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 use of the name, YHWH comes from the Midianites. They were a people who lived in Arabia, close to Sinai.
Dont know that you can call Yahweh a loan as He spoke with Abraham face to face.
Whoever wrote that was assigning one of the attributes of El to YHWH.
Abraham called Yahweh "the everlasting God".
Genesis 18 portrays YHWH as an ordinary person, who has to travel by foot in person to know if the people of Sodom are as evil as he had heard tell by others. My guess is that scribes in later times inserted the name for some reason, maybe to connect this angel with the one Moses spoke with.
Abraham did a lot of talking to the elohiym (plural) but didnt show them the respect that he showed Yah-weh. We see Yahweh and two elohiym meeting with Abraham.
Is that Gospel actually about a person named Thomas? Or is it just a name of a book, as if the name is somehow fitting for a book?
The compiler of Gospel of Thomas did, at least, so I strongly suspect.
wiki-Gospel_of_Thomas
The Gospel According to Thomas, commonly shortened to the Gospel of Thomas, is a well preserved early Christian, non-canonical sayings-gospel discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in December 1945, in one of a group of books known as the Nag Hammadi library. The Gospel of Thomas was found among a collection of fifty-two writings that included, in addition to an excerpt from Plato's Republic, gospels claiming to have been written by Jesus' disciple Philip. Scholars have speculated that the works were buried in response to a letter from the bishop Athanasius who for the first time declared a strict canon of Christian scripture.[1]
The Coptic language text, the second of seven contained in what modern-day scholars have designated as Codex II, is composed of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.[2] Almost half of these sayings resemble those found in the Canonical Gospels, while the other sayings were previously unknown. Its place of origin may have been Syria, where Thomasine traditions were strong.[3]
The introduction states: These are the hidden words that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them down. Didymus (Greek) and Thomas (Aramaic) both mean "twin". Some critical scholars suspect that this reference to the Apostle Thomas is false, and that therefore the true author is unknown.[5]
The means by which the conspiracy was carried out was implantation of false memories.
Luke24:4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5 In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7 `The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.' " 8 Then they remembered his words.
. . .
LK 24:44 He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."
And the poser even implanted in the disciples false memories of having read nonexistent scriptures.
LK 24:45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.46 He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things.
The apostle Paul also makes mention of the nonexistent scripture; he "received", without explaining how or from whom or which specific scripture he is referring to.
1CO 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles,
I found a PDF that looks like a contemporary review of Brückner's book, in a Princeton publication. In the essay, the writer says of Brückner's view of Paul's thinking:
My current view happens to be that Paul was not sufficiently Hellenized before engaging upon his mission. See 1 Cor 15:
I typed this up myself from a photocopy of this 1910 article. Why I would do this is because the actual works of Brückner are only available in German. Well isn't that funny. I wonder who the "we" is in this review of Brückner's book.
The preexistent One was to be revealed, suddenly to appear. Consequently the facts of Jesus' human birth and early life, with which Paul at his conversion was confronted in accepting the Messiahship of Jesus, constituted an element not only new but discordant with his previous Christological belief. Paul solved this problem by conceiving of the earthly life as an episode in the heavenly existence of the Son of God, to which he had voluntarily subjected Himself for the sake of mankind. This in so far modified the original conception of the preexistent Messiah, as ascribing to him this act of voluntary self-denial gave His heavenly life an ethical content, which to the mind of Paul it had not previously possessed. But apart from this the earthly life remained a mere episode, for the historic details of which, as distinct from its beginning in the incarnation and end in the crucifixion, the Apostle felt no interest. His conception of the post-existent glorified Christ virtually coincides again with his original idea of what the Messiah was as such from the first. Especially the functions of Christ at the Parousia are such that Paul the Pharisee might have affirmed them as well as Paul the Christian.
We believe that there is an important element of truth in this construction. It appears to us beyond doubt that Paul before his conversion ascribed preexistence to the Messiah.
Hi, I noticed your post and I thought I might introduce you to a people called Christians. We believe in a book called the New Testament and in this book, it tells all about a person we believe is the Christ, and his name is Jesus.
It was written that all the works and teachings of Yeshua would take up volumes.
the word used in the NT is transliterated, rhabbi, which is of Hebrew origin.
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by jmdewey60
A Hebrew Rabbi named Jesus.
That is logical.
Are you winning points for the Atheist side?
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by jmdewey60
You say He is the Christ (which is the annointed one, or the Messiah). Who annointed Him? Who is He the Messsiah of? And where do you get your proof that He is what you claim?
You already mentioned how he was a man who was eating a meal with Abraham.
Take Moses, One minute he is talking to elohiym and then Yahweh later.
Seriously?
. . .Yehovah is chief el. . .
22 “Yahweh possessed me in the beginning of his work,
before his deeds of old.
23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning,
before the earth existed.
24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth,
when there were no springs abounding with water.
25 Before the mountains were settled in place,
before the hills, I was brought forth;
26 while as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields,
nor the beginning of the dust of the world.
27 When he established the heavens, I was there;
when he set a circle on the surface of the deep,
28 when he established the clouds above,
when the springs of the deep became strong,
29 when he gave to the sea its boundary,
that the waters should not violate his commandment,
when he marked out the foundations of the earth;
30 then I was the craftsman by his side.
I was a delight day by day,
always rejoicing before him,
Originally posted by jmdewey60
Are you winning points for the Atheist side?
I said, the New Testament.
Where else would you get information about Jesus?
Do you have some magic book you found about Jesus?
Originally posted by jmdewey60
You are probably saying that thinking I changed my theology, then decided to go along with the higher criticism of the New Testament books. That would be a wrong assumption. Once I decided to accept the opinion of the critics, then I reassessed by opinion of end of the world theories.
Originally posted by Logarock
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Logarock
I go along with the critical view that says that 2 Thessalonians was a forgery.
There you go. You did well to let your theology be dependent on that built up. As far as the new creation it follows with the line "the brightness of His coming".
So I dropped all that end of the world theology which collapses without that one book.
Really? How convenient.
I am a Seventh Day Adventist, and if you don't know what that means, the "adventist" part of the name is referring to the second advent, which supposedly happens at the end of the world. So my current way of thinking is a wide departure from what it was not long ago. The overriding concept I learned from my religious denominational affiliation is to go by the Bible. If I find convincing enough of an argument that certain books of the Bible do not belong, then I need to adjust my theology accordingly, even if it removes the support for long-held views. Keeping long-held views in the face of contrary evidence is the other thing I learned from my church to not practice.edit on 1-11-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)
I think you are right, and I think that Princeton writer had it wrong and was making conclusions himself that Brückner did not make himself.
. . .Paul was learning from the Hellenized, but maybe not enough.
This is something I should use in that Day of the Lord thread (and also the other thing you brought up, for Ananke). I am looking at a book on Amazon right now that I find interesting though I don't find myself in full agreement with the author, The promised end: eschatology in theology and literature By Paul S. Fiddes. He says something that Akragon brought up on my thread, that time is irrelevant (my terminology).
To show at least one difference between 2Thess and Paul is to point out that 2Thess has this "close of probation" , when the possibility of truth learning becomes impossible because "god" sends the strong delusion, is framed completely in eschatological linear time line terms. Paul, on the other hand, places truth and error as in operation simultaneously as in Romans chapter 1:18-32, and that "god" has already "handed them (presumably Gentiles, including philosophers) over to a depraved mind."