Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 03-06-2018, 05:57 PM   #5716
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 31,622
Rep Power: 52 boxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really nice
Jesus' Death, Part II

As stated in 5705, the vast majority of Jews believed a couple of things about the promised "anointed" one -- the promised messiah. Most believed that the messiah would be a descendant of King David and as such occupy the Davidic throne. They also believed that this messiah would restore Israel and vanquish her enemies, that this king would greatly resemble the nation's greatest warrior-king and defender of Israel, King David himself.

The second very important point to understand about Israel's messiah is the great significance to being God's anointed one. When Israel's kings were chosen by God and inaugurated on their throne, there was a royal ceremony of anointing usually performed by the High Priest or a prophet of God. In the cases of Saul (Israel's first king) and David (the second king), both were anointed by the prophet Samuel. This ceremony used costly perfumed oil which would be poured over the heads of the kings. This costly oil signified God's favor, blessing and approval upon the king. In a real sense it signified the outpouring of God's Holy Spirit upon the king and it was expected of the king to rule and judge the people in the righteousness of God's Law and to protect all the oppressed.

Many of the messianic passages dealing with the royalty of God's anointed one can be found in the Psalms. See Psalms 2, 45, 72 and 110 for starters.
And the core of the Davidic Covenant promises God made with King David can be found in 2Sam 7:4ff. God promised David that his throne would be established forever. In light of these promises and messianic prophecies in the OT, we can begin to understand all the kingdom teachings of Jesus, including all the kingdom parables, and why he preached the Gospel of the kingdom of God! Jesus certainly saw himself as fulfilling the covenant promise his Father had made with King David about a 1,000 years or so earlier.

But it's not only in the Hebrew canon of scripture that we find this messianic kingship motif, but also in extra-biblical Hebrew writings. These writings, too, show how ingrained the kingship of the messiah was in the national psyche of Israel. Ehrman points this out in his book and so he quoted extensively from the Psalms of Solomon, which I will duplicate here.

See, Lord, and raise up for them their king, the son of David, to rule over your servant Israel in the time known to you, O God.

Undergird him with the strength to destroy the unrighteous rulers, to purge Jerusalem from from gentiles who trample her to destruction; in wisdom and in righteousness to drive out the sinners from the inheritance; to smash the arrogance of sinners like a potter's jar; to shatter all their substance with an iron rod; to destroy the unlawful nations with the word of his mouth; at his warning the nations will flee from his presence; and he will condemn sinners by the thoughts of his heart...

And he will have gentile nations serving him under his yoke...

And he will purge Jerusalem and make it holy as it was even from the beginning...

And he will be a righteous king over them, taught by God. There will be no unrighteousness among them in his days, for all shall be holy and their king shall be the Lord Messiah.


A couple of things -- Ehrman and other scholars date this psalm as being written in the first century BCE. This dating seems reasonable given the reference above to purge Jerusalem of the Gentiles who trample her to destruction. This psalm was very likely penned shortly after Roman occupation.

Also, it's clear that the composer of this psalm was alluding to various passages in the Hebrew scriptures themselves. We can know this, for example, from the use of the phrase "iron rod" -- a phrase that is used in the OT (cf. Ps 2:9). There are other phrases, too, the composer used, but time won't permit discussing those.

To be sure, there were other Jewish views relevant to the form the Jewish messiah would take when he came into the world. But again, time won't permit a discussion of those. Suffice to say, the the couple of other views were very much in the minority. The vast majority of Jews who believed in a coming messiah believed he would come as a warrior-king -- a conquering king who would deliver Israel from her enemies and restore to her to her former glory. This was the predominant view of the Jewish messiah.

Now...take a deep breath. Try to absorb what I have written here -- what the great hope and expectation of the Jewish world was when Christ entered it. And try to put yourself back into first century Israel. And remember, this great hope, huge expectation and eager anticipation were all greatly excited by the fact that the Jews longed to be out from under the yoke of Rome. And not only this, but some devout, pious, God-fearing Jews also generally understood from Daniel 9 and the Seventy Weeks Prophecy contained therein that their messiah was due to come onto the world stage momentarily.

So what happens? Well, the Gospels tell us. Jesus came, started up a ministry of preaching for three years, excited a lot people, gained quite a few followers but greatly angered many more because he presented a threat to their power and authority. Jesus was to the Jewish religious establishment what Donald Trump is to political establishment in D.C. -- a rank outsider! In the case of Christ, he did not tow their religious line. So...they had to get rid of him because every day he was building momentum among the people. He was becoming more popular. So, the Jewish establishment plotted and schemed and they brought false charges up against him to Pontius Pilate, who albeit reluctantly had him crucified publicly.

So given everything we have learned about what most Jews believed about their coming messiah, and how he would be the blessed one and favored one by God -- God's chosen and anointed king -- how in the world can his small band of core followers, subsequent to his shameful and humiliating death, preach their messiah CRUCIFIED and expect anyone to not consider them madly insane!? But more than this: How did they ever get anyone to listen to them!? How was this small, rag-tag ban of fishermen-disciples able to convert thousands of Jews shortly after Jesus' ascension? And how was it that the Jewish religious authorities were not able to easily expose the fraudulent nature of their preaching, given what they thought they knew about the nature of the coming messiah? Why couldn't the powerful religious establishment reveal the Jesus sect's preaching for hoax, mythicists say it was?

Remember what I said earlier, folks: The motif of messianic kingship was deeply ingrained into the national psyche of Israel. The religious authorities should have had no problems at all in bringing the vast majority of the Jesus followers back down to planet earth. After all, their "glorious" messiah, who had a way with words, nevertheless just got himself crucified!

To any honest thinker, something really doesn't add up here. Something stinks in Denmark. It wasn't as though Jesus came into ancient Palestine that was in a religious vacuum where it would have been relatively easy to pull the wool over people's eyes. Rather he came into the Jewish world -- unto his own people -- who had very strong and definite ideas of what their messiah would look like in terms of his character, authority, mission and office. The elite, educated, polished, sophisticated Jewish religious authorities should have been the 1-10 shot favorites to easily correct the misconceptions of the uneducated, unwashed masses. God only knows...they had enough scriptural and extra-biblical evidence on their side to show that God would never have cursed his messiah -- but rather he would have "anointed" him and we saw what that meant. I will leave one text for you all to ponder before taking my leave. This text being, perhaps, the primary reason why Paul at first rejected the messiah. Perhaps Paul could not, in his own mind, reconcile the curse of God on one hand with His blessing and favor and approval on the other. Paul in the bold highlighted part is probably alluding to Josh 10:26-27

Gal 3:10-14
10 For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them." 11 Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, " The righteous man shall live by faith. " 12 However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "He who practices them shall live by them." 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us — for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree"14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
NASB

To most Jewish minds the idea of a crucified Christ would have been extremely offensive to them. Jesus would have been repugnant to them, and it would never have entered their minds to bless or approve or accept what God had cursed! So..how on this little green planet did that small band of Jesus followers ever spread the gospel to convert thousands of Jews in Palestine and then take the gospel throughout the Roman empire to convert only God know how many more all these centuries? How were they able to overcome this seeming insurmountable obstacle of a crucified Christ with their fellow Jews and convert thousands of them?
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot

Last edited by boxcar; 03-06-2018 at 05:59 PM.
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 12:03 AM   #5717
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location:
Posts: 18,349
Rep Power: 35 hcap will become famous soon enoughhcap will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
I believe Trump is currently serving his first term. Stay tuned for the second one -- if you can count that high, that is.
Unbelievable. A so-called Christian loving the Turnip!
hcap is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 09:01 AM   #5718
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,041
Rep Power: 15 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
So, physics has all the answers to life?
Not yet.

"Science doesn't know everything. Religion doesn't know anything." - Aron Ra
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 09:06 AM   #5719
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,041
Rep Power: 15 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
The "existence of the milieu" in the NT is entirely different from the milieu in "Gone with the Wind". The latter we know is fiction, but the former never claims to be fiction.
Look up the definition of "milieu" and get back to me.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 09:24 AM   #5720
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,041
Rep Power: 15 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Naturalistic atheism is self-defeating because it violates the Law of Noncontradiction.
Prove it. And don't say you already have because you have not. If you do say you already have (or words to that effect) then that is an outright lie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
(You are working on finishing up your series, right?
You have deflected the conversation into the origin of life and then the historicity of Jesus. I assume those subjects are of more interest to you. If you are still interested in logic I'll gladly postpone further discussion on origins and historicity and concentrate on logic. Your call.

Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Don't keep us in suspense. I, for one, am chompin' at the bit to learn how I "abused" the laws of logic. )
A partial list:
  1. Outright lying.
  2. Use of logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are the subject of a later post.
  3. Failure to explicitly state all premises, A.K.A., tacit assumptions.
  4. Stating premises in an ambiguous manner.
  5. Equivocation, in effect, changing the definition of a word as the argument progresses.
  6. Failure to define terms.
  7. Unsupported generalities.
You are particularly fond of 1,2 & 3
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 09:52 AM   #5721
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,041
Rep Power: 15 Actor will become famous soon enough
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 11:37 AM   #5722
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 31,622
Rep Power: 52 boxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really nice
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
Unbelievable. A so-called Christian loving the Turnip!
And I voted for him too, and will again if given the chance. It would be downright un-Christian to vote for any socialist/commie alternative.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 11:55 AM   #5723
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 31,622
Rep Power: 52 boxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really nice
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Prove it. And don't say you already have because you have not. If you do say you already have (or words to that effect) then that is an outright lie.

You have deflected the conversation into the origin of life and then the historicity of Jesus. I assume those subjects are of more interest to you. If you are still interested in logic I'll gladly postpone further discussion on origins and historicity and concentrate on logic. Your call.

A partial list:
  1. Outright lying.
  2. Use of logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are the subject of a later post.
  3. Failure to explicitly state all premises, A.K.A., tacit assumptions.
  4. Stating premises in an ambiguous manner.
  5. Equivocation, in effect, changing the definition of a word as the argument progresses.
  6. Failure to define terms.
  7. Unsupported generalities.
You are particularly fond of 1,2 & 3
Just cut to chase and specifically demonstrate how I have abused any of the laws of logic. You are the one making the claim, so the burden of proof is with you. Get to the point, already, other than the one on top of your beanie.

You're a bigger liar (oops sorry... I meant to say PREVARICATOR) than Hcap. I never thought anyone would top him.

I have often demonstrated how a finite universe within an atheistic, naturalistic philosophy violates the Law of Noncontradiction. And after I did, you then postulated an infinite universe within the same philosophy -- a universe without beginning and without end. And then I demonstrated how that piece of excrement only dug a deeper hole of absurdity for you because it violated two laws of logic -- the Laws of Identity and Noncontradiction.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 11:57 AM   #5724
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 31,622
Rep Power: 52 boxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really nice
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Look up the definition of "milieu" and get back to me.
Why? I know exactly what it means. But of course, since YOU don't think I do, why don't you put forward a definition?
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-07-2018, 09:41 PM   #5725
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 31,622
Rep Power: 52 boxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really nice
I'd like to revisit my 5716 in which I quoted a passage out of Galatians. In that post I said that Paul was alluding to a text in Joshua 10 in the OT to the tree curse. But I was mistaken. I misspoke. Both the OT quotes in Gal 3:10-13 were alluding to passages in the Law of Moses -- specifically out of the Book of Deuteronomy. So, here's the passage in Galatians again for reconsideration:

Gal 3:10-13
10 For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them." 11 Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, " The righteous man shall live by faith. " 12 However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "He who practices them shall live by them." 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree"
NASB

In v. 10, Paul was quoting from Deut 27:26, and the second is loosely quoted from Deut 21:22-23, which I will quote.

Deut 21:22-23
22 "And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, 23 his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance.
NASB

So, what Paul has very obviously done in Galatians is tie the two passages together and apply them ultimately to Christ.

Deut 27:26 is found in the famous Curses Chapter of the Law wherein numerous curses are promised to be pronounced by God upon Israel for various acts of disobedience to God's holy law. God expects his chosen people to confirm the words of his law by continually doing them. James teaches essentially the same thing in different words when he told his Jewish audience that Whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all (Jas 2:10).

Deut 21:22-23 naturally assumes that when someone is stoned or put to the death with the sword for a capital crime that that person was found guilty by the elders or judges and the sentence of death itself was God's curse upon the guilty. Apparently, it wasn't ANE custom to hang people by the neck until dead, but it was a custom to inflict more shame, disgrace and humiliation upon the person by publicly hanging his corpse from a tree. This public hanging was the ultimate curse of God, perhaps to signify that even in death and after death, that soul will never find peace -- that another curse awaits him on the other side of the grave.

Of course, the old rugged Cross is an extension of a tree. And Christ was hung on that Cross. And as Paul told the Galatians, he suffered the Cross to become God's curse on behalf of his people. How did he become this curse? By becoming the elect's sin bearer. As Paul also said elsewhere, "He who knew no sin became sin for us" (2Cor 5:21). How did he "become" sin? By imputation! His Father imputed all the sins of his chosen people onto his holy and righteous Son. The righteous Son of Man became unrighteous, so that the unrighteous might become the righteousness of God in Christ (Rom 3:22). Jesus had to first drink from God's cup of wrath to completely and eternally satisfy his Father's justice before God could bestow his infinite and unfailing love, mercy and grace upon undeserving sinners, thereby legally, lawfully and righteously justifying them for all eternity. In the soteriology of the bible, Friday's Cross always precedes [Easter] Sunday.

One more important point before we tie a couple of loose ends together. I speculated earlier that it would not surprise me to learn (when I see Paul in heaven) that he initially rejected the Jewish messiah because we was unable to reconcile how God's "anointed one" (and all that this entails) could ever incur God's wrath and curse. How could a loving God ever curse the messiah he sent to Israel so that he could restore and deliver them from their enemies -- and by extension, therefore, His enemies, as well? I suspect that it was really tough for Paul to wrap his very Jewish, Pharisaic mind around that. And this Pauline passage comes to mind that lends credence to my theory:

1 Cor 1:23
23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block, and to Gentiles foolishness,
NASB

A STUMBLING BLOCK! Yes, indeed. I can certainly understand how Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, could think this way! The Cross would become a huge stumbling block to virtually all the Jews. It was UNTHINKABLE to a Jewish mind that their longed for, long awaited, expected, hoped for, prayed for messiah would be found anywhere near a Roman cross, let alone hanging on it! The apostle again refers to the Cross as a stumbling block in Gal 5:11. So, I strongly suspect this "stumbling block" that Paul strongly associates with the Cross would have been the messianic hope -- the promised messiah -- the ANOINTED one of God.

But after Paul's conversion, after he encountered the risen Christ, after Christ opened his heart to understand the mystery of the Gospel, the apostle could do NOTHING but preach the Cross of Christ and His resurrection. In fact, everything else was dung by comparison to knowing Christ and him crucified.

1 Cor 2:2
2 For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.
NASB

Talk about a radical post-conversion transformation!

In addition to the Cross being a stumbling block in Paul's mind, the messiah himself was also "stone of stumbling and a rock of offense". (Rom 9:33; 1Pet 2:8), and this was predicted in the OT (Isa 8:14-15; Ps 118:22).

Let's wind this up with everything we have learned. First, let's look at Christ as though he actually existed and died on the Cross and was Resurrected.

Christ Actually Lived, Died, was Buried and But Did Not Rise on the Third Day.

Solution for the Jewish authorities is obvious: Produce the body that was in the tomb. This would have shut down the Jesus movement in a heart beat, for they would have successfully refuted the resurrection lie. It would have taken the wind out of the sails of the rag-tag band of disciples. The Jesus movement would have self-destructed. It would have gone nowhere fast without a resurrected messiah.

Christ was a Myth. He never existed and all the stories about him were fiction.

Again, given what we have learned about the national messianic psyche of first century Israel -- a psyche that was well grounded in the OT and other extra-biblical Hebrew writings -- the solution would have been obvious to all highly offended Jews. These Jews would have looked at the Jesus "rumors" of the day as disgusting, appalling, vile and highly offensive. Not only would the rumors or fictional stories cast aspersions on God's messiah but on God Almighty himself. The Jewish religious establishment would have viewed this Jesus sect, who was spreading false stories, as heretics of the worst sought. They would have considered them blasphemers because their stories would have called into question God's love and faithfulness to his chosen people. It would have also called into question God's veracity. The Jewish authorities would have wanted to defend their covenant God by doing all they could to silence this heretical Jewish sect. And the quickest way to do this was to show the masses in Palestine that this Jesus sect's version of the messiah could not have been the true messiah because God would never curse his Anointed One by allowing him to be crucified. Moreover, it would have been in the vested political interest of the Jewish authorities (indeed the entire nation!) to shut down this Jesus sect and discredit them thoroughly, for in so doing they would have avoided any potential political fallout with Rome. Rome would not turn a blind eye to any province who could not control its own affairs! (And history bears this truth out!) And the establishment had plenty of material to make their case to the general populace against the Jesus sect. But where, where are the refutations? Where are the first century writings that label the Jesus sect's stories as blasphemous legends, or fables or empty babblings, as lies against God and all humanity?

So... the Jewish authorities produced no body of Jesus to easily refute the resurrection if in fact he lived, nor did the religious establishment produce any writings to refute the heresies (as phony as the stories may have been); for we all know that falsehoods can have very deleterious effects (intended and unintended alike) upon all people involved. Actions usually do have consequences. And here's the megabytes of irony: The religious establishment understood this very clearly. In Acts 3, in Peter's second sermon after Pentecost and after healing a lame man, the temple guard came and arrested Peter and John because of the great crowd the two apostles attracted and the commotion they caused. Then they were brought before the Sanhedrin. And this council were so enraged at the two, they wanted to murder them, too. And they would have, it hadn't been for a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a prominent and respected teacher of the Law. Gamaliel addressed the council and this is what he told them:

Acts 5:35-39
35 And he said to them, "Men of Israel, take care what you propose to do with these men. 36 "For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody; and a group of about four hundred men joined up with him. And he was slain; and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. 37 "After this man Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the census, and drew away some people after him, he too perished, and all those who followed him were scattered. 38 "And so in the present case, I say to you, stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or action should be of men, it will be overthrown; 39 but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God."
NASB

The narrative goes on to tell us that the Sanhedrin heeded this Pharisee's advice. All they did to the apostles was flog them and ordered them to not speak any longer in the name of Jesus, and then they let them go.

History proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the apostles and their successors were very successful in spreading the gospel from Jerusalem to Judea to Samaria and to indeed the remotest part of the earth. The religious establishment was not able to overthrow Christ's rag-tag band of disciples. Even Jesus predicted that the very gates of hell would not be able to prevail against his church (Mat 16:18). This evil world could not, cannot and never will prevail against the Truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2018, 01:30 PM   #5726
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 31,622
Rep Power: 52 boxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really nice
Jesus's Death Part IV

Another major and very obvious reason that the Jewish religious establishment of Jesus' day would have taken a very proactive role in killing the Jesus messiah rumors or stories is because those "phony stories" (or in today's vernacular (fake news) actually gained steam and lots of legs, thereby rapidly gaining grassroots support first among Jews in Palestine, then eventually throughout the Roman Empire. In other words, this "fake news" about Jesus being the crucified messiah not only became a real threat to the established religion of orthodox Judaism itself, but it actually succeeded in dividing first century Jews! Would not the religious establishment have taken an active interest in its own self-preservation!? It is inconceivable to think that the orthodox Jews would have passively sat on their hands to allow the spread of this "fake news" by the Jesus sect. But if you're a mythicist, then very obviously this is what the orthodox Jews did because they failed miserably in dousing the zealous fires of evangelism by the Jesus sect. There is not so much as one first century document that has been unearthed that would tell us that the religious establishment aggressively refuted the fake news and heresies of the Jesus sect, even though this fake news was aggressively and successfully propagated throughout Palestine and the Roman world.

Further, there is no record of the Jewish religious establishment enlisting the aid of the mighty Roman Empire to help them in putting down these dangerous Jesus rabble-rousers. What would have prevented the religious establishment from currying favor with Pontius Pilate? They certainly knew how to play politics, generally, and the Caesar card in particular (see Jn 19:12-15; Act 17:7). Why didn't they enlist the aid of Pontius Pilate? All they would have had to do was tell them that the fake news of the Jesus sect is preaching a false messiah (i.e. king!) and that this phony, make-believe, made up king is gaining legs among the unwashed masses and threatens the Palestine Jews' loyalty to Caesar, since this sect was preaching another king! Yes, Pontius Pilate might have rolled his eyes -- but would he not have acted on the local level, and kept the problem local instead of risking news of these Jesus rabble-rousers actually reaching the ears of Caesar? Would Pilate risk putting himself in a bad light by appearing incompetent with the Emperor of Rome? I think not. It's very likely, that even if Pilate sensed that the establishment Jews could be manipulating him, he would have gone in CYA mode -- just in case. He could always get back at the manipulators at a later date which would be greatly preferable to dealing with Caesar. But again...there is not one single first century record that Pontius Pilate or Rome itself intervened on behalf of the orthodox Jews, or acted in its own interest to subdue the spread of the fake news by the Jesus sect in first century Palestine.

So...if we believe the lies of the mythicists, at the end of the day we are supposed to infer and believe that the first century Jewish religious establishment just allowed the rabble-rousing Jesus sect to preach its fake news with insolence. They were willing to just let the chips fall where they may, not at all really concerned about preserving their own power, or the orthodoxy of their own religion or in defending their covenant God's integrity in spite of the blasphemous implications of the preaching of the fake news. The establishment just let things get out of control. And they were too proud to enlist the aid of Pontius Pilate to boot. The establishment Jews just rolled the dice and took their chances; and we see the outcome of that decision to this very day. Christianity blossomed into a world-wide religion. And we have the first century Jews to blame for that. They are the ones who stupidly allowed the Jesus "myth" to exponentially grow way beyond their control. The establishment Jews had their chance kill the fake news, but they blew it.

This kind of inference can only make sense to mythicists who who are missing more than a few brain cells.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-10-2018, 11:46 PM   #5727
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,041
Rep Power: 15 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
I have often demonstrated how a finite universe within an atheistic, naturalistic philosophy violates the Law of Noncontradiction
In what post?
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-11-2018, 01:48 PM   #5728
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 31,622
Rep Power: 52 boxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really niceboxcar is just really nice
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
In what post?
I don't know. I don't care. And I'm not taking the time to look it up. Atheistic Materialsim, in either a finite or infinite universe model, violates laws of logic.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-11-2018, 04:23 PM   #5729
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,041
Rep Power: 15 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
I don't know. I don't care. And I'm not taking the time to look it up. Atheistic Materialsim, in either a finite or infinite universe model, violates laws of logic.
Simply because you say so? I think not. If you had a good argument you would know. You would care. You would either look it up or repeat it. But instead you are throwing in the towel.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-11-2018, 04:41 PM   #5730
Greyfox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17,335
Rep Power: 30 Greyfox has a spectacular aura aboutGreyfox has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
But instead you are throwing in the towel.
Shirley you jest.
Greyfox is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
How many U.S. tracks will be running full (8+ week) meetings in 2028?
0: We'll all be nuked by then - 5.66%
3 Votes
1-5 - 9.43%
5 Votes
6-10 - 18.87%
10 Votes
11-15 - 18.87%
10 Votes
16-20 - 9.43%
5 Votes
21 or more - 37.74%
20 Votes
Total Votes: 53
Non-members may not vote on this poll.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2018 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved -- Best Viewed in a modern browser @ 1280x720 Resolution Or Higher
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.