It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: undo
Based on the xtra research I have been doing, the papyrus I have presented has nothing to do with the exodus, and this is a much more likely candidate. Thanks for the post man.
originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Tangerine
Paul lived at the same time as Jesus. We have his epistles. Scholars date his conversion 3-6 years after the cross. No, he didn't meet Jesus before the cross, but he did live in his time frame. he also would have been able to check the tomb on his own. Jesus was buried in a well known tomb not just some random hole.
originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: Tangerine
"
Not a word was written about Jesus until two generations after he allegedly lived. "
False. Acts was written as a history for the church and it ends with Paul in jail. It doesn't mention his death (~64AD), the Jewish rebellions against The Romans or the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple (70AD), so Acts was written around 62 AD. Luke was written before Acts, Matthew was written before Luke, and Mark was written before Matthew; so this was all within the generation of the first followers of Jesus (since he died around 30AD when Pilate was the Roman ruler).
Even more interesting is Jesus predicting the destruction of the Temple. Some say the prophecy was written in after the fact to give credibility so the gospels were written around 70 AD and on...
However even after the first 3 gospels were written with the prediction , later when Acts was written, it doesn't mention the destruction of the Temple , if the author of Acts wanted to convince people of Jesus then what better way than to memtion "years before Jesus predicted it would happen in the first 3 gospels and now as I write Acts, it recently came true!" but he couldn't take the opportunity to do that since the prediction still didn't come true yet until 70AD.
So yes, the first 3 gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke) as well as Acts, was written before 70AD all within the same generation as the life and death of Jesus.
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Tangerine
Technically the dates are based on the earliest copies...
IF they were and are copies, the scribes must have copied them from somewhere
Which is why the actual material in said copies are dated to quite a bit earlier then what you're saying....
And in any case you're wrong... the earliest fragment we have is early second century...
Theres nothing that has been found that is dated to the first century as far as I know...
originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: Tangerine
"
Not a word was written about Jesus until two generations after he allegedly lived
"There appeared in these our days a man, of the Jewish Nation, of great virtue, named Yeshua [Jesus], who is yet living among us, and of the Gentiles is accepted for a Prophet of truth, but His own disciples call Him the Son of God- He raiseth the dead and cureth all manner of diseases. A man of stature somewhat tall, and comely, with very reverent countenance, such as the beholders may both love and fear, his hair of (the colour of) the chestnut, full ripe, plain to His ears, whence downwards it is more orient and curling and wavering about His shoulders. In the midst of His head is a seam or partition in His hair, after the manner of the Nazarenes. His forehead plain and very delicate; His face without spot or wrinkle, beautified with a lovely red; His nose and mouth so formed as nothing can be reprehended; His beard thickish, in colour like His hair, not very long, but forked; His look innocent and mature; His eyes grey, clear, and quick- In reproving hypocrisy He is terrible; in admonishing, courteous and fair spoken; pleasant in conversation, mixed with gravity. It cannot be remembered that any have seen Him Laugh, but many have seen Him Weep. In proportion of body, most excellent; His hands and arms delicate to behold. In speaking, very temperate, modest, and wise. A man, for His singular beauty, surpassing the children of men"
TO TIBERIUS CAESAR:
A young man appeared in Galilee preaching with humble unction, a new law in the Name of the God that had sent Him. At first I was apprehensive that His design was to stir up the people against the Romans, but my fears were soon dispelled. Jesus of Nazareth spoke rather as a friend of the Romans than of the Jews. One day I observed in the midst of a group of people a young man who was leaning against a tree, calmly addressing the multitude. I was told it was Jesus. This I could easily have suspected so great was the difference between Him and those who were listening to Him. His golden colored hair and beard gave to his appearance a celestial aspect. He appeared to be about 30 years of age. Never have I seen a sweeter or more serene countenance. What a contrast between Him and His bearers with their black beards and tawny complexions! Unwilling to interrupt Him by my presence, I continued my walk but signified to my secretary to join the group and listen. Later, my secretary reported that never had he seen in the works of all the philosophers anything that compared to the teachings of Jesus. He told me that Jesus was neither seditious nor rebellious, so we extended to Him our protection. He was at liberty to act, to speak, to assemble and to address the people. This unlimited freedom provoked the Jews -- not the poor but the rich and powerful.
Later, I wrote to Jesus requesting an interview with Him at the Praetorium. He came. When the Nazarene made His appearance I was having my morning walk and as I faced Him my feet seemed fastened with an iron hand to the marble pavement and I trembled in every limb as a guilty culprit, though he was calm. For some time I stood admiring this extraordinary Man. There was nothing in Him that was repelling, nor in His character, yet I felt awed in His presence. I told Him that there was a magnetic simplicity about Him and His personality that elevated Him far above the philosophers and teachers of His day.
Now, Noble Sovereign, these are the facts concerning Jesus of Nazareth and I have taken the time to write you in detail concerning these matters. I say that such a man who could convert water into wine, change death into life, disease into health; calm the stormy seas, is not guilty of any criminal offense and as others have said, we must agree -- truly this is the Son of God.
Your most obedient servant,
Pontius Pilate
I did some more research. I will say it seems most Egyptologist date this papyrus a good while before the exodus account was supposed to have taken place.
Problem Two: Establishing the date "when" the Exodus account was written in the Holy Bible.
Certain locations mentioned in the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, which also include the Exodus account, have been identified by archaeologists and excavated; the excavations revealed that these sites either were not in existence in Moses' days, or if they were in existence, they were abandoned and not occupied _contra_ the biblical portrayal of events. The archaeological excavations revealed that some of the sites were in existence only in the 7th century B.C. so this anomaly suggests the Exodus account is no earlier.
originally posted by: Tangerine
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Tangerine
Technically the dates are based on the earliest copies...
IF they were and are copies, the scribes must have copied them from somewhere
Which is why the actual material in said copies are dated to quite a bit earlier then what you're saying....
And in any case you're wrong... the earliest fragment we have is early second century...
Theres nothing that has been found that is dated to the first century as far as I know...
No, they were dated by scholars based on a number of criteria. Wishful thinking is not a credible reason for scholars to select specific dates. You just argued against your own position with your comment that the earliest fragment we have is early second century.
I saw this awhile back, and it has just crossed my path again so I figured I'd share it with the ATS club. Very interesting Imo. Anyways enjoy the read.
The Publius Lentulus letter was a fraudulent letter written sometime between the 11th and 15th centuries that claimed to come from a Roman proconsul during the time of Christ. It gave a vivid physical depiction of Jesus that described his hair as “the color of the ripe hazel-nut” that fell “straight down to his ears, but below the ears wavy and curled.” The letter described Christ’s brow as “smooth” and his face “without wrinkle or spot.” It also described his beard as “abundant, of the color of his hair, not long, but divided at the chin.”
The most fascinating thing about the letter is that before the Civil War, just about everyone knew that it was a fraud. Whenever Americans discussed it, such as the President of Yale University Ezra Stiles, they admitted that it was a fake and that the Bible said nothing of what Jesus looked like. But then between the Civil War and the Great Depression, white Americans transformed it into a believed truth. They started referencing it as a fact, started making visual imagery based upon its description, and began claiming that it proved that the white race was supreme because God made it that way.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
So, in either account, we're looking at a minimum of 200 years AFTER this papyrus was written
Moses led Israel out of Egypt around 1445 BC. We arrive at that answer based on two important verses of scripture, Judges 11:26 and 1 Kings 6:1. In the Old Testament book of Judges, Jephthah was a judge raised up by God to deliver the Israelites from the oppression they suffered when the Ammonites were persecuting Israel. Ammon was a small kingdom located east of the Jordan River.
Before starting his Jewish military campaign against Ammon, Jephthah attempted to resolve the conflict through negotiation, which failed. In the process of negotiation, Jephthah, justifying Israel's possession of lands east of the Jordan River, reminded the king of Ammon that Israel had dwelt in Heshbon for 300 years. Jephthah asked the king of Ammon:
"While Israel dwelt in Heshbon and her towns, and in Aroer and her towns, and in all the cities that be along by the coasts of Arnon, three hundred years? why did ye not recover them within that time?" -Judges 11:26, KJV
I can show you a hole in the ground and say, "See, that proves hobbits are real." It proves absolutely nothing except that there's a hole in the ground
Theres nothing that has been found that is dated to the first century as far as I know...
Letter of Ignatius to the Ephesians 2 – John 8:29 3 – John 17:11-12 5 – James 4:6 6 – names Onesimus, as in Philemon 6 – John 1:14 7 - 1 Tim 4:10 8 – 1 Pet 2:9 9 – Matt 5:2, 2 Tim 2:24-25, Luke 23:34 11 – Rom 2:4 12 – Matt 23:35, Acts 9:15 13 – Eph 6:16, 6:12 14 – Luke 10:27, Matt 12:33 15 – 1 Cor 4:20, Rom 10:10, 2 Cor 8:18 16 – 2 Cor 6:14-16 18 – 1 Cor 1:20
Letter of Ignatius to the Magnesians 3 – 1 Tim 4:12 4 – Luke 6:46 8 – 2 Cor 5:17, mentions Judaizers 9 – 2 Thess 3:10, Phil 3:18-19, 2 Tim 3:4 10 – Acts 11:26 Letter of Ignatius to the Trallians 9 – Heb 10:12-13 11 – warns of "Nicolaitanes"
Letter of Ignatius to the Romans 2 – 2 Cor 4:18 7 – Gal 2:20
Letter of Ignatius to the Philadelphians 2 – 2 Tim 3:6 6 – “dragon Nicolaitanes" Letter of Ignatius to the Smyrnans 3 – Maybe Rev 1:7