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.

 

The Hijacking of Jesus. Paulianity and the Middle of the Road Doctrine

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by chromatico
 


News for you, cromatico...

I do not make the allusions nor will I provide the proof.

As I've already stated, I will show the allusions provided by scholars in the field; Christian, Jewish and secular scholars who actually study the DSS.

You, on the other hand, decry the apocryphal Gospels without proof at all, and yet I'll not ask for your proof, but instead ask you to provide scholarly proof.

The Gospels, as history, is also something which should be provided for with scholarly excerps, not expansive opinion.

You further point to the Jews as failing to debunk the NT. Why on earth would they care to, especially with their history of the past 2000 years in mind.




posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


I don't understand most of that comment, especially the part about the Jews. You have to elaborate more, you cannot merely lean on minority scholars.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I'll not answer any further inflammatory outbursts or poorly formed opinion presented with a slice of angry attitude.

Instead, I'll respond only to those members who approach the subject with calm and who have obviously taken the time to research their rebuttals.

No need for allowing a flame-fest in what will, no doubt, become a contentious issue for many.

 

grammar edit

[edit on 23/3/08 by masqua]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


At risk of penalties, I'll say you have nothing. I asked you for evidence, and by implication, debate, and you ran from me. I'm eager for the prospect of a real debate and will be watching this thread, ready to go if you present something.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by chromatico
 


You need to read the dead sea scrolls and compare them to the new testament.

Yeshua's message is much purer in the dead sea scrolls.

Paul watered down the message of love and truth to suit his own agenda, that of power.

Paul was a Roman. That is all you need to know about the man to know his true purpose in the religion.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by biggie smalls
 


There is no New Testament content in those scrolls.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by chromatico
 


From the source you provided:


Christian connections
Spanish Jesuit José O'Callaghan has argued that one fragment (7Q5) is a New Testament text from the Gospel of Mark, chapter 6, verses 52–53. In recent years this controversial assertion has been taken up again by German scholar Carsten Peter Thiede. A successful identification of this fragment as a passage from Mark would make it the earliest extant New Testament document, dating somewhere between 30 AD and 60 AD. Opponents consider that the fragment is tiny and requires so much reconstruction (the only complete word in Greek is "και" = "and") that it could have come from a text other than Mark.

Robert Eisenman advanced the theory that some scrolls actually describe the early Christian community, characterized as more fundamentalist and rigid than the one portrayed by the New Testament. Eisenman also attempted to relate the career of James the Just and the Apostle Paul / Saul of Tarsus to some of these documents.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by biggie smalls
 


Interesting possibilities...I agree that the fragment is likely genuine, however the Eisenmann's theories are, at present, just that. Still interesting though.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by chromatico
reply to post by masqua
 


At risk of penalties, I'll say you have nothing. I asked you for evidence, and by implication, debate, and you ran from me. I'm eager for the prospect of a real debate and will be watching this thread, ready to go if you present something.


Just to let you know, I will be watching this thread now as well. masqua can not moderate his own thread but I can. If you have something to add, please do. If you're here to disrupt, that won't be taken kindly.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


I was never, ever here to disrupt. I welcome your moderation, I am not doing anything wrong nor do I have the intention of doing so.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by chromatico
 


The root of true Christianity, that of love and peace, stems from the Essenes.

The Essenes were quite a radical sect in Yeshua's time. The priesthood did not like them because they were a threat to their power base.

The prophet Yeshua came from a family bred for the purpose of sainthood. They were people who lived on the fringes of society and did not meddle with the affairs of the "commoners."



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to Piemanpost by Yechidah
 


See 1st Yechidah reply posting. Pieman was whom that post was intended for. Good work Pie man

[edit on 23-3-2008 by Yechidah]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by biggie smalls
 


It's possible that Jesus had a connection with the Essenes, AFAIK, however, there is little to prove that. Also, Jesus was a man of the people, whereas the Essenes sought to withdraw from mainstream society. Jesus and the Essenes seem too different to me in that regard.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
Interesting that your list begins tentatively around 30-60 CE compared with the fact that the scribes workings on the DSS actually ended at the same time, after the Romans having crushed the sects at Qumran.


the document isn't dated so the early date indicates when jesus started teaching, ie; 30 AD, you can't date it earlier because there was little reason to write about jesus beforehand.

this throws up an interesting point.

if we believe at all, we assume that jesus existed in some sense, and that the canonical gospels at least get the general details correct, we also know historically that pilate was governor of judea from ad 26 to 36AD, so if he crucified jesus, then it had to be between these dates and the earliest christ could have begun teaching is 23AD.

if jesus started teaching sometime between 23 and 33 AD, how could he have been the great teacher referred to in the DSS?


by biggie smallsThe root of true Christianity, that of love and peace, stems from the Essenes.


i see where your going here, but jesus named his forerunner as john the baptist, and john had quite a large following, in his own right, from all accounts. we can also find links between jesus and the zealots, another radical jewish group, although not exactly fans of peace and love.

what do you all think to the possibility that the radical judaism at the time was in some ways similar to conspiracy theorists today, a large and disparate group loosely held together by a feeling that things weren't quite right. links exist but they don't add up to one unified movement and it doesn't necessarily mean one group is another.

personally, i think pauls involvement could use a little scrutiny on its own without the need to bring in non-christian writings.

[edit on 23-3-2008 by pieman]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
I must agree with biggie small and mosqua, and to a point Pieman, they seem to be more informed about the Dead Sea Scrolls more than the person defending the gospels. or saying Jesus did not exist or was not an Essene. See my YECHIDA posting. The scholorly research books I have listed to point the uniformed in the right direction is there Chromotico. However some of the DSS do in fact support the gospels, yet the interpretation of what is written in the gospels in places is way off base. The Book of Revelations is one. Read the books I have suggested before you make your level of knowlege too exposed.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


John the Baptist also was an essene. That's exactly my point.

The Essenes were the foundation of the New Testament while the Old Testament was based around "general" Judaism.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by biggie smalls
 


meh, if you have a basis i'll go with it, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility, however i had a quick look on wiki to see if there was any mention of this idea, so i could start looking for evidence myself, and the first thing that jumped out at me was that josephus is given as a historical reference for both, yet he doesn't mention the essenes when he talks of the life of john the baptist nor can i see john mentioned in reference to the essenes.

of course this doesn't mean he wasn't a essene but considering joesphus' ommition i think it requires a strong link between the two, or three, as the case may be, to show grounds for the theory.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


I believe it's further unlikely that JtB was a Essene because he is recorded as preaching to the masses. The Essenes, on the other hand, avoided the masses as much as possible.

[edit on 23-3-2008 by chromatico]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by chromatico
 


i do vaguely remember something about them being reclusive but there are so many sects, i thought i was thinking of someone else because i couldn't find a basis for it. can you link me to something about this aspect of their community as i hate being unsure about this stuff.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Masqua, I like reading everyone of your posts. I'll have to come back to read all of this one because I haven't got time time right now. But as a Christian, one of the things that held me back wholesale from converting to the faith was Paul. I just couldn't figure why he said and did what he did. There were many arguments among Paul and Peter about circumcision and the like. However, during my search, I soon after found and read a book written by a Jewish scholar (not a Christian Jew) who looked at Paul's writings from Paul's psychological viewpoint and the time in which he wrote, and suddenly it all became very clear to me.

Also, Paul was trying his best to bring the gospels to the Gentiles, not only the Jews. All my books are packed up right now *sigh* but I'll try to find it in the next few days. I think you may find reading it very interesting also.

By the way, I'm always interested in any opinions about early Christianity as I see no likeness today to what existed in the early church. And I'm talking about before Constantine.

[edit on 3/23/08 by idle_rocker]

[edit on 3/23/08 by idle_rocker]



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join