation of man

    He was never referred to by these titles.

    Was the second person of a trinity

    Sort of. The first Hindu follower who responded to this site states, “That Krishna is an avtar of Vishnu would make him the second god of the Hindu threesome”. However, he also acknowledges that the form of the threesome has changed over the years, and besides that,

    “The Hindu threesome cannot be equated even remotely with the Christian trinity.” The Hindu trinity is three separate beings, not the three-in-one of the Christian trinity.

    Was called: Jezeus/Jeseus by his disciples

    The source for this appears to be the forementioned Jacolliot, and thus postdates Christianity. Besides that, remember that Jesus’ Hebrew name was Yeshua. Jesus is only the English pronunciation. So even if true, this one is essentially meaningless.

    Krishna will return to judge the dead and will do battle with the “Prince of Evil.” The Earth will be desolated.

    This is another claim originating with Jacolliot and cannot be dated to earlier than the 19th century. Nor is it backed up by any evidence besides Jacolliot’s claim.

    Manali pointed me to these two passages in the “Bhagvad Gita”:
    “whenever there is a fall of sustenance; when it goes down, the righteousness falls off, to kill, to destroy these horrible negative forces: to save and sustain the saints, I come in every age in human form.”

    “To deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I Myself appear, millennium after millennium.”

    Manali says that Krishna is born into a new body in order to return (reincarnation), so this does not compare to Jesus, who is said to be returning in the same body He had in the 1st century.

    Links:
    Hare Krishna Home Page
    Encyclopedia Mythica: Krishna
    Indian Mythology
    Investigating The Similarities
    http://www.kingdavid.com

    Loading…
39. 

    Zoe

    December 2, 2015 at 2:32 pm

    
    

    Professor Thomas Arnold, cited by Wilbur Smith, was for 14 years the famous headmaster of Rugby, author of a famous three volume History of Rome, appointed to the chair of Modern History at Oxford, and certainly a man well acquainted with the value of evidence in determining historical facts. This great scholar said:

    “The EVIDENCE for our Lord’s life and death and RESURRECTION maybe, and often has been, shown to be satisfactory; it is good according to the common rules for distinguishing GOOD EVIDENCE from bad. Thousands and tens of thousands of persons have gone through it piece by piece, as carefully as every JUDGE summing up on a most important cause. I have myself done it many times over, not to persuade others but to satisfy myself….and I know of NO OTHER FACT in the history of mankind which IS PROVED by a BETTER and FULLER EVIDENCE of EVERY SORT, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the GREAT SIGN which God hath given us that Christ DIED and ROSE again from the dead.” 60/425,426.

    Wilbur Smith writes of a great LEGAL authority of the last century, He refers to John Singleton Copley, better known as Lord Lyndhurst (1772-1863), recognized as one of the greatest legal minds in British history, the Solicitor General of the British government in 1819, Attorney General of Great Britain in 1824, three times High Chancellor of England, and elected in 1846, High Steward of the University of Cambridge, thus holding in one lifetime the highest offices which a judge in Great Britain could ever have conferred upon him. When Chancellor Lyndhurst died, a document was found in his desk, among his private papers, giving and extended account of his own Christian faith, and in this precious, previously unknown record, he wrote: “I KNOW pretty well what EVIDENCE IS; and I tell you, such EVIDENCE for the Resurrection has NEVER broken down yet.” 60/425,584 (EVIDENCE That Demands a Verdict, Historical Evidences For The Christian Faith, Vol 1, p.191) Emphasis added.

    Loading…
40. 

    Hal Austin

    April 16, 2019 at 8:06 am

    
    

    France in Mali: the return of the colonial trap
    11th April 2019 by Renaud Girard

    It has been more than six years that the French army has been deployed in Mali. In this former colony of AOF (French West Africa), two-and-a-half times the size of France, it is a question of preventing Islamist katibas from the deserts of the north from seizing the big cities of the centre (Timbuktu , Mopti, Gao), then from Bamako to the southwest.
    The capital of Mali is a road junction from which one can easily enter Guinea in the west, Côte d’Ivoire in the south, Burkina Faso in the east.
    Caused by the Franco-British military intervention of spring 2011, the fall of the Gaddafi regime has proven to be a disaster for the entire Sahel region. A large part of Libya’s stockpiles of weapons (as well as those parachuted by the DGSE on Jebel Nefoussa in the summer of 2011) found themselves in the hands of uncontrollable militias professing Islamism and enriched by trafficking in drugs and human beings.
    Launched in January 2013 by President Hollande, Operation Serval rescued Bamako and drove the jihadist groups out of the cities of central and northern Mali.
    The relief was only short-lived. The Islamist fighters vanished into the sands, only to reappear a few months later throughout the Sahelian band – ever more numerous, more determined, more daring, more menacing.
    In August 2014, Serval was replaced by the “anti-terrorist operation Barkhane”: 4,500 French soldiers are deployed in Mali (Gao, Kidal, Tessalit), Niger (Niamey, Aguelal, Madama), and Chad (N’Djamena, Abéché, Faya-Largeau).
    In the event of a hard blow, Barkhane also has the support of French fighter-bombers and attack helicopters based in Ouagadougou.
    In his fight against the jihadists, Barkhane is helped by a poorly co-ordinated force of 5,000 soldiers set up by the G5 Sahel countries, all former French colonies (Mauritania, Mali, Burkina, Niger, Chad). To help stabilize it, Mali also has the UN forces of Minusma -13,000 soldiers and 1,800 policemen.
    Despite all these military deployments, the security situation in the Sahel continues to worsen. To the Islamist katibas were added interethnic struggles.
    On March 23, 160 Fulani civilians were horribly massacred in the village of Ogossagou (Mopti region, central Mali) by Dogon militias, hitherto politically supported by the government of Bamako. The Dogons are sedentary farmers while the Fulani are nomadic pastoralists. There is the struggle for land, but also the fact that many young Fulani have joined the Islamist katibas.
    In ethnic wars, it is always civilians who suffer the worst reprisals. Noting the deterioration of the situation in Mali, the Americans are thinking of reducing their financial commitment to the Minusma. EU countries are providing financial aid to Mali and the Sahelian band, but their men are not ready to die alongside French soldiers.
    In Bamako, the jeeps of marines and legionaries are no longer greeted with flowers; the young people are freezing them out. As we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, the soldiers of a Western foreign military force, especially in the land of Islam, easily pass from the status of liberators to that of occupiers.
    In those countries where administrations are inefficient and corrupt, the foreign soldier quickly becomes a scapegoat.
    Is the colonial trap closing in on France? Does it intend to become again the gendarme of the Sahel, which it was from 1900 to 1960? Do we want to return to the “civilizing mission of colonization”, dear to Jules Ferry? Does France still have the means to pacify Africa, so that Chinese, Japanese, German and American companies can quietly come and be awarded contracts?
    By getting involved, from 1990 to 1994, in quarrels between Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda, a former Belgian colony, France landed with both feet into the colonial trap (low probability of winning a little in the face of high probability of losing a lot). While its intentions with regard to Rwanda were pure, France lost a lot of prestige and self-esteem.
    Remove Barkhane overnight would be a mistake. A huge chaos would follow, right up to the shores of Côte d’Ivoire. But it is imperative to develop a gradual exit strategy. That can only happen with the cooperation and reinforcement of the African states and armies, possibly operated by France, but necessarily financed by those powers that trade most with Africa.

    This article was first published in Le Figaro.

    Loading…
41. 

    Donna

    April 16, 2019 at 10:06 am

    
    

    Falling down I say falling down!
    London Bridge is falling down!

    Burning down I say burning down!
    Notre Dame it is burning down!

    Next…..

    Loading…
42. 

    David

    April 16, 2019 at 10:51 am

    
    

    Interesting to the hypothetical Catholics fawning over the damages caused by the fire.

    Loading…