Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
I wonder what the Original poster does with documents like P52 and P46, which date to the 125-200 AD range. Those papyrii are from texts as varied as
Titus and the Gospel of John, yet they are in the same form as much later manuscripts.
P52 is a tiny scrap of Papyrus 3.5 by 2.5 inches which contains lines from the Gospel of John (see
). Both P52 and P46 have been dated by paeleographic (the study of handwriting styles in
different periods of history) methods and as the Wiki article on P46 states [I]"As with all manuscripts dated solely by paleography, the dating of
(P)46 is uncertain[I/I] ( en.wikipedia.org...
All estimates based on paeleography are unreliable, irrespective of the many claims which paeleographers make. Scribes often wrote in the writing
style of an earler period to make a document look like a document from that period.
Even in the modern world we have had numerous "fake Shakespeare" documents and even the fake Hitler diaries. I am not suggesting however that the many
ancient texts and fragments of the Bible are "faked," merely that they may have been written in a previous style of writing to give the imperssion of
a more ancient document.
If Constantine et al created the New Testament in the fourth century, why is so much of it 150 to 200 years older?
Well firstly such documents have not been proven to be older; they are merely estimated to be older based upon paeleography. Secondly the article I
have hyperlinked in the OP ( www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
), which is a summary of Tony Busby's book, "The
Forged Origins of the New Testament" merely claims that the New Testament was essentially a syncretic (a mixture of various pre-existing sources)
combination of what was considered to be the best of "in all, two thousand two hundred and thirty-one scrolls and legendary tales of gods and
saviors, together with a record of the doctrines orated by them
(Life of Constantine, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 73; N&PNF, op. cit., vol. i, p.
518)." It does not suggest that the New Testament was a completely original document, but rather based on many previous myths, legends and tales of
Saviour gods and miracle workers (stage magicians).
Likewise, the consensus of scholars is that at least part of the mentions of Jesus in Josephus' "Antiquities of the Jews' is likely authentic.
But even if it's not, there's the problem of all the early christian graffiti throughout the classical world.
There are two passages from Josepheus, one which refers to Jesus as a person who was "called the Christ," and the other passage where he is referred
to as "Christ" or "the Christ," and where Josepheus allegedly even doubts it being lawful to refer to him as a "man;" ths is considered to be a piece
of Christian propaganda which was likely inserted into Jospeheus at a later date.
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men
as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the
suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to
them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of
Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Josepheus was of course Jewish and not a Christian, and it is highly unlikley that he would have written this; it is much more likely to be a later
Christian editing of the text. Further there is a version of the text in the Arabic which reads quite differently, thus
For he says in the treatises that he has written in the governance of the Jews: "At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, and his
conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned
him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon their loyalty to him. They reported that he had appeared to
them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive. Accordingly they believed that he was the Messiah, concerning whom the Prophets have
There is a massive amount of evidence of the editing and re-editing of hardwritten copies of texts to suit the propaganda of the Christian Church;
ancient documents written on parchement or papyrus could always be scratched out and overwritten to suit various purposes, and there is ample evidence
It is easy enough to say the evidence doesn't exist if you are careful to remain ignorant of any evidence or research. Some of it is problematic,
certainly, and the scholarly community is not monolithic about the conclusions. Still, very few of them share the OP's view. I wonder why....
It is simply due to the effects of religious hypnosis and indoctrination.
Originally posted by racasan
That is a fascinating Internet Site, and while I am agreement with most of the contents of that book, the central thesis, which is that "Jesus never
existed" is a thesis which is impossible to prove or disprove.
2000 years ago there were numerous Messianic sects in Israel and numerous Israelites "took up their cross (i.e., rebelled against the state)," just as
in the modern world there are numerous Messianic cults, and numerous people in rebellion against their governments, risking torture, imprisonment and
I think that the Monty Python film "Life of Brian" is actually quite useful in understanding the kind of primitive Messianic religious fanaticism
which existed in Israel 2000 years ago. I would be quite surprised if there was "not" a person called Joshua (Jesus is an Anglicisation of a famous
Biblical name) 2000 years ago whom the "Jewish Messiah" tale of the Gospels is based upon, however what can be established is that the New Testament
was compiled at the time of Constantine and is a syncretisation of numerous saviour deities and magicians.
Even if a person called Joshua existed 2000 years ago and claimed to be the Saviour of the Jews, he was only one of many who made the same claim, and
we know almost nothing about him; all that we have is a fourth century fabrication of tales attributed to numerous Saviour gods of the ancient world,
which was designed to unite the Empire under a single religion, and numerous other contradictory documents about him.
Breaking on the Wheel.
The naked heretic had each limb and joint broken precisely to avoid any fatal blows. He was then 'braided' into the spokes of the wheel and hoisted on
to a post. There he was exposed to the elements – or left to be twirled by passers by who wanted to join in the fun.
A 16th century device to lift the victim in and out of the fire, roasting him alive slowly instead of burning him all at once.
These methods aren’t just about getting some uncooperative voices quietly out of the way; this is about instilling terror into the population and to
Yes even Constantine demanded the beheading of those who had texts which contradicted his "New Testaments;" it was certainly a means of unifying the
empire under a "One Empire" religion.
How the Gospels were created
Constantine then instructed Eusebius to organize the compilation of a uniform collection of new writings developed from primary aspects of the
religious texts submitted at the council.
His instructions were:
"Search ye these books, and whatever is good in them, that retain; but whatsoever is evil, that cast away. What is good in one book, unite ye with
that which is good in another book. And whatsoever is thus brought together shall be called The Book of Books. And it shall be the doctrine of my
people, which I will recommend unto all nations, that there shall be no more war for religions' sake."
(God's Book of Eskra, op. cit., chapter xlviii, paragraph 31)
"Make them to astonish" said Constantine, and "the books were written accordingly"
(Life of Constantine, vol. iv, pp. 36-39).
Eusebius amalgamated the "legendary tales of all the religious doctrines of the world together as one", using the standard god-myths from the
presbyters' manuscripts as his exemplars.
.....Eusebius then arranged for scribes to produce,
"fifty sumptuous copies ... to be written on parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient portable form, by professional scribes thoroughly
accomplished in their art"
"These orders," said Eusebius, "were followed by the immediate execution of the work itself ... we sent him [Constantine] magnificently and
elaborately bound volumes of three-fold and four-fold forms"
(Life of Constantine, vol. iv, p. 36).
They were the "New Testimonies", and this is the first mention (c. 331) of the New Testament in the historical record.
With his instructions fulfilled, Constantine then decreed that the New Testimonies would thereafter be called the "word of the Roman Savior God" (Life
of Constantine, vol. iii, p. 29) and official to all presbyters sermonizing in the Roman Empire. He then ordered earlier presbyterial manuscripts and
the records of the council "burnt" and declared that "any man found concealing writings should be stricken off from his shoulders" (beheaded) (ibid.).
There are many threads on ATS about christians concerned with the NWO using force and terror tactics to enforce a new religion – I have to wonder if
this is because they know this is how their own brand of religion was origional forced onto the world
The "Second Coming" prophecies predict the coming of a genocidal global dictator (a king of kings) who will exterminate all his opponents; it seems to
me that the Christians would be the ultimate allies of the NWO dictatorship, which is essentially the International Dictatorship of Captialism, and
indeed since most Christians are anti-Communists, that seems also to fit their agenda.
edit on 20-3-2011 by Lucifer777 because: addition to text
edit on 20-3-2011 by Lucifer777 because: Formatting