The Origins of the King James Bible and the New Testament, and the Forgery, and Pagan influences in

reply to post by NOTurTypical

I invited you hear because you stated to me that you could in fact refute anything I said against the Bible. That challenge inspired this research. I appreciate that in itself. Care to throw out a new challenge?
So, let's see your evidence, proof, please? I say the KJV Bible was edited by a Rosicrucian named Francis Bacon. Can you offer anything to prove me wrong, or to prove the theory flawed?
I thought you may like to discuss the facts I presented here, instead of attempting to take the topic off on a tangent of physics. From your own Profile, under "Stuff I Don't Like:"
"Nothing. I don't hate".
Let's see it then.

reply to post by autowrench


You say edited; this much is almost a given. I have virtually no doubt that some sort of revision took place. However...

I would ask that you specify to what degree Francis Bacon "edited" the Bible, according to your allegation.

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

I invited you hear because you stated to me that you could in fact refute anything I said against the Bible. That challenge inspired this research. I appreciate that in itself. Care to throw out a new challenge?
So, let's see your evidence, proof, please? I say the KJV Bible was edited by a Rosicrucian named Francis Bacon. Can you offer anything to prove me wrong, or to prove the theory flawed?
I thought you may like to discuss the facts I presented here, instead of attempting to take the topic off on a tangent of physics. From your own Profile, under "Stuff I Don't Like:"
"Nothing. I don't hate".
Let's see it then.

Its already been soundly refuted if you are perceptive enough to find it. Its in a two-word key. The breadcrmbs have already been dropped. In logic you never address someone's fallacy, you lose when you do that. The diligent will see the clue and research.

Two word key.

reply to post by autowrench

I too love a good conspiracy! On the Piso Theory alone, there is a lot of evidence that Arrius Calpurnius Piso was a real man, a Roman General, and the authors of the Gospels are lost in time, the only evidence is second or third hand information, written hundreds of years after the fact.

Yes, if you have read the source i posted, you would have noticed the following:

The member of the Piso family who started it all was Arrius Calpurnius Piso. He was the Roman general who captured the city of Jerusalem for Rome in 66 CE (Common Era), and who, collaborating with Titus (a relative) destroyed the temple there in 70 CE. In fact, both Zela (religious center of Pontus) and Jerusalem were the sites of temples that were destroyed: Julius Caesar destroyed the one in Zela in 47 BCE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another promoting site says, "...Vitellius took control over the empire as emperor. He was killed soon afterwards, by Arrius Calpurnius Piso."

Really? Not according to Suetonius, who in The Twelve Caesars records that Vitellius was killed by a group of soldiers who performed various atrocities on him before throwing his body in the Tiber. No "Arrius" makes as much as a bow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This "Arrius" is also said to have to have headed Roman forces, and along with Titus, "layed seige upon the Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 C.E." Yet Josephus makes no mention of such an Arrius (though we'd guess that's because he was Arrius and was trying to hide it?). We'd like the reader to note that there is no cite or source given for this information, which is apparently typical for this consortium. People are invented from this Piso family based on no more than a whim and perhaps a presumption of an embedded code in the NT and other documents. To put it simply, there is no evidence outside the theory that "Arrius Piso" actually existed.

On the Roman Piso Family

On the other side however, there was indeed a "Julius Piso" who was mentioned in a letter of Pliny,but he had nothing to do with the Jewish War.

THE SOLICITOR to the treasury of the city of Amisus instituted a claim, Sir, before me against Julius Piso of about forty thousand denarii, 1 presented to him by the public above twenty years ago, with the consent of the general council and assembly of the city: and he founded his demand upon certain of your edicts, by which donations of this kind are prohibited. Piso, on the other hand, asserted that he had conferred large sums of money upon the community, and indeed had thereby expended almost the whole of his estate. He insisted upon the length of time which had intervened since this donation, and hoped that he should not be compelled, to the ruin of the remainder of his fortunes, to refund a present which had been granted him long since, in return for many good offices he had done the city. For this reason, Sir, I thought it necessary to suspend giving any judgment in this cause till I shall receive your directions.

Source

The truth is, the twelve disciples are a grubby and sordid invention.

Such, absolute. Anyway, technically would have been 13, after the betrayal of Judas. But that is another theme. Concerning the absolute claim of your source, which claims that the 12 apostles, never existed. There are few sources concerning the Apostles, beside the Bible.

1. Papias (A.D. 60-135) He was the bishop of Hierapolis, in what is now Turkey. He was a disciple of John.
2. St. Clement of Rome (d. 101) was a disciple of Peter and Paul and served as pope between A.D. 91-101.
3. Iranaeus (A.D. 120-202)
4. Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 153-217)
5. Hippolytus (A.D. 170-236)
6. Tertullian (A.D. 145-221, a Latin-speaking African theologian)
7. Origen (A.D. 185-254), an Egyptian teacher and theologian
8. St. Jerome (342-420), an Italian scholar and translator.

Unless,your source claims also, that the above persons never existed.

"Responding to the challenge of re-creating the lives of the Twelve
apostles from the barest information, he has examined the best sources available and outlines the life of each of Christ's closest followers as thoroughly and completely as it is possible to do."
- Peter F. Macaluso, Ph.D., The Cord

Twelve - The Life of the Apostles after Calvary


Peace

Who was Paul? Real name, not the fake Paul of the Damascan balognium.

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

Don't remember saying that, friend. All I did say if the famous books of Christianity are part of a sinister agenda, the same books used to damn everyone but them to some place they call Hell, and to try to convert everyone into this little cult mentality so they will give up their human will and money to the group...and for what? Peer acceptance? To live on planet Earth you don't need a guidebook! Life, for the most part, is self realizing and self explanatory.

Yea, I know what you said. Those were just the implications I got from it. And again, I must stress the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about. I'll address this later, but the main part I wouldn't to point out in this part I quoted is how you say this life is self-realizing and self-explanatory.

Are you kidding me? Then why do we need parents? Why do we need teachers? Why haven't we evolved to the point where we don't need to make mistakes anymore? We've supposedly gone 50,000 years and still don't innately know that fire burns when you touch it? Seriously?

No, this life is not self-realizing or explanatory. Not by a long shot.

Christianity in it's present form breeds HATE, all over the world. I have come to believe that is what Christians want too, they want to be the most hated, ridiculed, and persecuted people on the planet.
And for what reasoning? Why is it some need a being bigger than they are? Better than they are? Isn't is human destiny to perfect ourselves, after all, instead of perfecting a being who lived 2000 years ago that we know nothing about?

Hate to sound cliche, but those aren't Christians. Jesus was liberal? Seriously? I'm glad not many take them seriously. And no, we don't seek to be persecuted, and one doesn't speak for the whole "sect". I certainly don't speak for the majority, since the majority is skewed on what Christianity actually is. And actually, we're perfected through Him who lives today, who rose again 2000 years ago.

When I informed her that we are Wiccans, and our Church is wherever we are at any given time, she got really mad, and then told me she would rather pay Double to a Church goer to fix her machine, rather than paying a "Satanist" like me. I could see the hate in her eyes and her face. This is the hate I am talking about. Where does all this come from? I know it is not in the Bible, but Christians are learning to hate people from some source! I think it prudent to examine one's own self, before damning another to their own version of the Afterlife.

She handled the situation wrong. I'm sure you think all Christians are like that now? Is that how you think I act? With hatred? Ugh. This is why I think it's so stupid for people to do shove their beliefs down another's throat. They never handle it properly. People just get angry for no damn reason. Me? I'm a sinner. I can give you a list of things I've done and you'd probably think I'm the worst human on Earth. Only thing is, I know who I was, and who I am now. I was forgiven, and recognize that. Now I only have love, or try to, for others. Why? Because God gave it to me first, not because of what the Bible tells me, but because I felt it for myself. I want others to have that feeling too, which is why I do what I do. That DOESN'T mean I'm perfect. I get angry, I get stupid, just like everyone else.

Get that from the book, did you? I know of no other publication that damns everyone to Hell, friend.

Running out of room to type, so I'll have to finish with this. The Bible condemns no one to Hell, neither does God. You obviously don't understand what Hell is, or the Abyss. The Abyss is simply complete separation from God. It was created for the fallen Angels, who wanted it. Who would rather suffer, than serve God. Sound familiar? Yea. The soul is eternal, and so it must go somewhere. If it cannot go to Heaven, it goes to the Abyss. God made it super easy to get to Heaven, it's amazing how some people can't grasp it. Hopefully they're given another chance when they stand before God, because I personally wish NO one goes to the Abyss.

I trust I have explained myself? I cannot "believe in" a being based on faith alone. I have no desire to go to the Christian Heaven, or the Christian Hell, where I expect many Christians will suddenly find themselves, when the time comes for them to judge themselves.

If you want to talk about logic and evidence-based reasoning, at least get your facts straight about what Christianity is actually about.

Originally posted by Lionhearte
If you want to talk about logic and evidence-based reasoning, at least get your facts straight about what Christianity is actually about.

Is there anything as remotely as inane as two Christians arguing over what Christianity is about?

I'll answer. No.

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by Lionhearte
If you want to talk about logic and evidence-based reasoning, at least get your facts straight about what Christianity is actually about.

Is there anything as remotely as inane as two Christians arguing over what Christianity is about?

I'll answer. No.

That's simply because everyone is different, but I guarantee you all Christians believe in Christ. If they say they don't believe in Christ, obviously they aren't a Christian. That's not opinion, it's just fact. That's like a Buddhist not believing in Buddha.

And that's the main key thing - believing in Christ.

Originally posted by Lionhearte

That's simply because everyone is different, but I guarantee you all Christians believe in Christ. If they say they don't believe in Christ, obviously they aren't a Christian. That's not opinion, it's just fact. That's like a Buddhist not believing in Buddha.

And that's the main key thing - believing in Christ.

Profound.

Completely off the mark in response to my post but nonetheless profound.

Arius Calpurnius Piso and Scripture I’ve recently been reading about a person named “Arius Calpurnius Piso”. Apparently, this person, and members of his family, were responsible for creating the “New Testament”. Although I’m not particularly bothered by that, I am bothered by the contention that he is also responsible for writing certain passages of the Prophets, as well as the book of Esther. What is your opinion of all this? Throughout the ages there have been many critics of the bible who have asserted many things about its authorship.There are two types of biblical criticism – lower criticism, also known as textual criticism, looks at the differences in the available manuscripts to determine what is most likely the correct text for a given passage. The other type of biblical criticism, known as higher criticism, looks at the source of the text, the environment in which the given text was constructed, cultural context, and a few other factors. In general, with the exception of the canonical approach, higher criticism usually seeks to prove that the bible could not have been written by whom, and when, it has been traditionally accepted as having been authored. Many biblical scholars of religious origin, both Jewish and Christian, feel that the Bible, specifically the Jewish Scriptures or Tanach, have stood up to higher criticism; they have been proven to have been authored by those to whom we have asserted, and in the times that we claimed. The Jewish Scriptures were canonized several hundred years before the New Testament and the destruction of the Temple. The common date given is around 300 BCE. Therefore, it is impossible for it (or any part of it) to have been written by Piso, especially if Piso is assumed to be Josephus, who lived between 37 CE and 100 CE. Concerning the authorship of the New Testament, while Josephus certainly did live at the correct time, there is ample evidence that the New Testament was not authored by one person, but by several people. While the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) are believed to have been written from Matthew’s notes (called the Q document), the style and quality of the writings are still different enough to be attributed to different writers (even though the original source notes may be the same). In short, there is no evidence that the New Testament, nor portions of the Tanach, were authored by Piso, regardless of his actual identity.

www.jewishanswers.org...

you didn't answer me on another thread, appearently i dont exist like your ideals

reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars


There are a lot of things we disagree on, but that post had me laughing.

Thanks.

reply to post by Lionhearte

The Bible condemns no one to Hell, neither does God. You obviously don't understand what Hell is, or the Abyss

Hold on...

"Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" . . . And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." Matthew 25:41, 46

" ... in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power" II Thessalonians 1:8-9

Wait, there's more!

Mark 9:43-48 Jesus says, "If your HAND causes you to SIN, Cut It Off. It’s better to enter Eternal Life with only ONE HAND than to go into the UNQUENCHABLE FIRE OF HELL with TWO HANDS ... If your FOOT causes you to SIN, Cut It Off. It’s better to enter Eternal Life with only ONE FOOT than to be THROWN INTO HELL with TWO FEET... And if your EYE causes you to SIN, Gouge It Out. It’s better to enter the Kingdom of God with only ONE EYE than to have TWO EYES and be THROWN INTO HELL, where the MAGGOTS NEVER DIE and the FIRE NEVER GOES OUT."

Luke 6:24-26 Jesus says, “What SORROWS AWAITS YOU who are RICH, for you have your only Happiness now. What SORROWS AWAITS YOU who are FAT & PROSPEROUS now, for a time of AWFUL HUNGER awaits you. What SORROWS AWAITS YOU who LAUGH NOW, for YOUR LAUGHING WILL TURN TO MOURNING AND SORROW. What SORROWS AWAITS YOU who are PRAISED BY THE CROWDS, for their Ancestors also Praised FALSE PROPHETS."

I especially enjoy this one. It practically shouts "GOD FOR PRESIDENT!"

Luke 12:5 Jesus says, "I’ll tell you whom to Fear. Fear God, who has the power to kill you and then THROWN INTO HELL. Yes, he’s the one to Fear."

Yep. No hell to be found here. The Bible absolutely condemns no one. *cough* HOMOSEXUALS *cough*

I hope I made my point. If I didn't, then there's no use trying anymore.

Originally posted by Hessling
I've made mention before of a strange story that applies.

I knew a co-worker years ago who was in Seminary School. He was a mega-IQ type and quickly rose to a position where he was chosen to do some sort of extremely sensitive project having to do with Scripture. Very soon after he dropped out of Seminary.

Try as many of us did to get him to explain this strange decision he always refused to talk about it.

What I'd give to know what it was he saw.

My guess is that he saw the wonder and glory that is sexual congress.

That's why I dropped out of the seminary.

Originally posted by Lionhearte

And that's the main key thing - believing in Christ.

Which Christ? The Catholic version? Southern Baptist? Dogmaless Christ? Historical Jesus? Jesus who whored with Magdalene? Jesus the Virgin? Black Jesus? Olive Jesus?

Jesus H. Christ, which Jesus is it?

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by Lionhearte

And that's the main key thing - believing in Christ.

Which Christ? The Catholic version? Southern Baptist? Dogmaless Christ? Historical Jesus? Jesus who whored with Magdalene? Jesus the Virgin? Black Jesus? Olive Jesus?

Jesus H. Christ, which Jesus is it?

Sexy Jesus, of course.

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by Lionhearte

And that's the main key thing - believing in Christ.

Which Christ? The Catholic version? Southern Baptist? Dogmaless Christ? Historical Jesus? Jesus who whored with Magdalene? Jesus the Virgin? Black Jesus? Olive Jesus?

Jesus H. Christ, which Jesus is it?

Sexy Jesus, of course.

Please. Stop that. I'll have that song in my head for the next 24 hours.

I don't like you.

Originally posted by Furbs

My guess is that he saw the wonder and glory that is sexual congress.

That's why I dropped out of the seminary.

After you found that masturbation was a close second to nothing, why did you really quit the seminary?

reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars


If this is your thinking, you are doing something wrong, my friend.

EDIT:

))((

reply to post by Furbs


Um..what on earth is that symbol?

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by Furbs

 

Um..what on earth is that symbol?

heh
heh
If it could talk, it would do a Monologue.
heh