Why Didn't Jesus Write The Bible?

as a scientist and historian. You are absolutely correct. Only problem is,how can we inform this to the mainstream at a normal rate?That will be hard,some dont even se facts in front of them.

In a certain sense Jesus did write the Bible, that is, if you trust what the Bible says on the subject of itself.

2 Tim. 3:16 - All Scripture is given by inspiration of God...

2 Peter 1:21 - For the prophecy came not in the old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Here the Bible speaks of itself as being inspired. As I understand it, the word "inspiration" literally means "God breathed".

We also see the the Holy Spirit has a part in this inspiration as He "moved" men.

Now consider what the Bible says about Jesus.

John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

John 1:14 - And the Word became flesh..

Hebrews 1:1-2 - God...hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son...

Now compare and consider the implications of these next two verses.

John 12:48 - He that rejeceth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shalll judge him on the last day.

Rev. 20:12 - ...and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

The Bible is a collection of books and it seems that our lives will be compared and judged according to these books, which also record the words of Jesus; the word that He said men would be judged by on the last day.

Finally the Bible says...

1 John 5:7 - For there are three that BARE RECORD in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.

To say it simply, the teaching about the Bible as found in the Bible is, The Father thought, the Holy Spirit brought it, and the Son taught it.

Hope this helps.

Got Wrote the 10 commandments.

Got Wrote the story of Christ in the Constellations

All 48 constellation figures from Enoch depict the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The star figures in the sky form a very precise map of the heavens and display many allegories which have been preserved as Greek myths. But much more than that, the Book of Enoch states that the angel Uriel revealed them to the prophet Enoch, long before the Great Flood. When he came to understand their meaning, it records that he exclaimed,

I blessed the Lord of glory, who had made those great and splendid signs, that they might display the magnificence of his works to angels and to the souls of men; and that these might glorify all his works and operations; might see the effect of his power; might glorify the great labor of his hands; and bless him forever." — Enoch 35:3
Text

www.johnpratt.com...


The Incarnate Son (Virgo - Virgin)...Isaiah 7:14
The Redeemer (Libra - Scales)...1 Corinthians 6:20
The Sufferer (Scorpio - Scorpion)...1 Corinthians 15:55-56
The Conqueror (Sagittarius - Archer)...Revelations 6:2
The Sacrifice (Capricorn - Goat)...Romans 3:25
The Living Water (Aquarius - Water-Bearer)...John 7:38
The Liberator (Pisces - Fishes)...Genesis 48:19; Mark 1:17
The Crowned Lamb (Aries - Ram)...Revelations 5:6
The Judge (Taurus - Bull)...John 5:22
The King (Gemini - Twins)...Romans 1:3
The Protector (Cancer - Crab)...Isaiah 4:5-6
The Victor (Leo - Lion)...Revelations 5:5

www.novareinna.com...


The Bible was written long ago in the heavens but man had to carry the burden of the message througout the ages because we are seperate from God, Jesus took the ultimate sacrifice for us.

Originally posted by Archirvion
as a scientist and historian. You are absolutely correct. Only problem is,how can we inform this to the mainstream at a normal rate?That will be hard,some dont even se facts in front of them.

You could start by PRESENTING THE FACTS WITH EVIDENCE THAT THEY ARE FACTS.

Which no one who agrees with the OP's point has done in this thread yet. I would do it if I had the knowhow, but I don't. So why don't you take a shot at it, Archie?

Hi Hoon 007-2000

Your Greek is a little weak. The text of 2 Timothy 3:16 (whoever wrote it, for one thing it certainly does not seem like Saul of Tarsus' Greek to the experts - full of hapax legomena) does NOT say'all scripture is inspired by god and useful for teaching' it says

πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος ωφελιμος προς διδασκαλιαν προς ελεγμον προς επανορθωσιν προς παιδειαν την εν δικαιοσυνη

'EVERY WRITING THAT IS god-breathed IS USEFUL FOR TEACHING, REPROOF, CORRECTION, &tc....' which means there are 'texts that are god-breathed' (i.e. defile the hands) and there are texts that are NOT god-breathed (i.e. don't defile the hands).

This is a VERY different meaning - not that any Christian theologian would dare point this out to their parishoners (only to other clerics and scholars for the most part). The sheep have to be kept, well....in the fold, as they say.

Later 2nd and 3rd century MSS add KAI ('and') but this KAI compleltely ruins the smoother grammar of the original sentence.

Not that the epistle is by Paul ('Pauline') at least as it stands in the texts today anyway.

The whole thing is a literary FORGERY possibly based on a VERY short note by Saul/Paul to Timothy to carefully guard the money in the collection box while he is in prison - in the style of Philemon, and apparently was enlarged (using 'theological language foreign to Paul) by a later group who had other later beliefs to impose on their growing congregations in the early 2nd century CE.

reply to post by pplrnuts



simple Jesus was a carpenter not a novelist

reply to post by liveandletlive


even lamer attempt at bigotry! hahahha. congratulations, someone successfully destroyed your logic and all you can think of is personal attacks...HEY! just like your original post love how impotent you people are...

Originally posted by reptoidsonice
reply to post by liveandletlive

 

even lamer attempt at bigotry! hahahha. congratulations, someone successfully destroyed your logic and all you can think of is personal attacks...HEY! just like your original post

love how impotent you people are...

Oh look, you just registered on March 3, 2010. Welcome to ATS. Let me offer some advice to a new member. The fact that you have a newly created account and you’re needlessly attacking me makes the other members think you’re a “troll” looking to derail the thread. They have threads to help new members. You might find them helpful! Also, it is possible to use the laughing smiley’s too much. Hope this was helpful.

reply to post by The time lord

Got Wrote the 10 commandments.

Actually yahwhe didn't write anything, moses is alleged to have written the commandments.

Whatever the omnipotent yahwe wrote with its' magic finger moses somehow managed to destroy having a temper tantrum.

And as for why didn't jesus write the bibles ? Well that's quite a simple one to answer "Because he's imaginary "

reply to post by trueblue

simple Jesus was a carpenter not a novelist

Jesus was not a carpenter, he was described as a Tekton which translates as a "craftsman" or more likely the son of a Tekton.

Imho, I would opt for the allusion to "a person versed into the craft" a mason who revered the "Architect of the universe".

Jesus making the claim to the throne of david, being versed in sandwriting and the law, I would go as far as saying this man could have been a 33rd degree mason, which would explain a few things.

Hey man... Jesus was the rock star of his time.
He was a bit too busy doing things. That's why he had 12 disciples to do that for him.

Originally posted by liveandletlive

Originally posted by oliveoil

Originally posted by liveandletlive
reply to post by oliveoil

 

Most other things written do not have the claim of "infallibility" attached to them. The bible states that whoever should change the bible would be held accountable to god. Doesn’t that imply its corruptible?

No, That implies that whoever changes these TRUTHS written would be held accountable. Would you like to debate these truths with me?

You’re joking right? So you are saying that the bible is an accurate and perfect document but at the same time susceptible to "changes"? What’s to debate, your argument is a contradiction!

No, I am quite serious. The Bible and the books it contains are accurate and perfect. However yes, they are susceptible to changes as far as the intent as of what is being spoken and or copied(written).Take the Watchtower organization for example and what they did. All I'm saying is that it does not matter if an honest man wrote the Bible, or a corrupt man wrote the bible.Truth is truth no matter who wrote the bible.

The Apostles, followers, and Prophets wrote it, while questioning all along the God Almighty.

The felt a Perfect Sacrifice would demonstrate Martyrdom. Saviorism is the key play, I see it performed better in Horror Films, which unfortunately draw more of my attention.

But as the paper is weak, so must be the weilded hand

Originally posted by grey580
Hey man... Jesus was the rock star of his time.
He was a bit too busy doing things. That's why he had 12 disciples to do that for him.

He had 12 Apostles....120 disciples

reply to post by octotom


With regards to secular scholars "speculating" that the Bible was redacted or edited over the centuries, secular scholars have plenty of circumstantial evidence to prove their theories. For one thing, they can analyze the texts themselves to show signs of editing. The style and language of various books of the Bible changes from passage to passage, which suggests different authors added different passages over time.

One theory states the Old Testament had 4 groups of authors. The Bible originally consisted of what scholars call the Book of J and the Book of E, which were written in different geographical regions of ancient Israel. The Book of P was later added, which was written by Priests. Finally, the three books were synthesized by the prophet Ezra (or individuals who lived around his time).

reply to post by oliveoil


If you are saying that it can be interpreted in different ways and therefore it is corruptible by the interpreter I would agree. But that does lend support to my argument. As an example, take anyone from any period of time that is unable to read. If they are misled through inappropriate interpretation of “any” ancient religious documents throughout various cultures they are still held accountable. Based on that idea, if you are uneducated and unable to read or you are born into the wrong culture you could spend eternity in hell as a consequence. Isnt that right?

Originally posted by pplrnuts
I am referring to THE OLD TESTAMENT. I didnt think I had to add that REMEDIAL bit of info.

EDIT: To add some emphasis in color.

[edit on 8-3-2010 by pplrnuts]

Then you actually mean re-write, don't you?

reply to post by pplrnuts


or because the bible was written before and after the death of Jesus...........................

reply to post by liveandletlive

Based on that idea, if you are uneducated and unable to read or you are born into the wrong culture you could spend eternity in hell as a consequence. Isnt that right?

Only if you're a christian jews didn't have a hell so they would no be attending, but there again a christian (or he wouldn't be a christian) shouldn't end up in hell so hell must be empty.

Just to keep everyone one the same page here...

Iesous (R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir. BCE 12 to CE 36) did not have a single 'bible' (i.e. Old testament) as say American protestants have today between two covers: what he had were several hundred scrolls that were not even exact copies of each other- some are more familiar (the torah scrolls) than others (the testaments of the 12 patriarchs) but he QUOTES from both types as if they were 'scripture'

introduced by the word FOR (meaning, 'even as it is written...') see e.g. John 4:22 which MIS-quotes the Testament of Naphtali, chapter

13:8 'Know that days to come that the Salvation of Israel shall come from the Judaeans').

So where did 'Iesous' get all of his bible material from since it is SO different than the 'bible' that modern Christians read today in their churches as 'scripture'?

The Answer is the Dead Sea Scrolls Time Capsule at Qumran (Caves 1-11 - not to be confused with later Dead Sea Scroll material found at Wadi Murraba'at or the sites during the bar Kokhba revolt of 136 CE which are more 'conformative' to the later familiar texts)

Here's a quick backgrounder: Please do not tell me all this is NEW information to you people !

In November of 1946 some Bedouin re-discovered some rock caves near Jericho (at Qumran, ancient Seccacah) now numbered caves 1-11 which were filled with jars and flatly laid out Scrolls in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek which were SEALED UP INTO THEIR CAVES FORMING A SORT OF TIME CAPSULE in June of 68 CE during the 1st Failed Jewish War against Rome (66CE - 72 CE) which began at the 70th anniversary of the Death of King Herod which caused Rome to re-annex Judaea under 'direct rule' (4BCE).

So we can see that the roughly 800 hand copied scrolls (dating from 300 BCE to CE 68) sealed up in Caves 1-11 in 68 CE are a fragmentary SNAP SHOT (albeit today most are in tattered fragments due mainly to being buried in feet of bat dung which ate away much of the surface of the original goat-skins) of what 'the bible' looked like in 68CE (= A.D. 68) i.e. shortly after the execution of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir (Gk. 'Iesous') for Armed Sedition against the Maiestas of the 'divine' Roman Emperor Tiberius in 36 CE (at the 100th anniversary of the 1st Invasion of the Roman Army into Judaea in 63 BCE under Pompey).

In the year 217 CE the Bishop Origen states that Bedouin discovered 'scrolls in Hebrew and Greek sealed in jars stored in rock caves near Jericho' and 'Jews came in droves and took them away' - in 1946 it seems that cave 2 and 3 and 5had been broken into and most of their contents were taken out.

In the year 790 CE, Timotheus the Patriarch of Seleucia claims that 'Bedouin had discovered some scrolls in Hebrew in jars in Rock caves near Jericho' which might refer to the rifling of Caves 6, 7 and 9 - and again, 'Jews came and took many scrolls away...'

So Caves 1-11 were clearly rifled through by Bedouin at least twice before the most recent discoveries in Nov of 1946 - and some of these ended up in Cairo (at the Synagogue of Ben-Ezra) in 'clean copies' made from some of the material than ended up there (re-copied c. 1100-1400 CE)

Clearly the books of the 'bible' are DIFFRENT during Iesous' life than what it LATER became.

Opening up caves 1 and 4 and 11 for example, scholars unearthed a massive pile of fragments which represented a series of c. 800 Hebrew and Aramaic Unpointed Consonantal Text Scrolls - which included what we call the Torah, the Psalms and the Prophets in various text versions (about 15-20% difference between them, ALL BEING COPIED SIDE BY SIDE despite the differences) as well as MANY OTHER BOOKS / SCROLLS that did NOT get voted into the Old Testament after Jerusalem was ground to powder in AD 70 at the Council of Javneh c. AD 90 -

Interestingly, some of these books have quotations from them PLACED INTO THE MOUTH OF THE GREEK SPEAKING IESOUS in the GOSPELS -
which suggests he not only KNEW these books well (or memorised versions of them as 'scripture') but that he used them as PROOF TEXTS

e.g. The Scroll of the Book of the Testament of Moses (aka The Book of Jubilees), the Scroll of the Book of the Words of Henoch the Son of Jared (aka I Henoch chapters 1-36 and I Henoch chapters 72-104), the Scroll of the Book of the Wisdom of Iesous ben Sirach (aka 'The Book of Wisdom' or 'Ben Sira' or someetimes called 'Ecclesiasticus'), the Scroll of the Book of the Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs being the Sons of Yakkov in the Last Days, the Book of Tobit and other 'Apocryphal books' e.g. Susanna and Judith &tc.

These 'biblical texts' were cited as scripture in the Dead Sea Scrolls unpointed, i.e. written wiithout vowels) along with some Greek texts (mostly Torah, Psalms and Prophets in various Septuaginta like translations, eg. once scroll that followed the Greek OT version of the Torah and Prophets of Aquilla, others resembled various Greeks version of Symmachus, another used (e.g. Greek Daniel) followed the Greek of Theodotion, the same version used in quotations in Greek in the 'Book of Revelation' for the prophet Daniel's citations.

Also if you take a closer look at the Greek citations of the 'Propecies of the Messiah' found in the Hebrew 'bible' (i.e. Old Testament type texts) which were quoted as FULFILMENTS in the Greek text of the 1st canonical Gospel (according to 'Matthew' whoever he was), you can see that the VERSION tghat is being quoted DOES NOT MATCH THE LATER LXX Septuaginta Greek OT at all, nor is it very close to either Aquilla's Greek LXX version or Theodotion's version or Symmachus' Greek OT - it seems to be a Greek Translation of an Aramaic Paraphrase which resembles much of the text types we see in the Dead Sea Scroll Fragments - which means the Dead Sea Scrolls 'Bible' is one that the early Christians were using as their authoritative Text - about 20% different from the 'bible' (OT) that is used today by Jews and Protestants (i.e. the socalled Masoretic text) - and is more similar at many times to the Hebrew Textual underlay (vorlag) to the Greek LXX copies - which formed the basis of the Catholic Old Testament (based on Jerome's LATIN translation of these texts).

So buried within the 'gospel of Matthew' are citations of the Old Testament which are closer to the text families of the Dead Sea Scrolls than they are of modern 'old testaments' and therefore...closer to Iesous own day.