Then I see you did touch on Nebuchadnezzar as the golden head of the statue. Why don't you continue and explain to us the relevance of the different metal layers of the statue? The same goes for the four beasts of Dan. 7. You'll see in connection with these your Maccabean dating falls seriously short.
Posts by Jeffro
-
189What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
đ¤Śââď¸ the same tired apologetics. Not responding to all that guff from overnight. Notice how he not only doubled down on the Daniel interpretation but also simply ignored the fact about who Daniel said would be âcut off at the half of the weekâ. Similarly the apologist claims Daniel 9 doesnât fit because Antiochus IV âdidnât destroy Jerusalemâ, but Daniel 9:27 says the abomination (desecration) would be âset upâ âat the templeâ and doesnât even claim that Jerusalem would be destroyed. Always recognise these pathetic bait-and-switch attempts.. And yes, priests were anointed (Exodus 29:7; Leviticus 8:12; Psalm 133:2; Hebrews 5:4 etc).
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
The above is a firm favorite of mine. Note, it describes the fate of Jerusalem. No matter whether you appoint an early or late date to the authorship of Daniel, it happened just like that. It also discusses "an anointed one," the Messiah, to be cut off with nothing for himself. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Then it discusses the destruction of the city: "And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator" (Dan. 9:27 ESV).
This coincides with the Roman invasion and the destruction of the city and temple, whereas the Roman Empire will receive its just desserts in due course. If you work on the chronology of seventy sevens since the reconstruction of Jerusalem, you come up with (70 x 7) = 490 years, the time Jesus are supposed to enter Jerusalem. What a coincidence!Entirely wrong from start to finish. The book of Daniel (2nd century BCE) refers to events up to and during the reign of Antiochus IV Epihanes. This is very well understood by scholars. The motif was reused in the gospels to refer to different events that the Romans were involved in, but Daniel has nothing to do with the first century or with anything happening now. There were seven âweeksâ from 587 BCE to 539 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon, and there were a separate 62 âweeksâ from 605 BCE (the start of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, the gold head of the statue) until 171 BCE when the priest Jason was âcut offâ and Antiochus appointed Menelaus, but 3.5 years later (the âhalf of the weekâ) Antiochus desecrated the temple and banned Jewish worship (168 BCE). Then at the end of that âweekâ (165 BCE), the temple was rededicated and Antiochus died not much later.
In the botched Christian reinterpretation, Jesus died at the âhalf of the weekâ, but thatâs not when Daniel says the messiah is cut off, Daniel instead says it is the leader bringing destruction on Jerusalem who puts an end to sacrifice at the âhalf of the weekâ (which precisely fits Antiochusâ actions). This is conveniently ignored by Christians, as is the fact that their supposed start of the period doesnât match the reign of Artaxerxes either.
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
Youâre welcome to misinterpret sufficiently vague writings as âprophecyâ but it contradicts your premise that you wouldnât âput your life on the line for hearsayâ if it came down to it. Unless you arenât serious about your beliefs anyway. đ¤ˇââď¸
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
Most of the martyrdom stories of prominent first century Christians are Christian tradition only. And people die for their religious beliefs even now. And not just Christians. It is only evidence that they believed, not that itâs true.
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
Vidqun:
I found it quite accurate, comparing well with the accounts in the Gospels.
đ¤Śââď¸ Hardly surprising that the later Christian forgery is consistent with the Christian âgospelsâ.
a confutation to an earlier pagan and anti-Christian work also known as the Acts of Pilate
And that makes you more confident about the later Christian forgery? Cognitive dissonance at its worst. And confirmation bias to boot.
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
Vidqun:
Jeffro, not sure about your "fact" about the wrong emperor. In this version he wrote to Tiberius Caesar, which governed from 14 until 37 CE. That sounds about right.
Haha⌠I was waiting for that. The spurious work contains a separate letter to Caligula, who was not emperor during Pilateâs tenure. The letter to Tiberius was added later. But thanks for playing along.
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
The forgery also gets the name of Pilateâs predecessor wrong. His actual predecessor was Valerius Gratus but the translation of the spurious work instead offers a misspelling of Valerius Flaccus, a poet from the late 1st century. -
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
Nope. The Gospel of Nicodemus (containing the spurious Acta Pilate) is known to be a later apocryphal Christian work. And it has Pilate writing to the wrong emperor.
-
189
What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?
by Touchofgrey inis there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
-
-
Jeffro
Mikejw:
Our current dating system started from a man called Jesus Christ was born 2024 years ago. That is pretty strong evidence.
Our dating system (first adopted in the 6th century) is based on a tradition around someone who according to the source material would actually have been born in 4 BCE. Nothing about that establishes any 'supernatural' claims about Jesus, including the claim that he was 'Christ'. Our current names of four days of the week are based on Norse deities but it doesn't mean they're real.
also as has been said Josephus and many other ancient historians recorded Jesus.
A very small number of non-Christian sources (not "many") from the second century mentioned Jesus (or at least mentioned Christians), but did not confirm any claim that he was supernatural.
there is no doubt about this very special man called Jesus but there is doubt about the miracles and who he claimed to be?
All of the stories about Jesus' ministry in the gospels were written decades after his death, and it is impossible to know what if anything in the 'gospels' accurately represents anything Jesus actually said or did. We can reasonably conclude from Paul's writings that during Jesus' life or shortly after his death he was considered special by a small number of followers, and they convinced Paul (who never met Jesus) that Jesus provided a redemptive 'sacrifice', but nothing else can be reliably established.