It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: HAZE3
a reply to: Sremmos80
Bible reference to the siblings of Jesus is Mark 6:3 in the new testament
James Charlesworth writes: "That Joseph and Asenath is a fifth-century Christian work, based upon a Jewish writing, is a dated conclusion (P. Batiffol, Le Livre de la Prière d'Asénath [Studia Patristica 1-2] Paris: Leroux, 1889-1890). That it is an early, perhaps late first-century A.D., Jewish composition is a contemporary perspective (cf. C. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth [WUNT 8] Tübingen: Mohr, 1965; see esp. pp. 148-51; Philonenko, no. 1003; A.-M. Denis, no. 24, pp. 40-48). Most scholars now contend that the original language is Greek (Burchard, Untersuch., pp. 91-99; Philonenko, no. 1003, pp. 27-32). The parallels with the Dead Sea Scrolls have raised the possibility of influence from the Essenes, or more probably from the Therapeutae; some scholars affirm a relationship
The Greek word for ‘fate’, ‘death’ and ‘goddess of death’ is ‘e ker’ (feminine); the word for’heart’ and ‘breast’ is ‘to ker’ (neuter); while the word for ‘honeycomb’ is ‘to kerion’ (neuter). The common root ‘ker’ links the ideas of the honeycomb, goddess, death, fate and the human heart, a nexus of meanings that is illumined if we know that the goddess was once imagined as a bee
The 3rd century Greek philosopher and mathematician Porphyry of Tyre believed that souls arrived on earth in the form of Bees, having descended from the moon goddess Artemis, and that they were lured to terrestrial life by the promise of earthly delights, such as honey. Ironically, honey was also a symbol of death and was frequently used as an offering to the gods. The dualistic quality of honey is no coincidence, as the nectar and its maker – the Bee, appear to represent the very cycle of existence. One could say that as the Bee returns to its hive, so the Melissa returns to its god in the afterlife; the beginning is the end and the end is the beginning.
The Bible IS NOT an historic document. Just because there are actual historic places and people woven into the story doesn't make it true. To take the Gospels as anything more than contemporary mythology is not realistic scholarship.
By Richard M. Fales, Ph.D.
No other ancient book is questioned or maligned like the Bible. Critics looking for the flyspeck in the masterpiece allege that there was a long span between the time the events in the New Testament occurred and when they were recorded. They claim another gap exists archaeologically between the earliest copies made and the autographs of the New Testament. In reality, the alleged spaces and socalled gaps exist only in the minds of the critics. Manuscript Evidence. Aristotle’s Ode to Poetics was written between 384 and 322 B.C. The earliest copy of this work dates A.D. 1100, and there are only forty-nine extant manuscripts. The gap between the original writing and the earliest copy is 1,400 years. There are only seven extant manuscripts of Plato’s Tetralogies, written 427–347 B.C. The earliest copy is A.D. 900—a gap of over 1,200 years. What about the New Testament? Jesus was crucified in A.D. 30. The New Testament was written between A.D. 48 and 95. The oldest manuscripts date to the last quarter of the first century, and the second oldest A.D. 125. This gives us a narrow gap of thirty-five to forty years from the originals written by the apostles. From the early centuries, we have some 5,300 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. Altogether, including Syriac, Latin, Coptic, and Aramaic, we have a whopping 24,633 texts of the ancient New Testament to confirm the wording of the Scriptures. So the bottom line is, there was no great period between the events of the New Testament and the New Testament writings. Nor is there a great time lapse between the original writings and the oldest copies.
The work is anonymous and its author unknown. The dating is contentious, and it is not even clear whether this is a Jewish or a Christian work (or neither). The earliest version is in Syriac and dates from the sixth century AD. Most modern scholarship treats it as a Jewish work dating some time from first century BC to the second AD. Batiffol (who produced the first critical edition) and, more recently, Kraemer have argued that it was originally a Christian work, dating from the fourth or fifth centuries. Kraemer suggests connections with works like Acts of Thomas.
What's your point? You come into a thread about Jesus being married and attack/mock those who question his existence, in the first place.
There is no evidence, outside of the Bible of your Jesus of Nazareth. Speculating what someone probably really meant, 2000 years ago just, doesn't qualify as scholarship or proof.
Text The Bible IS NOT an historic document. Just because there are actual historic places and people woven into the story doesn't make it true. To take the Gospels as anything more than contemporary mythology is not realistic scholarship.
originally posted by: Jobeycool
Why in the world would it be encoded in some top secret coded message only some people can understand.That enough should tell you it is crap.This stupid stuff gets as looney as the 9/11 Truther nonsense.