Customer Discussions > Religion forum

Why wasn't Jesus' entire life thoroughly documented?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 901-925 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:26:01 AM PST
BJ your Von Daniken reference is not the same at all. You have not mentioned the rather long list of references i took the time to list which run from those contempory to Jesus to the present. The reason there were a preponderance in the 19th cnetury is that the discovery of the rosetta stone in the previous enable the translation of egyptian hieroglifics for the fisrt time. That work was attacked by the hugely well funded religious establishment but the work has continued to the present day and the proofs continue to be documented. The denial of history by the religious establishment is like the similar denial of science from Galiileo and on. The church continues is 2,000 year struggle to obstruct and or control human knowledge. You attacks are from the same motivation as the mullahs that did not want polio vacines or the anti vacine movement here now. Mankind still needs to escape the selfish me first views that deny science and obstruct change and the growth of knowledge.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:35:15 AM PST
Sarah says:
Thanks, BJ!

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:35:42 AM PST
Sarah says:
You wrote a book on this subject? What is it?

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:42:58 AM PST
Sarah says:
LBJ: The paintings and words on the walls of the tombs in Egypt and scrolls for example are time machines they tell us what people believed before the OT was written.

S No, they do not. The tomb art and words tell you what the kings who commissioned the tombs wanted to announce to eternity, about their own beliefs about their own personal status, that nobody was ever expected to see. The Dead Sea scrolls tell you what a few people in a marginal, transient sect believed - or they tell you insofar as anyone today is able to decipher their metaphoric language, which, given the disagreements, is not all that far.

Come to that, the Bible tells you what a few scribes and officials wanted to write down, possibly for themselves and their own caste or some other limited group and that later passed muster with redactors.

The masses of ordinary people in any of those civilizations never recorded their thoughts or analyses of these matters, or if they did, the information has not survived.

So, no, speculations about the ancient past are not verifiable. The time machine remains unused in the hangar.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:57:45 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
Sorry Lawrence, I suggest you get any introductory anthropolgoy or sociology book to see how you are wrong.

I can recommend some that I have used in classes I have taught in the past if you like.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:59:52 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 25, 2012 7:03:31 AM PST
Sarah that makes no sense. When an ancient tomb has pictures and words describing the virgin goddess Isis giving birth to a Son who was a redeemer and shepherd of his people, when ancient coffin texts show Horus raising Lazur from the dead after 4 days and shows Anup his cousin baptizing him it means some thing. The tombs were not writen by kings they were writen by priests.
The people believed what the priests told them ON PENALTY OF DEATH. So Sarah crank up the Time machine again, it is not a perfect machine but it shows us enough and it all makes more sense than a magical explanation. When we look at great arc of the growth of human knowledge its all built small layer after after on the sholdures of previous generations.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 7:02:39 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
I wrote a book about the LDS. I don't mention it too much because Amazon does not want authors to promote their works here.

One of he two posts I have had deleted over he years was deleted because I was discussing the book somebody else had written. What he had written about his book, and my reply were both deleted by Amazon.

He said that Amazon threatened to ban him if he kept talking about his novels.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 7:04:16 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 25, 2012 7:22:03 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
I do not think Sarah believes in a magical explanation Lawrence.

If I am wrong, she can correct me.

Many scholars say they cannot prove or disprove a myth. They thus look at things like how a myth affects people's lives or how it is used in a healing ceremony among the Dine. They examine myths in many many ways, but they do not try to prove it true or false.

Which does not mean that many scholars do not personally disbelieve the myths, including the stories in the Bible. I do think that academics tend to be atheists in fields like anthropology and archaeology.

BTW if you have not seen me say this, I have many times said IMO a fundamentalist scholar is an oxymoron.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 7:05:58 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on May 18, 2012 8:34:47 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 7:29:04 AM PST
B. Josephson says:
Or possibly mP thinks Paul and Jesus were gay ;)

In some versions of the Bible knew is not the most literal translation of the Hebrew...

(not to be taken seriously alert) Puck's post put me in the mood.

Best Wishes,
Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 7:51:18 AM PST
wrong about what BJ
Reading below it occurs to me we just misunderstand our terms. So I endorse the truth of many myths e.g. a myth that shows the power of love or the damage of lies is true even if Prometheous did not personally discover fire for all man kind or a physical Jesus was dead for 3 days, lived again and rose into heaven saving all mankind. When I say magic I include anything that could be supernatural.
I just noticed references in Job to the Zodiac and a quote in Murdocks book by Doctor Frederick Farrar the Dean of Cantebury in 1880's "The Jews... borrowed many astrological notions form the Chaldeans and connected these notions with the advent of the Messiah". The Egyptian texts the Sothis "leads orion" which constitutes the motif "the bright star followed by these three kings- or soothsayers". Plutarch(12,359d) "The soul of Horus is called Orion," Hence , the three "king stars" following the bright star represent and equate Osirus (the father) and Horus the son. The son Horus is the Solar savior at winter solstice AND the summer solstice in the inundation of the Nile. All of these event predate the Bible!!!! They were know as the mysteries through out the known world!!!

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 7:53:07 AM PST
Kevin Bold says:
"Why wasn't Jesus' entire life thoroughly documented?"

Why would it be?

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 9:40:23 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 25, 2012 9:53:04 AM PST
Sarah says:
>LBJ: The paintings and words on the walls of the tombs in Egypt and scrolls for example are time machines they tell us what people believed before the OT was written.

>S No, they do not. The tomb art and words tell you what the kings who commissioned the tombs wanted to announce to eternity, about their own beliefs about their own personal status, that nobody was ever expected to see. The Dead Sea scrolls tell you what a few people in a marginal, transient sect believed - or they tell you insofar as anyone today is able to decipher their metaphoric language, which, given the disagreements, is not all that far.

Come to that, the Bible tells you what a few scribes and officials wanted to write down, possibly for themselves and their own caste or some other limited group and that later passed muster with redactors.

The masses of ordinary people in any of those civilizations never recorded their thoughts or analyses of these matters, or if they did, the information has not survived.

So, no, speculations about the ancient past are not verifiable. The time machine remains unused in the hangar.

LBJ: Sarah that makes no sense. When an ancient tomb has pictures and words describing the virgin goddess Isis giving birth to a Son who was a redeemer and shepherd of his people,

S When a tomb has that, if any tomb has any of that, which, btw, you have claimed but not proved, then it is a communication by a king intended for no human audience whatsoever. The images and words were locked up in stone pyramids in such a way as to prevent (as far as possible) any access by living humans.

LBJ: when ancient coffin texts show Horus raising Lazur from the dead after 4 days and shows Anup his cousin baptizing him it means some thing.

S When a tomb has that, if any tomb has any of that, which, btw, you have claimed but not proved, then it is a communication by a king intended for no human audience whatsoever. The images and words were locked up in stone pyramids in such a way as to prevent (as far as possible) any access by living humans.

LBJ: The tombs were not writen by kings they were writen by priests.

S These tombs were financed and commissioned by kings, to communicate about themselves, with no human audience intended. If you have any evidence that priests were involved somehow, that would show priests being employed and commissioned by the king to craft the king's private message to the supernatural world about himself. Have you any such evidence? What is it, exactly?

LBJ: The people believed what the priests told them ON PENALTY OF DEATH.

S What exactly is your evidence that such a requirement with such a penalty existed? And what is your evidence as to the content of any belief communicated to "the people," as distinguished from messages locked away in inaccessible royal tombs?

You do know, do you not, that for at least one king (Akhenaten), the king's own worship practice was one thing and the people's worship practice is known to have been mandated to be something else?

LBJ: So Sarah crank up the Time machine again, it is not a perfect machine but it shows us enough and it all makes more sense than a magical explanation.

S What magical explanation? Who said anything about a magical explanation? Explanation of what? What are you talking about?

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 9:41:43 AM PST
Sarah says:
Thanks BJ. I shall quietly look for the title, alerting nobody to my clandestine, discreet quest, way under the amazon radar, preferably around 3 a.m. when the amazon people are supposed to be asleep.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 9:44:14 AM PST
Sarah says:
BJ to LBJ: I do not think Sarah believes in a magical explanation Lawrence. If I am wrong, she can correct me.

S You're right. LBJ seems confused. I don't even know what "magical explanation" he thinks someone would offer or what phenomenon he thinks needs explaining.

bJ: Many scholars say they cannot prove or disprove a myth. They thus look at things like how a myth affects people's lives or how it is used in a healing ceremony among the Dine. They examine myths in many many ways, but they do not try to prove it true or false.

Which does not mean that many scholars do not personally disbelieve the myths, including the stories in the Bible. I do think that academics tend to be atheists in fields like anthropology and archaeology.

BTW if you have not seen me say this, I have many times said IMO a fundamentalist scholar is an oxymoron.

S sounds right to me.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 9:51:51 AM PST
Sarah says:
LBJ: I just noticed references in Job to the Zodiac

S You have inspired me. I have now discovered references in the Tanakh to onions, garlic, mud, frogs, leaves, and birds' nests. Maybe some of those things are the real underlying basis of biblical religion.

LBJ: ...and a quote in Murdocks book by Doctor Frederick Farrar the Dean of Cantebury in 1880's "The Jews... borrowed many astrological notions form the Chaldeans and connected these notions with the advent of the Messiah".

S Well, that settles it. If a Dean of a Cathedral expressed his (probably correct) opinion about Babylonian Jews and astrological notions over a century ago, that must prove that biblical religion is based on Star Worship. What more evidence could anyone possible want? Let's just be glad LBJ didn't find an Archdeacon expressing an opinion about the (probable) fact that Babylonian Jews borrowed Babylonian beliefs in the need to destroy hair clippings so that evil magic couldn't be worked with them, or we might be hearing that all of biblical religion was based on Hair Worship.

Posted on Feb 25, 2012 11:55:39 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 25, 2012 12:12:48 PM PST
There is so much sarcasm and irony in these posts I cant understand what is going on or what any one believes.
Previous posts from Sarah gave me the impression she was arguing for a literal belief in the bible, maybe i misunderstood or its some other Sarah, anyway thats why I thought she beleived in magic.

From what I understand Priests have real temporal power especially in ancient times. Blasphemy or heresy for example were grounds for execution and still are in many parts of the world.
The celebrations of religious festivals were extremely important events and the scripts for these events were never written down as that was illegal for a long time. The masses of people could not read any way. Many of the texts that have survived were written about by Greeks and Romans Plutach and Plato among others. The wall paintings etc since they were private and royal property are part of the record of what the priests used in the festivals for the masses according to what I have read. One of the reasons for the festivals was to ensure the sun would come back and the floods critical for new crops. I dont want to insult any one but this is common knowledge for even the initiates such as myself who is by no means a scholar. It does align with the smattering of information I have gleaned in the most dilletantist manner over the years for cultures everywhere from National Geographic to a my meager liberal arts degree. So I am at a loss to understand how a quote I make since everyone seems to want a quote one of many i could make is cause for derision rather that arguing the point being made by a very respected acedemic. I know this is all a game for us but should we not iron out the rules of engagement to make it all more interesting? Or is this all just a mock a thon. I can enjoy banter but them when some one says something interesting its a temptation to try and be respectful and sincere back. Of course we get thrown off track by trolls and other odd species of people here. SO I apologize to those I should and will continue to ignore the Trolls. I often do just state things I believe rather than quote all of hte references for two reasons. 1) This is the only place where I know of people who care about this stuff so more work gets little pay back and 2) It makes so much sense to me. If something reads as logical I dont tend to need to do a huge amount of more original research. Mz Murdock for example is so into this stuff she has learned ancient languages. Her interest or motives are clearly not money.

Posted on Feb 25, 2012 12:38:38 PM PST
blueskies says:
Even if the entire story of Jesus in the Bible is a myth, Christianity remains a very potent religious force, and has for centuries. The religious have built hospitals, schools, leper asylyms, etc. etc. It is not all bad; although some of the political applications have been very bad.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 1:02:44 PM PST
There are common traits of all cultures. The list of these traits is in the appendix to the Steven Pinker book the Blank Slate: The modern denial of human nature.
some include belief in the supernatural, division of labour by gender, empathy, healing the sick, hospitality, admiration of generosity, magic, reciprosity,morale sentiments. Hospital building and care for the needy is common everywhere under secular or religious support.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 2:02:47 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 25, 2012 6:18:22 PM PST
Sarah says:
LBJ: There is so much sarcasm and irony in these posts I cant understand what is going on or what any one believes.

S I don't see the problem. I don't consider it my business to discover what anyone believes. I can only respond to what they say. And that is enough for me. Of course, if someone says they believe something, I take them at their word. But if they don't choose to say, how is it any of my concern? Clearly, guessing others' beliefs is not among your skills, given your mistaken announcement to all about Sarah supposedly believing in magic. Don't worry. Guessing others' beliefs is not my skill, either. I advise you to refrain, as I do.

LBJ: Mz Murdock for example is so into this stuff she has learned ancient languages. Her interest or motives are clearly not money.

S Speculating about other people's motives is futile and that information is none of our business, anyway. I advise you to refrain, as I do.

LBJ: From what I understand Priests have real temporal power especially in ancient times.

S Then you need to study up on the relative statuses and powers of priests in various ancient societies, in each era that interests you.

LBJ: Blasphemy or heresy for example were grounds for execution and still are in many parts of the world.

S No, I think the NT tales have confused you. Christians (other than a very small minority among Christian scholars) don't even know what Jews considered blasphemous or under what conditions a blasphemous statement was punishable. And if heresy was grounds for execution in any ancient society, I'd like to see the ancient evidence. Shouldn't you research specific cultures and find specific evidence before you make claims?

You make a lot of confident, unsupported statements, then you become affronted and complain of being attacked when others take issue with your claims.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 2:45:46 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 25, 2012 2:49:43 PM PST
agreed,

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 2:57:31 PM PST
mP says:
In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 7:29:04 AM PST B. Josephson says:

Or possibly mP thinks Paul and Jesus were gay ;)

In some versions of the Bible knew is not the most literal translation of the Hebrew...

(not to be taken seriously alert) Puck's post put me in the mood.

Mp

How lame, can't even find a single scripture to refute my assertion?

Best Wishes, Shaamba Kaambwaat

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 3:00:08 PM PST
mP says:
S

Come on, explain job 38:31-32. You can poke fun or whatever at the surrounding text but one cannot deny the astrological admission s of 31 n 32. Xians themselves use less for many other beliefs, st peter and the keys.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:19:41 PM PST
Sarah says:
Not my job. Why don't you explain why you single out just those two from a long list?

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 25, 2012 6:37:21 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 25, 2012 6:50:14 PM PST
sarah's approach is officially a bore for me never a contribution only criticism only ideas nothing to offer bye bye Sarah
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Religion forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  98
Total posts:  1068
Initial post:  Jan 29, 2012
Latest post:  Apr 4, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 6 customers

Search Customer Discussions