Posts by Bart Belteshassur

29

Are the Gospels real history or myth?

by Island Man in

this lecture by dr. richard carrier will definitely give you something to think about (please note that the video is linked to start about half hour into the video which is when the lecture starts):.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=illdt2xhzw0&feature=player_detailpage#t=1659.

if the timing doesn't work just move the play head to the 27:00 mark.

Bart Belteshassur

Phizzy- " None of the bible is real history. None of it was written to be such"

Have you asked the question, if the NT does not contain more than just myth why are there so many details of precise time of the day given in it, when the precise timing of an event is not needed in the myth. The times given indicate the need for detailed knowledge of what they represent. In the temple cult mornings and evenings was an indicator of the constant offering, but praying at 3pm in the after most show something that is more complex. If we consider the whole of the last supper to the accension it is riddled with times and precise days, that includes day 3 which is Tuesday by the way not Sunday morning.

If one starts with the view means nothing you will find nothing, if you search the text for patterns, strange grammer, and specifics which are not required you may find encryption. As the NT has had such an influence on modern life it is worth the investigation don't you think. The analysis must be from the original text in greek to remove pervertion from church doctrine.

13

Do God and Jesus have free will? No they do not. Proven in this thread.

by Comatose in

does god have free will?

why couldn't they be like him in that they had free will but just wouldn't or couldn't be bad?.

Bart Belteshassur

The fact that the bears only tore them to pieces, even if it where with softer paws, the injuries and disablement of the child victims was a evil act of the up most horror and effect, not only to the chrildren to endure for rest of their lives but also for the poor parents who would have to look after them for rest of their lives. I never thought that telling the truth could produce this reaction from God!

29

Are the Gospels real history or myth?

by Island Man in

this lecture by dr. richard carrier will definitely give you something to think about (please note that the video is linked to start about half hour into the video which is when the lecture starts):.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=illdt2xhzw0&feature=player_detailpage#t=1659.

if the timing doesn't work just move the play head to the 27:00 mark.

Bart Belteshassur

Good video. He makes very accurate points. However he does not explain the meaning of the Fig tree event or the conection with the temple. It would be to easy to dismiss the NT text as just myth and put it file 13, without considering the meaning of the events which are quoted and their historic background. I believe the fig tree was an emblem used by the Jewish Zealot movement and there appears to be a connection in this story with zealots producing fruit for the early christain movement, sorry thinking outload.

13

Do God and Jesus have free will? No they do not. Proven in this thread.

by Comatose in

does god have free will?

why couldn't they be like him in that they had free will but just wouldn't or couldn't be bad?.

Bart Belteshassur

Not only does God have to have knowledge of all evil, his creation of Satan for example, but he is capable of committing acts of evil.

2 Kings 2:24 NWT "Finally he turned behind him and saw them and called down evil upon them in the name of Jehovah. Then two she-bears came out from the woods and went tearing to pieces forty two chrildren of their number."

Evidently this was Jehovah's personnel choice of which form of evil he would aid Elisha with, from his unlimited arsnel of evil acts he could have performed.

26

Do you believe in a literal Christ?

by Monsieur in

jw
friends

do you believe in a literal christ?.

someone that walked the earth and did the things the bible states he did?

(miracles, etc.).

Bart Belteshassur

MadGiant- "Would you please elaborate?"

The point I was making was that it is not a simple question of whether the NT is literal or not. It is evidently a very well written collection of Myth literature, the writers being well educated and wellversed in the greek and other cultural myth genre, despite church leaders telling us for some two thousand years that these writer were not. This was used to explain the numerous strange grammatical constructions used in the greek text which appear to have no reason even when it is evident that the writer purposely changed between their constructions even though they know and use the correct and or common types. With the writers expert level of scholarship an inconsistant approach to grammatical construction must indicate some form of encryption. The special way which scholars of greek since Jerome have insisted that the NT demands unique translaton of words in specific versres is evidence of the churches false doctrine and the removal of the encryption indecators in the original text.

If the writer were intelligent and expert enough to produce such clear scripts then there is no reason why they could not have hiden within the myth story true and acurate facts of the real historic situation and events which with using a specific set of rules, or knowledge that the early leaders of christain movement were fully awear of. It is unfortunate that we as common people and the scholars have been taught to accept some basic facts ,which are not true, and not to question to stongly the establishments' views.

The concept of hiding facts is as common today as it was two thousand years ago, although the consequenses for NT writers or early leaders were far more serious than they are now, especially if some of the true identities and motives of some of the main characters in the NT were in VERY elevated positions of power within the Jewish and Roman political structure. The same is true of this site, many posters use an alias to avoid the consequenses of their identities being revealed to the JWs of there congregation etc.

I hope this makes the concept a little clearer.

26

Do you believe in a literal Christ?

by Monsieur in

jw
friends

do you believe in a literal christ?.

someone that walked the earth and did the things the bible states he did?

(miracles, etc.).

Bart Belteshassur

If by literal you mean the devine miricle working supernatural mythical recreation that appears to be described in the NT then NO. If you mean the none supernatural historical person which is also alluded to,in line with the history of the creation and purpose of this new form of Jewishness then there is little reason not accept the evidence with the normal reservations. The problem here is understand the complex methods used by the NT writers to hide to the true events of the period in the apparent supernatural and that a true and complete understanding is beyond those of us who would love to know but have not got the time or the passion to do the studying required in order to obtain the multiple Phd's required.

47

Question About 607BCE and How That Date Was Picked - Help JW Scholars

by Comatose in

so i've been sharing some a little at a time with my sister.

she is married and very scared of actually learning too much.

she doesn't want to ruin her marriage.

Bart Belteshassur

Russell used 536-70 to get 606, but WTS lie when they say Russell made a zero year error. He understood the maths far better than the WTS understood his work. The calculation can be found in Studies in the Scriptures vol 2 The Time is at Hand studyIV pgs 73 to 102. Russell calculates from the start of 606 to the end of 1914, 2300 years, how ever he makes it clear that he understands the zero year error Miller made with 1843, and in his chronology he understood that the Jewish years had their start in Trishri of the previous year. Therefore when he shows start 1915 or end 1914 it means Trishri or as he states it as October 1914.

Rev John Aquila Brown first produced a 7 times prophecy date using 604 the first year of Nebuchadrezzar as his start point, not the desolation of Jerusalem, and had an end date of 1917.

The 1799 is Russells date for the end of the papacy, 1260 yrs from it's inception in 539, from this start date using the 1335 yrs Dan 12 he reached 1874 and with the addition of 40yrs made up from the last week of the 70 weeks, 7years plus the 33 yrs between the end of the 70 weeks and the 2nd Roman destruction. The 1874 date was adapted from Millers original prophecy of 1843 by exchanging Millers 1290yrs which was deducted from the fall of the papacy with Russell's 1260 figure and thus advancing the invisible return by thirty years to 1874.

Hope this helps.

11

How does the latest translation of Kings 24:12 in the Common English Bible change our views on the date of Jerusalem's destruction?

by Bart Belteshassur in

the last clause of verse 12, kings 24 has always appeared to me to be somewhat ambiguous,.

"and the king of babylon got to take him (jehoiachin) in the eighth year of his being king.

" this has lead to the genneral connection of nebuchadnezzar's eighth year to the start of zedekiah's rule and thus to the equating of nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year with zedekiah's eleventh.. the ceb reads, " the babylonian king took jehoiachin prisoner in the eighth year of jehoiachin's rule.".

Bart Belteshassur

The king james reads "and the King of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign". In english grammar the third person his always refers to the last refent person which in this case is him not the king of Babylon. Therefore the king james states it is Jehoiachin's eighth year.

11

How does the latest translation of Kings 24:12 in the Common English Bible change our views on the date of Jerusalem's destruction?

by Bart Belteshassur in

the last clause of verse 12, kings 24 has always appeared to me to be somewhat ambiguous,.

"and the king of babylon got to take him (jehoiachin) in the eighth year of his being king.

" this has lead to the genneral connection of nebuchadnezzar's eighth year to the start of zedekiah's rule and thus to the equating of nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year with zedekiah's eleventh.. the ceb reads, " the babylonian king took jehoiachin prisoner in the eighth year of jehoiachin's rule.".

Bart Belteshassur

The king james reads "and the King of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign". In english grammar the third person his always refers to the last refent person which in this case is him not the king of Babylon. Therefore the king james states it is Jehoiachin's eighth year.

11

How does the latest translation of Kings 24:12 in the Common English Bible change our views on the date of Jerusalem's destruction?

by Bart Belteshassur in

the last clause of verse 12, kings 24 has always appeared to me to be somewhat ambiguous,.

"and the king of babylon got to take him (jehoiachin) in the eighth year of his being king.

" this has lead to the genneral connection of nebuchadnezzar's eighth year to the start of zedekiah's rule and thus to the equating of nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year with zedekiah's eleventh.. the ceb reads, " the babylonian king took jehoiachin prisoner in the eighth year of jehoiachin's rule.".

Bart Belteshassur

Over%forme- "605 for Nebuchadnezzar first year"

From VAT 4956 an astronomicial tablet list an observation in Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year and dates to 568BCE. This therefore gives his first as starting Nissau 604BCE, and that the date for Jehoiachin's exile detailed in the Babylonian chronical ABC5 as the 2nd Adar 597BCE Nebuchadnezzar's 7th year.

Which translation did you use, which gives Nebuchadnezzar's 8th year specifically in 24:12? The CEB has as Jehoiachin's and most are ambiguous at best.

2Kings 25:8-9 does not mention the fall of Jerusalem only the burning of the Temple and the pulling down of walls, which is not defined as Zedekiah's 11th years but only as Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year, indicating that the exile of Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year equates to Zedekiah's 11th. The captives taken in the 19th year were struck down at Rilah and 25:18 lists only seventy two of them.