General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2180950

    What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

    Locked

    by dmambo ·

    Located in a safe deposit box in Long Island (of all places!) the Gospel According to Judas has been translated. It reveals that Judas was making the ultimate sacrifice working in conjunction with Jesus to turn Him over to the Romans during Passover and to allow Jesus to shed His earthly mantle. Judas knew that he would be reviled throughout history for his actions, but did it because he loved Jesus.

    How do you think this will affect the practice and teachings of Christianity?

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #3286424

      More of

      by rob mekel ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      Love your neighbour as you love yourself.

      or is it more of:

      Love yourself as you love your neighbour.

      Rob

    • #3286423

      While these have been dated

      by jdclyde ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      who is to say they are accurate?

      They were not written by Judas, but after he was dead already.

      Just a good story?

      At worst case, why would this affect anything?

      • #3286420

        I don’t believe that anny of the Gospels

        by dmambo ·

        In reply to While these have been dated

        were written by the apostles. They were all written in the first or second century after Christ’s crucifiction. I’m a LOT of studying away from being a biblical scholar, so maybe someone can confirm that.

        And I’m just asking and interested in others’ opinions. I was not stating that I think this new Gospel will have some impact. In fact I believe the mainstream church will mostly ignore this, so it’ll have very little affect on the teachings of the established denominations, at least for the foreseeable future.

        • #3075304

          Gospel of John written by John, at least dictated…

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to I don’t believe that anny of the Gospels

          Matthew was written by Levi, one of the twelve, Mark is from a collection of Peter’s sermons, Luke was Paul’s physician, all of these were written while there were witnesses alive who could verify what they had seen… (Peter, John, Levi(Matthew), John Mark, Jude the brother of Jesus, James the brother of Jesus,etc. the 500.

          The Gospel of Judas is interesting. It is dated to long after Judas was dead, and isn’t consistant with the other gospels. Therefore it is not worthy of canon.

          The least questionable of the NT books is James.
          He has a nearly bored with it all attitude that give dutch uncle advice…

        • #3103713

          Originally there were over 30 gospels and

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Gospel of John written by John, at least dictated…

          each disciple had written one. The only copies we have availabel today are just that – copies, like this document in question, made many years later from earlier copies. Today we have only four gospels as one church leader decided that 30 gospels were too many and decided that four was the right number and then decided which four he thought were the best to include as the approved texts – being human he chose those that went with his doctrinal views.

          No one saw the divine hand of God pushing the other 26 off the table.

          We do not have a single copy of the four gospels in the Bible that were written in the hand of the disciples or by a scribe under their direction. What we have are later copies.

        • #3103634

          1 valid Point.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Originally there were over 30 gospels and

          There were many writings. The ones that survived were the “Cream of the Crop”.

          One point is that The Gospel of Thomas, and the Gospel of Judas were written long after the eyewitnesses died. The 4 Gospels that survived were considered Canon. i.e. Reliable and witnessed and were set into Canon during the lifetime of the disciples.

          There was no divine hand, but a decision about accuracy and relevance, and use was decided by man, but with a view to consistancy with OT scripture and NT Canon…

          Other writings came much later, and may truly be heretical, from an orthodox point of view.

          Burn them at the Stake, get the Pitchforks 😉

        • #3103589
          Avatar photo

          What a Crock

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to 1 valid Point.

          The current Christian Religion is Pauline in nature and as such very different from the Christianity taught by Jesus. Paul was a disciple on the outer ring and very much reviled by the [b]True Christians[/b] after the death of Jesus. So in an attempt to save his skin he fled the country and proceeded to teach his perverted form of Christianity to others ands when it became known what it was that Paul was doing many where dispatched to counter his [b]Propaganda[/b] as it was believed at the time by the [b]True Christians[/b] that fact that Pauline Christianity has survived is more a testament to the place that Paul fled to rather than any over riding factor. After all what good Christian would allow the major religious days to be moved so that they fitted in with other religions pagan in nature?

          Col

        • #3103524

          Upon advise of jd

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          I have been told that I need to restate the title of my last reply to Two questions! 🙂 I would do that through edit, but it would make his reply to me seem strange.

          So I offer apology. Eesh! The Blunders of Beth continue!

          edit: Double blunders!! I attached this reply to the wrong post! ROFL

        • #3105602

          You are of course correct, Colin

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          although perhaps a little extreme (simplistic) in your comment.

          It has always concerned me that in developing doctrine, the words of Paul are given equal status to those of Jesus, and in some instances probably greater status.

          So yes, the religion would more correctly be called: “Paulianity.”

          While Paul wrote some really cool stuff — like 1 Corinthians 13 — I personally am a follower of Jesus.

        • #3105557

          Col, for someone ho doesn’t follow a path, you seem to be an expert.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          You have the bitterness of a broken faith.

          The Paulianity you complain really doen’t contradict Peter, John, etc. Paul rebuked Peter, and peter repented. Read the book of Acts. Yep, Paul was treated like a leper by some in the early church. People knew he was having them killed before he converted. Many thought he was trying to infiltrate and then kill them…

          Paul died long before Peter did in Rome. Peter came to lead the church in Rome, and he died there. Peter and the other disciples followed after Paul in many places…

          What he was more than the other disciples was literate. He was a Gamalian student… He wasn’t a Rabinical failure… He would have been the greatest Jewish leader of his day, if it hadn’t overlapped the life of Christ, in whose name he followed. Don’t blame Paul at this point. Blame Peter and James for not being more prolific writers…

        • #3287263
          Avatar photo

          That’s an Interesting Observation

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          [i]You have the bitterness of a broken faith.[/i]

          But totally incorrect as I do follow a path just not a Christian Path I was taught from a very early age to follow a different path by one of the 47 Sholin Priests who where given the job of making sure that the Dali Lama made a successful escape from Chinese controlled Tibet. Even then I don’t fully agree with the Dali Lama who is a complete Pacifist as I was taught to fight to protect the people who couldn’t protect themselves and the Dali Lama just tells people not to resist and accept what happens. That is something that I can not accept but such is life and I’m not one to complain.

          Being who I am I used to be called in to be a Body Guard for the Dali Lama whenever he visited AU which he found funny as he could never understand that he was in danger and was willing to accept whatever happened to him, where I was given the job of protecting him and making sure that nothing did happen to him.

          But my Master did insist that we study the different religions around the world and understand them as they really all are the same thing expressed in a different way as different people express the same happenings in different ways according to their society and their previous experience. So from that prospective I don’t see any real difference between the basics of Christianity, Hinduism, Muslim, Buddhist or any other faith.

          Rather my view is a matter of an outsider looking in and seeing the differences and laughing at them for what they are rather than [b]having any bitterness over a Broken Faith.[/b] The ones that scare me are the fundamentalist of any faith as they distort their so called religion to suit their own ends and claim that the ends justify the means which I do find unacceptable. That can range from some Muslim Extremists flying commercial aircraft into buildings to a group of Fundamentalists Christians Declaring war on all of the Muslim faith because some Fundamentalists fools hurt them or scared them so everyone of that faith has to be [b]Put to the Sword![/b]

          I can see wrong on all sides in the current conflict between religious beliefs and while I don’t disagree with hunting down the Fundalmenalists responsible for the events of 9-11-2001 I do see a major problem with attempting to force your ideals onto every one of that religion and attempting to force them to change as this will only make the enemy stronger to fight against you. Currently there is a [b]MESS[/b] that has no solution in the Middle East and it has been brewing since before WW11 and there are some fools who think that they will be able to fix it in a few weeks/months/years when actually it will require decades to put right and I personally don’t think that the people involved will have the stomach to follow through to the finial product where it is possible to have peace.

          All I currently see is the supposedly [b]Good Guy’s[/b] descending to the level of those they are supposed to free and by doing so are only making the opposition to their presence stronger and the fight more bitter and longer than it should or needs to be.

          Currently Afghanistan is a Mess and Iraq is no better and if anything worse and there is talk of moving on from Iraq to green pastures to bring freedom before the job is finished, to me this smacks of [b]Hypocrisy[/b] as there is currently [b]No Plan[/b] to withdraw from Iraq and leave a stable situation in place just mess things up and walk away saying [b]Look How much Good we Have Done![/b]

          Currently I still fail to see why Iraq was invaded in the supposed [b]War on Terror[/b] as there has been no proven connection between that country and the events of 9-11-2001. The only similarities are that both countries where Muslim and at one time got assistance from the US to fight against the supposed enemies of the US.

          What is missed here is that we are now facing a new situation that no country is currently prepared to admit to instead of fighting over land and resources the enemy has neither just an idea and they are independent of any country so they are effectively invisible and have nothing to strike back against except the people themselves. Invading countries will not cure the current problem but it will exacerbate it and possibly push us over the edge into a World War which we will be on the wrong side of as previously we have never been responsible for a [b]First Strike[/b] we have only reacted to an attack against us and our property meaning land a couple of buildings just doesn’t count in the bigger picture no matter how wronged we feel at the time.

          Col

        • #3287254

          Col, givern your personal beliefs, you may be interested in this.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          Please see

          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=8&threadID=193152&messageID=1993993 .

          P.S. Several of us have noted Gret’s apparent long absence from these proceedings, and are hoping that she is well. Can you advise?

        • #3287202

          tjsanko

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          At any given time there seems to invariably be a new member of TR who is an arrogant, offensive a$$hole.

          Currenly you are fulfilling that role.

          I suggest you change your attitude if you want people to treat you seriously.

          While Colin has spoken for himself, after knowing him for more than three years I can say that he is always polite, has a vast general knowledge, and most certainly is not bitter.

          [Edited because of auto-censor]

        • #3287184
          Avatar photo

          Sandy Re Grett

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          Grett has had computer problems and has been messed around by the supposed professionals down where she lives. About a year ago they rebuilt her computer and sold her new MS Software but didn’t change the Video Card which has been giving problems but from my understanding the people who did it have not accepted the problem and have had the computer for ages attempting to make it work by changing the M’Board CPU & RAM.

          I got an E-Mail from Grett about a week ago and she’s madly fighting her way through the backlog of E-Mail in an attempt to get on top of things [b]As if that’s ever possible[/b] :^0

          But with a bit of luck she’ll be back in the near future as her usual self. I just hope that she doesn’t have Reams of Translations to do as that will slow her down considerably, but she insisted that she fine last time I was in contact with her and very [b]Peeved OFF[/b] with the people who repaired her computer.

          I was down there just after the repair and if I had of known I could have done it for her properly.

          Col ]:)

          Well just to finish off the week properly after upsetting at least 2 of the TR Staff I’ll post this and see if they throw me off all together. :^0

          http://tinyurl.com/jrfm9

          Jay look and [b]Suffer!!!!!!!!![/b] :p
          Remember I have my eye on you!

        • #3287090

          Thanks, Col

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to What a Crock

          You’re right; fall behind here and you’ll never catch up. The best one can do is try to forget what may have been missed and start anew. I know, from experience.

          You may recall that I vanished from sight here in July of last year. Owing to the needs of a client, who is also my closest friend (the Spiritualist Reverend that I’ve referenced elsewhere believes that we were brothers in a prior incartion), along with my efforts to re-hab my house, preparatory to selling it and moving back to the Penn State area, have left me with precious little time for other than the absolute necessities.

          At the moment, I’ve a short period during which to re-visit TR. I very quickly gave up on trying to read all of the posts, noted in several hundreds of e-mails, that I’d missed during my absence. It was either that, or continually subject myself to playing Sisyphus.

          I’m glad to hear that Gret’s absence is not owing to some greater tragedy than that of a loss of communications.

          Should you have the opportunity, please tell her that I wish her well, and look forward to her return.

          May the future be kind.

        • #3103577

          A question

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to 1 valid Point.

          You stated “There was no divine hand” and I wonder how you came to that conclusion, regardless of what it refers to.
          It’s been my experience that God often works through guiding groups of people to agree. It has also been my experience that He has used things I have written for others and what others have written for me.
          So who is to decide what is the working(s) of a divine hand?

        • #3103529

          Technically, “mazing”

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to A question

          that was TWO questions, not “a” question.

          [i]”I wonder how you came to that conclusion,”[/i]
          and
          [i]”So who is to decide what is the working(s) of a divine hand?”[/i]

          So unless you go back and restate this, you are over your quota and shall be denied all answers from this point on! ;\

          Go write about THAT one! 😀

          ————-
          edited to point out I actually made a post that didn’t have any DE’s or other references! ]:)

        • #3103519

          To err is human

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to 1 valid Point.

          http://techrepublic.com.com/5225-6230-0-1.html?forumID=8&threadID=193152&messageID=1994414

          Now let’s hope you are in a divinely forgiving mood! 🙂

        • #3105554

          But it Felt divine.. Perhaps an error in translation :)

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to To err is human

          Anyone recall the source of this quote.

          Heinlein? Time enough for Love, Maybe?

        • #3103458

          Cream of the Crop – as decided by a small group of men

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to 1 valid Point.

          who selected items that supported their doctrinal views and rejected any that did not. The people who made the decisions had no evidence to say which of the matters were accurate and the relevancy was what matched their views.

          Regarding accuracy look at the fate of Judas in Matthew 27 as against that in Acts 1 – two totally different, and mutually incompatible, stories of his death. One states he died before Jesus was crucified the other give no time indication of his death.

          The best way to handle this sort of thing re scriptures i to not take them as being word perfect but to read them and then to ask God for an interpretation and udnerstanding.

        • #3105624

          Ah, but that small group of men were divinely inspired …

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Cream of the Crop – as decided by a small group of men

          as any Christian will tell you. 🙂

          Not so long ago I started a discussion here as to whether the King James Bible was the “True” Word of God.

          There are many people who insist that the KJV is the only valid translation. It would appear that the Holy Spirit made a special visit to earth in 1611 to personally oversee that translation: B-)

    • #3286405

      If I remember the news stories well

      by faradhi ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      But I admit I have slept since then, It is believed that the gospel was written by Nicolaitans which were derided by the early church as heretics.

      So I do not think there will be any effect.

      • #3075302

        You win a Ceegar!!! DaVinci code corrections…

        by x-marcap ·

        In reply to If I remember the news stories well

        -edited for poor point and click—
        You are bang on that it won’t be accepted, according to some sources it is the gnostics who were putting out this alternative gospel…

        By the way, the dead sea scrolls only contain OT texts, they were not NT writings. Found in the area of the Essene community, and they were from previous to Christ.

        They weren’t found in the Mediteranean basin, but on the banks of (you guessed it) the Dead Sea…

        The scrolls validate the OT and Jewish writings…
        The weren’t in Greek as Dan Brown speculated, wrongly. I guess that is why it is called fiction…

    • #3286392

      IM breaking a promise to myself

      by oneamazingwriter ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      to enter into any discussion on religion, so if you all beat me up, I deserve it, because I don’t like breaking promises to anyone, especially me. That said:

      Those who actually practice Christianity are few and far between and won’t be affected one way or the other because they have made their decision and committment.

      Those who instruct Christianity are already so divided that this is simply another controversial thing for someone to pick up on.

      OK…pelt me…but please keep it water balloons. It’s not my time to go to the cross as far as I know. I was born on that thing and it was faith that got me to climb down and have some joy in this life.

      • #3286371

        Not even safe in here

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to IM breaking a promise to myself

        because the water balloons are filled with COLD water… Did you wear a tee shirt today? (hope hope….) ]:) Pitures! We WANT picutes! ;\

        [i](sorry, sometimes I just can’t help myself and the other times I don’t even try to stop!)

        • #3286356

          :) Now how did I know

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Not even safe in here

          that you would be the frist to arrive? 😀 Hi, jd! I can tolerate cold water if I must. T-Shirt? Hon, I’m typing from home. “Shower and dress” is NEXT on my list of things to do when I am done here. 😀 Gotcha!
          Ah, the truth is fun.

        • #3103527

          It is a gift…

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to :) Now how did I know

          that I have of showing up at the right time! 😀

          No t-shirt, oooooh. nightie? Water balloons work even better on that! ]:)

          As for the rest, WAY too fast, and way too vague!

          Details and pictures! ;\

          And here you thought the TRUTH could be fun? :p

        • #3103513

          I have decided

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to It is a gift…

          that you are in my life to keep me real! ROFL Check out the mess I made above on my last post after following a suggestion from you! Devil or angel, jd, you help me to follow my 11th commandment: Thou Shalt Not Take Thyself Or Life Too Seriously!
          If I were a ballerina I have the sneaking suspicion that you would tie my shoelaces together. The problem there is that I would laugh and mess up the whole show!
          Life: I am determined to “get” this thing while I am in it! 😀
          edited:of course!

      • #3286361

        huh?

        by m_a_r_k ·

        In reply to IM breaking a promise to myself

        [i]”Those who actually practice Christianity are few and far between”[/i]

        Er…what do you mean by that? Christianity is the largest religion on earth, though there are many different sub-religions of it, so to speak. Catholicism, all the Protestant religions, etc. I will agree that many people call themselves Chritian but don’t really have much of a clue what that means and don’t really pay much attention to the teachings.

        • #3286358

          Yup

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to huh?

          There are those who practice religion as an intellectual exercise, or as a fellowship, like joining a fraternity. There are those who define themselves as one religion or another because that’s what their family raised them to say. There are those who have an experience that causes them to make efforts to live in a certain way.

          “I will agree that many people call themselves Chritian but don’t really have much of a clue what that means and don’t really pay much attention to the teachings.” I just took a lot of words to say what you said. Correct me please if I am wrong. 🙂

        • #3075607

          You are correct

          by m_a_r_k ·

          In reply to Yup

          You hit the nail on the head. 🙂

        • #3075605

          See me grin? :)

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to You are correct

          Although I tend to be verbose, for understanding’s sake I rephrase what people say into my own words to see if we truly do agree. Color me a happy camper. Agreement is rare these days!

        • #3075601

          Agreement is damn rare

          by m_a_r_k ·

          In reply to See me grin? :)

          Especially when the subject is religion 😐

        • #3075596

          Religion, politics, sex and money,

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Agreement is damn rare

          are the four topics of controversy that keep debates going among married couples, so why not in the world as a whole? When people find an area they can agree upon and build on that, both can learn, but when they take opposing sides and fight against one another rather than for fighting for a mutual understanding, usually what occurs is a stalemate (and in marriage you can take that literally :D).
          I like debate as long as there are cooling off periods for “warring” parties to remember that we are all in this thing called life together, and that it’s good to take a break and enjoy that we CAN relate at all!

          disclaimer: if I am going to continue to post at length I will not be editing posts, so all will have to deal with my dyslexic typing! :p

        • #3075595

          Oneamazing, if you added beer to your list

          by dmambo ·

          In reply to Agreement is damn rare

          I’d suspect you of eavesdropping on personal conversations between my wife and me 🙂

        • #3075589

          DMambo, all/most wives

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Agreement is damn rare

          or husbands are asking when they debate is do you love “it” (regardless of what “it” is) more than me?

          eidt: after saying I wouldn’t edit I put a / in the title of this reply…since, obviously, as I was writing it, I coudn’t decide which word to use:D

        • #3075583

          Oneamazingwriter

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Agreement is damn rare

          ‘It’ has usually been the computer! 😀

        • #3075562

          Jellimonsta!

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Agreement is damn rare

          I LOVE your new AV. Adorable!

          Do you think TR would pay me to start a Beth Landers column? LOL

          Compromise is a good rule of thumb, Jelli. You do something that she likes and ask her to join you in your computer interest. Sometimes that means that a man goes to the opera and a woman goes to a wrestling match and both go “Ick!” for a time, but you’d be surprised how wanting to learn to be close can help one another acquire new interests neither one would have considered. (That’ll be $5.00 ‘cuz I work cheap! LOL)

        • #3075555

          One: Compromise

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Agreement is damn rare

          Thanks for the props on my avatar (my 3 yr old daughter). 🙂

          Actually, my wife does not have much interest in the computer (luckily I am not a gamer), but we usually find that going on walks, hiking, or rock climbing are some of the few hobbies we do together. 🙂

          Well, obviously we have a few more that I am not going to mention on here! 😉 :8}

        • #3103580
          Avatar photo

          HUH?

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to huh?

          [i]Er…what do you mean by that? Christianity is the largest religion on earth[/i]

          Mark what Planet are you living on? Christianity is a relatively small religion when it comes to Global Population followers the reality is that the followers of Allah vastly outnumber Christians even when you allow the non practising ones.

          Time to face facts Christianity is a small religion for small minds who are unwilling to look at the big picture on a per capita basis there would be as many Buddhists as there are Christians though by their very nature that haven’t spread themselves all over the planet as they don’t need to force people to join their religion unlike the Christians who blindly have been attempting to convert as they go and look at the mess that they have made of things.

          Col

        • #3103565

          Hal, not by the numbers I see

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to HUH?

        • #3105722
          Avatar photo

          James I would question the accuracy of those figures

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to Hal, not by the numbers I see

          They claim that there are now 14 million Jews and Hitler was supposed to have killed off 6 Million in WW11. I find that figure way too low to be believable.

          I can also assure you that the figure of 397 Million Buddhists is way out as well, and I would question the number of Muslims as you have to remember that the Middle East is predominately Muslim as wall as Pakistani, Afghanistan, Indonesian, Philippines and several other smaller countries where they have Legislated that they are Muslims. Not to mention the Ethnic Cleansing that went on in Yugoslavia where it was the Muslims that where killed en mass by the Christians.

          But I’ll give you this that the greatest land mass is covered by the Christian Faith.

          I’ll just dispute the actual number of followers that are claimed to be whatever. If I remember correctly there are in excess of 14 Million people living in Israel and they all claim to be Jews and that doesn’t count the ones living in other parts of the world. I know that the UK, USA and AU have a large Jewish populations.

          Col

        • #3105665

          Figures from another source

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to James I would question the accuracy of those figures

          I normally use adherents.com as my source for religious statistics.

          However I have another source which is in accordance with adherents com. It is a book: “Top 10 of Everything,” 2000 edition — which is more recent than the figures published at adherents.com — and which gives very similar numbers.

          Total world populations of major religions:

          Christianity: 1,965,993,000 [say 2 billion]

          Islam: …… 1,179,326,000 [say 1.2 billion]

          Hinduism: ….. 865,000,000

          Buddhism: ….. 365,875,000

          Judaism: ……. 15,050,000

          However I will suggest that these figures are nominal (i.e. aligned with but not necessarily practising) which would probably put Islam ahead of Christianity.

          It is my understanding that all/most Muslims practise their religion, whereas many Christians will list their religion in a census, but will not regularly attend church services or make any serious attempt to practise their nominated denomination of Christianity.

          [Since originally posting this, I have spoken to two young Muslim men from the Indian sub-continent (Pakistan, India, Bangladesh) and they fully agreed that most Muslims in these countries observe the rituals of this religion.]

          The figure from adherents.com for the total number of Christians, includes “nominal.”

          As for Buddhism, you have to take into account that for half a century religion was totally banned in China, and so that would cut deeply into the Buddhist figure, as Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism lived comfortably together in that acountry.

          Chinese people who were born and raised under the communist regime have no idea whatsoever of the great religious heritage of that country.

          An example is my friend Patrick Li, who is a person of impeccable ethics and integrity. He has no awareness of the three religions mentioned, and simply says: “I believe in God.”

          As for the number of Jews, you are way out of line there also. Israel is NOT inhabited by Jews alone.

          Later I will search for the figures, but I have known at least one Christian — Armenian Orthodox — who was born and raised in Jerusalem.

        • #3287219

          Col as of Mar 29/06, the population if Israel is 6,352,117

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to James I would question the accuracy of those figures

        • #3287197

          and add this in

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to Col as of Mar 29/06, the population if Israel is 6,352,117

          That’s less than the Population of the City of New York, and NYC has more Jewish people than the whole country of Isreal. (as not all people in Isreal are Jewish)

        • #3287115
          Avatar photo

          Well if that what the`

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to Col as of Mar 29/06, the population if Israel is 6,352,117

          Chocolate Investigation Agency insists I will not argue but I find it very hard to believe that there is such a small number of members of the Jewish Faith in Israel. Particular when you consider that the entire population isn’t Jewish it just seems way too small for belief. B-)

          I suppose that people are trying to tell me that Hitler did a much better job that I was lead to believe in ridding the world of Jews. I know that he killed far more Russians and even that vast number killed had very little impact on the entire population of the USSR but he must have done a better job of killing off the Jewish Faith Right? ?:|

          Col ]:)

        • #3105142

          Jews in America

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Col as of Mar 29/06, the population if Israel is 6,352,117

          Many years ago one of my best friends, who was a doctor, worked for a while in an American hospital.

          He sent me a photo of all the doctors. What was very obvious was that almost all of the doctors exhibited distinctly Jewish facial characteristics.

          And before someone jumps down my throat and calls me a racist, I can readily distinguish most Jewish people regardless of the prominence of their breathing apertures.

        • #3103557

          Christianity is a small religion for small minds

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to HUH?

          is a broad statement, although I do understand that Islam is a larger by member religion and I do agree that there are many small minded people in any religion.
          Those who impose their will on others don’t seem to be following any God that I can comprehend, but I do call myself Christian because my experience has been that of receiving grace by faith that opened my mind.
          I believe there is a major difference between making a decision (and acting on that decision) and closing one’s mind to the point of view of others.
          Part of my ancestry is Native American. What supposed Christians did to some of my ancestors in the name of Christ was deplorable. Yet I am a “born-again” Injun by personal experience. (And apparently some “Christian” liked the way some of my ancestors looked and cooked or I wouldn’t exist!) 🙂 Forgiving mankind is at the core of my spiritual beliefs. When I finally got past anger and said, “What a bunch of jerks!” I was able to laugh and feel a part of mankind…for I am a proven jerk myself.
          The faith that I do have allows me to look at myself and say, “Oh! sh*t!” and pray to learn how to turn myself around when I have obviously been wrong.
          If I could have gotten good for God, I would have. I failed miserably. Then I surrendered and found out that it’s the grace of God that makes me good.
          The rest is just left over schrapnel and I am hopeful that it will continue to work itself up and out as I age. Patience with self is a must for me. As a blessed jerk I get to be right sometimes! That’s a definite improvement over who I once was!

        • #3105716
          Avatar photo

          Well I applaud you

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to Christianity is a small religion for small minds

          But from my observations you are in the Minority. Most of the so called Christians that I run into do have closed small minds and are unwilling to accept that there may be some good alternatives available.

          When I constantly hear so called Christians describe people like the Dali Lama [b]As Another Misguided Pagan[/b] I just loose the plot and ignore them all together. From my limited understanding Christianity is supposed to be a forgiving Religion but this is something that I don’t see in it’s followers being practised.

          What makes things even funnier is just how often I’m told what a good Christian that I am and when I reply I’m not actually a Christian but a Buddhist the way that I’m treated by the same jerks that where praising my actions a few seconds previously. If only they knew that I don’t actually practise the Tibetan form of Buddhism they just might take a second look and shut their mouths as I’m more than capable of hitting them and having them dead before they hit the ground but I forgive them and allow them to go on their misguided way. :^0

          If only the same was applied the other way life would be so much more peaceful. 😉

          Col ]:)

        • #3105693

          Have we met the same people?

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Well I applaud you

          Someone is always trying to “save me”. I “beam up” and ask for patience, and it comes. I have a “spiritual son” online who I met six years ago. About a year into our relationship I told him that as a Muslim he was the finest of Christian sons and he told me that as a Christian I was the finest of Muslim mothers. It works for us. It works for our concept of God.
          My concept of God is Spirit and Truth. When we commit to having that take over there’s a lot to chuckle about in this life. I have all of the nasty little glitches in my make up that come at me from others. I’m simply able to tap into a loving Source and let it take over. (Simple isn’t always easy!) A wise woman once said, “We all receive faith. Some receive a thimble full, some receive a tankard full. It’s only important that we use all that we have.” I’m more concerned about hearing when God calls, than I am about what name He is called. My experience of Christ was to be lifted into the loving arms of Father God, who I can call Abba. My son calls Him Allah. Syntax. I don’t quibble over it. When the result is love, compassion, empathy and good cheer, I have no desire to say anyone is wrong. God is, and I am not God. That works really well for me.
          A young woman I know and love was born a Jew. She asked one day if I would try to convert her. I asked, “For what? You look fine to me!” When we get together an incredible spirit of truth, understanding and absolute hilarity takes over. She inquires about my “son” and he inquires about her. She calls us the United Nations.

        • #3105682

          Bet most of the small minded are not really Christians

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Well I applaud you

          but just think they are. Let’s have a quick look at some major points in the Bible and what Jesus taught.

          1. Adam and Eve and the ‘first sin’ bit.

          2. All sins need to be balanced by a sacrifice. All great events need to be celebrated with a sacrifice.

          3. Moses handed down the 10 commandements and the laws.

          4. Jesus teaches tolerance and acceptance of people for what they are. He also teaches that one should always be merciful, like God is.

          5. Jesus states that he is here to complete the old law, is a sacrifice to do that and thus end all sacrifices.

          5a. Well there goes the original sin – sip gone no longer applicable. It does not apply to Christians at all.

          5b. Jesus atones for all our sins, so we no longer have to be punished for them – so why are the priests telling people that they have to atone by saying so many Hail Marys etc?

          5c. The old law is complete and no longer valid – good bye 10 commandments and the rest of the Mosaic law.

          6. Jesus teaches there are but two laws – Love God with all your heart, mind, body and soul; and love your neighbour as yourself – there goes the arguements about who trims whose trees etc.

          6a. These two cover, and greatly expand, everything that was in the 10 commandments and the other Mosaic laws needed to get along with people and not sin.

          7. Jesus taught that once you accept him, he is the only channel you have to God.

          7a. So why do some supposedly Christian churches teach people to pray to, and seek intercession from, Mary and saints – mind you they also do it to statues of those they pray to. Hmmm.

          It certainly makes you wonder what is going on in some churches and the minds of some of their members. I am willing to bet that the small minded people you mentioned all believe in original sin and see the 10 commandments as the most important rules of the Bible. So they are really Jews not Christians.

          BTW God must have a sense of humour, otherewise God would not have given us freewill.

        • #3105623

          Do you mean to tell me Col

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Well I applaud you

          that you forgo a perfect opportunity to brush up on your Kung Fu moves when a particularly annoying JW or Mormon knocks on your door?

          [Edited for typo]

        • #3287260
          Avatar photo

          Yes Jules I do

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to Do you mean to tell me Col

          But I’ll admit to playing [b]Black Sabbaths[/b] War Pigs. ;\

          Or on one particularly less than understanding group that wouldn’t take [b]NO[/b] for an answer I did offer to attend one of their religious meetings if they would attend one of mine. Of course I made out I was a Satan Worshipper and intended to perform a human sacrifice of one of them at the meeting. :^0

          It’s so hard to get your hands on people willing to be scarified these days. :_|

          I haven’t seen any JW’s since then and I’m not complaining either. :p

          Col ]:)

        • #3287246

          A pushy JW

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Do you mean to tell me Col

          Came to my home when my children were still children. I allowed her to speak, gave her a glass of water, listened and asked where she lived. The next day my children and I walked 5 miles to her home. I brought a Bible with me (for the only time in my life when visiting another) and knocked on her door. She asked what I wanted. I asked if I could enter. She let me in. I asked for a glass of water. She looked puzzled and annoyed. I opened my Bible. She asked what I was doing. I said that the day before she had come to my home and I had listened to her, so I was returning the visit and offering to share my faith with her. She threw us out of her home. I then said, “Now please go to your Kingdom Hall and inform all of your friends that I will return every visit made to my home.” From then on they would get out of their car every weekend, canvas the neighborhood, point at my home and walk on by.

        • #3287241

          Oneamazingwriter: Nice job!

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Do you mean to tell me Col

          That is pretty funny what you did to the Jehova’s Witness. Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode when Jerry asks for the telemarketers home number so he could call him back! 😀

          I believe in sharing the ‘good news’ with people, but I do not believe in ramming it down their throat. I guess it is a very delicate balance, and I have not really seen many able to balance it.

        • #3287201

          Not all JWs are obnoxious

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Do you mean to tell me Col

          Once upon a time there was a very attractive young JW woman who invited me to sunbathe nude on her balcony, which was out of the line of sight of any neighbours or passers by.

          I thought this was a friendly gesture, although I never took up the offer.

        • #3287199

          Duplicate post :)

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Do you mean to tell me Col

          courtesy of TechRepublic.

      • #3103687

        “Get thee behind me Satan”

        by jardinier ·

        In reply to IM breaking a promise to myself

        I am pleased, and not at all surprised, that you succumbed so quickly to the temptation of participating in a discussion. 😀

      • #3103502

        If I post a message here……

        by maxwell edison ·

        In reply to IM breaking a promise to myself

        …will I be breaking a similar promise to myself to never get involved in religious discussions? I pray that I won’t be, as Lord only knows, it will be a real sin if I do.

        • #3103486

          Hi! Maxwell!

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to If I post a message here……

          I dunno! At this point I think it’s like dating. For as long as it’s pleasant and you don’t get overly involved, I think it’ll be all right! 😀 I do Love your phrasing! Give ’em hell, Maxwell 😀 ( Now watch someone attack me for that one! ROFL)

        • #3105619

          You are skating on thin ice, Max

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to If I post a message here……

          I believe this is the second religious discussion that you have had a peek at within a relatively short period of time. B-)

    • #3286384

      Gnostics, Apocryphal writings/ text, and Heritics (Oh My!)

      by mickster269 ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      The “Gospel of Judas” has been around – it was written somewhere around 130-170 C.E. It was tossed at the same time as the rest of the Books of Gnostic writings.

      Instead of going into a long discourse about it, I’ll just point to Wikipedia.

    • #3286355

      It won’t change a thing

      by m_a_r_k ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      It doesn’t matter if Judas and Jesus collaborated or not. For those who believe in Christianity, Jesus being crucified was the whole point of his life. The reasons for that go back to the Old Testament and the sacrificial lambs as atonement for sins. Something, someone, somehow had to cause Jesus’ early death. If he’d have lived to a ripe old age and died peacefully, Christianity never would have exploded across the world like it did in the first hundred years A.D. The Romans unwittingly helped spread it by dispersing Jews and Christians across their empire. And that eventually led to the downfall of the Roman empire.

    • #3075472

      A few points to keep in mind people

      by deadly ernest ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      The document translated was written in the 2nd / 3rd century AD in Coptic – a language that Judas did not know. The earliest known copies of any of the gospels date from roughly the same period. That does not indicate when they were written. Recently I bought a book printed in mid 2005 by Robert Heinlein, the copyright information shows it was written and first issued in print in 1952, 53 years prior. Does my new book mean that he did not write it until 2005, no just that this copy is only that old.

      In those days books were hand copied and passed around, and often quickly worn out from use. In some cases they were passed along verbally for years before being written down.

      We do know from other records of that era that all the disciples had written gospels and that there were many other gospels and books used by the Christian churches at that time.

      At one point there was a fight for control of the Christian church and what constituted approved doctrine, the two main groups were the Gnostics and the Authatarians. Also about that time a few people tried to set out what were approved texts and one decided that the church only needed for Gospels, so he went through them all and picked out the four that most closely followed his authatarian doctrinal points of view – Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. He also winnowed out many other books that supported the gnostic view point. And that list was the one used when the bishops decided on what were approved texts.

      Is the black picture of Judas shown in some of the gospels true or is the picture in the Judas gospel true – we don’t know. Certainly the gospels that view shown in the gospels believed to have been the earliest written do not show him as bad as those believed to have been written later during more dangerous times. But what we do know from what is there that Jesus ordered Judas to ‘go and do what you must do’ and Jesus clearly knew what was going to happen. Judas later threw the money away and hung himself, not the typical behaviour of a traitor. I have felt, for over 40 years, that the black picture of Judas was not accurate. And that was well before hearing about this document.

      Will this new document change the way the church hierachy teach things – no way, they have too vested an interest in keeping it as it is. Look at the two core teachings of Jesus and how they are treated.

      1. Jesus taught that all people could communicate with their Heavenly Father, gnostic viewpoint. Yet the major Christian churches teach an authatarian line that the higher up you are in the priesthood the more God listens to you.

      2. Do not worship any graven idols or anyone but God and the only way to God was through Jesus. No room in there to have statues of saints through out a church and no room in there to ask saints to intercede with God for you, that is clearly the job of Jesus. Seems a bit of paganism snuck in there somewhere.

      And don’t forget that Jesus instructed people to tell God their problems, not tell the local priest or minister. Add in that Jesus came to fullfil the old law so the concept of first sin is not valid for a Christian as it only applies to Jews, Jesus was the sacrific to close out that matter.

      • #3075465

        Good points

        by ar-15 ·

        In reply to A few points to keep in mind people

        You make some good points.

        I am baffled that more people don’t see organized religion for what it often is… a blatant power grab.

        • #3075318

          Like any other bureaucracy

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Good points

          The first order of business is to maintain the need for itself.

          The significance of the fact that Christian Bible is the work of men is often overlooked. Those men were ‘reporters’ and that other men acted as editors. It’s a lot like the modern press. Someone deciding what’s important to report and what’s not, and someone else deciding what to print and what not to.

          While I believe in the general message (though not necessarily in the absolute accuracy of every single passage), I am also suspect of anything “a body of men” decides not to tell.

          That suspicion actually makes this newly found document appear more credible to me!

      • #3075452

        First Ernest,

        by oneamazingwriter ·

        In reply to A few points to keep in mind people

        thank you for that well thought out and clear post. I found it to be easy reading.

        Where Judas is concerned, the problem I would have would be in his committing suicide. I do believe a traitor would do such a thing. I consider those who go on crime sprees and murder relatives, etc. and then kill themselves. I don’t believe that suicide is within God’s will, but that’s a very personal belief of mine.

        Also, I can’t picture Christ having someone do His dirty work for Him. I would think that He would simply make Himself available for capture, rather than tell someone else to turn Him in. I have no problem believing, though, that he understood in advance who would turn on Him. (Been there.) To me Judas has represented those who go along with something that will benefit them for as long as they please, and then opt out when the going gets rough. “Copping a plea” is very common even today.
        I’m grateful that my personal experience came before I read the Bible, rather than afterward, or I would have intellectualized so much I never would have gotten the message.
        The life of Christ to me, means forgiveness. Forgiving myself had to come first…and Judas certainly didn’t display that.
        Other than about Judas, though, you and I are in agreement. My sense of “religion” is very simple. I get to talk to the Man at the Top…directly. It’s an awesome experience. I get zapped with pretty stuff in return and get to share that with others. It sure beats anything I can do on my own.

        No doves or lambs were sacrificed in the making of this post! 🙂

        • #3075387

          but who said he comited suicide?

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to First Ernest,

          The new books tell a different story. The suicide part (or parting) came out of Rome.

        • #3075336

          What I know

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to but who said he comited suicide?

          I hold onto, but what I believe remains open to be instructed differently. I do not “know” that he committed suicide. I only believe that, so if you can convince me otherwise, feel free. I prefer an open mind to an empty head. My belief, naturally will remain the same until/unless I learn something that causes me to change what I believe. But have hope for me, Dawgit. When I was a kid I believed brown cows gave chocolate milk! 🙂

        • #3103756

          They lack credibility.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to but who said he comited suicide?

          Look for all other accounts. This is written after the eyewitnesses were dead…

        • #3103719

          There are no gospels written in the hand of any disciple

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to They lack credibility.

          what we have are documents said to be later copies of what they wrote or dictated. The Gospel of Judas that has recently surfaced is in Coptic, Judas did not know Coptic, this is clearly a copy made at a later date. All the scholars agree about this. None know when the original gospel was written or dictated. All the gospels are later copies and date from about the 2nd century AD. Either copies or written well after they were dead.

          In another response I gave a modern example of this same effect. I recently bought a brand new book, just out from the printers, by Robert Heinlein. Did he just write this story when it was printed in 2005 – no the first edition was 1952, 53 years earlier than this copy. Same applies here.

        • #3287133

          I thought the vatican had three Pauline letters in the original hand.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to There are no gospels written in the hand of any disciple

          I thought the might have 1 gospel also.

        • #3287129

          The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to There are no gospels written in the hand of any disciple

          They also have text consistant illustrated manuscripts from circa 175.

          You might want to investigat before claiming none by the hands of the disciples. They do have writings by Appollo, also mentioned by Paul. They also have peices of Christ’s cross.

        • #3287074

          They have may items that they CLAIM are

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          genuine, but they have not allowed them to be scientifically tested. Especially since the incident with the Shroud of Turrin they have become very concerned about having them checked out. Many of the items that they claim are originals were located by Helena, the emperor’s mother, in the 4th century AD and the providence is her statement that she believed them to be true.

        • #3105131

          I trust their word more than I trust people who have an agenda to disprove

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          The problem with carbon dating is consistency.

          We took a leaf in amber and it tested 15,000 years old at OSU. To Cap Poly the same artifact was sent. It came back 14,750 years +- 250 years. We took a fresh leaf, dessicated it and encased it in sap pressurized it and cooked it for 8 months… OOPS… Carbon dating isn’t ALWAYS accurrate.

          The problem is that science is now a religion, but it is a religion with no power to save you from anything but ignorance. It can lead you into stupidity.

        • #3105076

          Science is a religion?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          Please, spare us from having to listen to that tired refrain again.

          Such is naught but sophistry .

        • #3105070

          So, the Catholic Church has NO agenda?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          It seems that you [b]are[/b] willing to accept the word of those with an agenda, so long as such agrees with your beliefs.

          This is a rational position?

        • #3105068

          Reverend Green, of radio past, also claimed to have pieces of The Cross.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          He also claimed to have personally autographed pictures of Jesus Christ.

          Both were available for a suitable donation to his radio ministry.

          Does the Catholic Church know about this?

          Are they the reason that he is no longer on the airwaves?

        • #3286803

          Science fits the criteria for a religion for many liberals.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          — replace it with Science several places…—

          Science is trusted by those who can’t tell a beaker from a bunsen burner. If I start talking valences they are looking for the curtain rods…

          It is believed even in the face of insurmountable evidence. The but what if we are right is just as plausible for the GA. baptist as for the global warming crowd and Greenhouse gase morons…

          They don’t want to be confused with measurements or any potential contradictory facts… For those who can quote, but cannot understand it, Science is a religion.

        • #3287487

          What you allude to is NOT Science!

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          Quoting “science” means nothing.

          Labeling something as “science” does not perforce make it so.

          Science and Religion are distinctly different. The attempt to label Science a religion is naught but an attempt by those who put beliefs before facts to hold out their beliefs as worthy of acceptance without having to be subject to empirical proofs.

          In short, the claim that Science is a religion is sheer intellectual dishonesty.

        • #3150012

          Really, I took some time off to think about this. I stand by the assertion

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          In particular I am targeting the so-called environmentalists, and green house gas gang. For many science is their religion.

          Science is trusted, even though, when proved inaccurate, the progressive revelation of “new data” allows the ignorant to continue to believe that which they want to believe.

          Valences and electron rotation are beyond the ken of the average environmentalist. Most of those characters top out at grade school geometry. Schroedinger’s wave equation, and Uncertainty anyone?

          What is the mathermatical relationship between speed and accelleration. If you don’t know what it is, then your faith in science is a religion for you not a science. What is the mathematical relationship between distance and time.

          For those of you who wonder if I know what I am talking about:
          d=1/2(a*t); this is the 1st derivative of
          s=a*t

          For those of you without a calculus background, and physics, to you science is religion. You may use technology, and the fruit of others labors, but you don’t understand them…

          If it can’t be measured it is opinion. If the facts aren’t consistant, don’t bother telling the facts as their minds are made up.

          Sandy, I hope I answered your response. You sound like an old Lieut. Cmdr on the Enterprise in 1977. I told him he has the right to be wrong…

        • #3149892

          “Religion” vs “religion” – The devil’s in the details.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          The discussion at hand is about “Religion,” as in definition 1b), below shown, not “religion”.

          In your remarks re. Science, you are using “religion,” per definition 3) and/or 4).

          Therefore, within the context of this discussion, equating “Religion” with Science is incorrect.

          Give close attention to the etymology.

          ==================================================

          Main Entry: re?li?gion

          Pronunciation: ri-‘li-j&n

          Function: noun

          Etymology: Middle English [i]religioun[/i], from Latin [i]religion-[/i], [i]religio[/i] supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from [i]religare[/i] to restrain, tie back — more at RELY

          1 a : the state of a religious
          b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
          2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
          3 [i]archaic[/i] : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
          4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

        • #3151103

          Religion –> Look at the end of your own section that I have requoted…

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          Most environmentalists with no understanding want to restrain our activity. Look at the etymology yourself…

          The answer is in the etymology as well as 3 and 4 definitions.

          The discussion at hand is about “Religion,” as in definition 1b), below shown, not “religion”. In your remarks re. Science, you are using “religion,” per definition 3) and/or 4). Therefore, within the context of this discussion, equating “Religion” with Science is incorrect. Give close attention to the etymology. ================================================== Main Entry: re?li?gion Pronunciation: ri-‘li-j&n Function: noun Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back…

          This is the Kyoto treaty and Carbon gas concern in a nutshell.

        • #3150949

          Huh?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to The Vatican treasures Pg 50.

          To repeat,

          “The [b]discussion at hand is about[/b] “Religion,” as in [b]definition 1b)[/b], below shown, not “religion”.

          In [b]your remarks re. Science[/b], you [b]are using[/b] “religion,” per [b]definition 3) and/or 4)[/b].

          Therefore, within the context of this discussion, equating “Religion” with Science is incorrect.

          Give close attention to the [b]etymology[/b].”

          ==================================================
          Main Entry: re?li?gion

          Pronunciation: ri-‘li-j&n Function: noun

          [b]Etymology[/b]: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio [b]supernatural[/b] constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back…

        • #3103725

          The intriguing part is we have two endings

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to First Ernest,

          In one story Judas discards the money and hangs himself, wish I could remember the refernce for it. In the other, in Acts, he uses the money to buy a field and later he falls down a slope in the field and dies there. Seems the early writers could not make up their minds about him.

          One thing that many forget when reading the scriptures is that the culture that existed when those events occurred is different to ours. In those days you could not walk up to the authorities and confess to a crime until AFTER you had been charged. No one had laid any specific charges against Jesus until the events with Judas. Jesus HAD to be charged, turned in, and executed for the prohphesies to come true.

          The Jewish leaders had issued a general charge and asked for witnesses to identify and accuse the one concerned, remember at that time they had NO eveidence of any wrongdoing by Jesus, Judas went and did as he was told ‘do that which you must do’ and laid the specific charge against Jesus and then identified him, like a modern day line up. Thus the requirements of the law for the accuser and identification was upheld. Judas was said to have done this as an informer, as such the authorities could not use his information unless they paid him for it, thus the pieces of silver.

          Anyway, we are all entitled to have our own opinion on this and until we stand before Jesus and ask him for the full detail we wont know for sure. However, I believe that Judas was not the total evil being that the later gospels paint him to be. Thouogh I sincerely doubt he was a saint.

        • #3103660

          Thanks, Ernest

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to The intriguing part is we have two endings

          What you wrote certainly sheds a different light on what I had believed. I have no problem accepting that the culture was very different at that time. “In those days you could not walk up to the authorities and confess to a crime until AFTER you had been charged.” I’ll be thinking about that most assuredly in the days ahead, and because I am who I am, I will look for information that verifies what you have stated. (Always check the source!)
          Any helpful hint as to how I could do that would be greatly appreciated.

        • #3103464

          You should always check for yourself

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Thanks, Ernest

          and one source that you can check is by asking God which is correct. Just remember God always answers your questions and prayers, but God does not always answer in your timeframe. God may decide that before you can understand an answer you must learn other things at it is years later that you get the answer to the question. God does not use a drive through window or a fast food ethic of instant gratification. I sometimes think this is because what he calls a day and what we call a day are two totally different time scales.

        • #3103569

          Hanging of Judas

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to The intriguing part is we have two endings

          It is in Matthew 27:5 that Judas is purported to have hung himself.

          It is in Acts 1:18 in which he ‘fell headlong and burst at the midsection’.

          Check this link for some food for thought.
          http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2846

          Regards,
          Mike <><

        • #3103465

          AP got it totally wrong

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Hanging of Judas

          Thanks for the Matthew reference, I always remember the content of what I read, but not always where I read it or the chapter. I just read the web page and the references and set AP an e-mail with the following content:

          Start quote

          Matthew 27: 4 – 8 states that Judas threw the money in the gutter and hanged himself. Then the
          priests took counsel and bought the potter’s field to bury strangers and it was then called the
          field of blood.

          Acts 1:18 – 19 states that Judas himself bought the field and then fell down the field, clearly
          he was alive at that point, and the field was then known as the field of blood. No mention
          of a potter’s field at all.

          Your claim about Judas hanging himself than fall to the field just does not hold water as he
          could not have bought the field after his death.

          End quote

          I think it interesting to note that there is a significant time difference between when Matthew was written and when Acts were believed to be written. Also they were written by different people living under different socio-political pressures. It is very possible, as some scholars believe, that Judas was being intentional demonised by Matthew as it helped him with other issues. I don’t know, I was not there – it is my belief that Matthew is not accurate in his attitude to Judas.

          Edited to correct wrong references to John that should have been Matthew. 3.30 am after a very long day and after just writting about John at length sorry for any misunderstanding.

        • #3103451

          Let me know…

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to AP got it totally wrong

          If you get a reply from AP let me know. I would be interested in seeing how they try to refute your message.
          Mike <><

        • #3105531

          Hey Jelli AP did reply, and with another link.

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Let me know…

          Here is their reply and my response.

          Dear Mr. Bywater,

          The following link will take you to an article on the subject in question.

          http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/569

          I hope that you find it helpful.

          Sincerely,

          Eric Lyons

          Dear Eric Lyons,

          Thank you for your response, and your time involved.

          I am sorry but that article, like the first, appears to me to be revisionistic in an attempts
          to reconcile the unreconcilable. In Matthew 27:1 to 11 it is a clear statement that Judas
          was supposed to approach the priests the morning after the betrayal and was rejected,
          he left and hung himself, they then bought the field, then went on to take Jesus before the
          govenor. Thus Judas dies the day after the betrayal and before Jesus.

          Yet in Acts 1:1 to 22 we are clearly told that Jesus has died and been resurected verse 9
          describes the ascent on the cloud. Then verse 12 tells us that they had returned to Jerusalem
          from Olivet about a week’s journey. Then we are told that Judas purchased the field and fell
          down it to his death and the field is now called the Field of Blood.

          The wording is clear in both, to claim that one is absolutely clear in meaning while the other
          is interpretive is wrong. This screams of revisionism and attempts to mould things to suit the
          authors own point of view. Another intersting point is that the fate of Judas is not mentioned
          in the Gospels of Mark, John, or Luke. Yet if Judas had died as stated in Matthew this would
          have been a significant enough event, showing instant retribution, that it would have been noted.
          To me, this is more an indication that the bit about Judas’ hanging was not part of the original
          text but inserted into later copies that have reached through the ages.

          The maxim about acting through others is valid only where the others are acting on, or under,
          the first persons direct, or specific, orders or directions. To take your own example: If a young
          man asks his father to buy him a car and the father does so then the father is acting for the son.
          However, if the father decides ‘it is time my son had a car’ and goes and buys it without talking
          to the son then the father is acting on his own behalf. The maxim you quote relies heavily on the
          person being acted for giving the direction or instruction without that direction then the maxim
          does not, cannot, apply and nor can an interpretation reliant on that be valid.

          BTW I do find the few articles I have read interesting and worth reading, if only to make me think.
          I am just sorry that me slow speed access doe not allow me enough time to go through your site
          in detail – when I can get a high speed connection I will do so.

        • #3105505

          Deadly Ernest: AP

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Let me know…

          Oh, oh, looks like you may be on a merry go round! 😀

        • #3105830

          An alternate theory

          by faradhi ·

          In reply to AP got it totally wrong

          I amazes me that that people who take a translation of a translation of a translation, …, at face value that they are shocked there may be some internal conflicts.

          Additionally, the bible is a mix of metaphors, symbolism, history and allegory. As such, there is a real possibility that there will be times when everything is taken literally, even with perfect translations, that it will conflict.

          As such I propose that both the writings could be stating the same thing in separate ways. What if Judas threw the money away and hanged himself as Matthew describes. The priests purchase potters field with the Judas’ money. (Thus Judas’ purchasing the land.) Fitting both scriptures. The Judas was buried in the field which could be descibed as “fell down the field.” As described in Acts.

          I am merely suggesting that none of these writings should be taken at face value. There is no right or wrong only it is possibility.

          But again, I am no religious scholar. I know this is rather simplistic. However, Just like I can not prove that either of the scriptures are wrong, you can not prove i am.

          -edited for grammer, I may have actually made it worse.

        • #3105757

          like a potato

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to An alternate theory

          so they made a potato out of him? reclycled him? doesn’t sound harsch enuf, if they hated him. And that would then go against Christs teaching, no?

          (potato; cut up in little pieces an planted in a field, grows more potatoes, ‘be fruitfull and multiply’ and recylcled.)

        • #3105752

          sorry dawgit, you lost me

          by faradhi ·

          In reply to An alternate theory

          That is not hard mind you.

          But I missing the point in your post.

        • #3105776

          Off Topic, but I don’t know where else to post this

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Hanging of Judas

          Below this discussion there are some interesting sponsored links, and I followed this one:

          http://www.wizardacademy.com/TheGospelofDonQuixote.asp

          Just last week in a blog post I referred to myself as a female Don Quixote.
          On my planet coincidence is just another way God says , “Hi! Gotcha!” to me. It keeps me giggling.

          A different kinda duck,
          Beth

      • #3103760

        Ernest, I heartily disagree with point 1.

        by x-marcap ·

        In reply to A few points to keep in mind people

        1. No, that isn’t what the New Testament teaches. There is only one High Priest, Christ Jesus of the order of Melchizidek. There is one between you and the Father, and he is your advocate, Christ Jesus… Any other understanding is a twisting of the scripture.Man’s construct within the Catholic Church notwithstanding…

    • #3075469

      Grey is the new Black and White

      by ar-15 ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      Having long ago spent much of my early adulthood studying Christianity, I find this most interesting.

      The history of the early church and its origins in pagan rites is very interesting for those who like to study history.

      Christianity as a religion was co-opted early on for political/power purposes and since has led many astray from a truly spiritual path…

      It is often said that if Jesus were to return today he would not be acknowledged by those who proclaim to follow him.

      One last point and then I will stop babbling…

      I also find it interesting that the Bible teaches that Satan comes as an angel of light. Satan decieves those who would follow God into following him. Leaves us with a bit of a catch-22 wouldn’t you say?

      • #3075445

        All that glitters is not gold.

        by oneamazingwriter ·

        In reply to Grey is the new Black and White

        Abusers are the most charming people in the world…they have to be to get people to come close to them and get into a position of some authority over them. If evil didn’t look good and intially feel good, who would bother with it?
        My paraphase of an example in the Bible of “believers” is those who say, “Look what I did for you or in Your Name?” and Jesus replying, “Never knew you. You should have been talking to me instead of about me. We might have worked well together.”

      • #3075403

        It is true

        by faradhi ·

        In reply to Grey is the new Black and White

        if Jesus returned today he would not be acknowledged.

        In fact, I would say that he would probably be locked, our people would attempt to lock him, in a mental institution.

        I can see it now. “I am Jesus Christ.” Counselor, “Yeah right, here is your thorazine and how did you get out of your room!” 😀

        • #3075397

          Maybe not…

          by mickster269 ·

          In reply to It is true

          I know a few guys that go by the name Jesus…And some of them even play Major League Baseball.

          Btw, on the Chicago Cubs, there is a player named “Angel Pagan “.

          Talk about a sense of humor.

        • #3103686

          If he came in human form

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to It is true

          no doubt he would not be recognised.

          However that is not how Scripture portrays his return:

          Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

      • #3103757

        Test the Spirits.

        by x-marcap ·

        In reply to Grey is the new Black and White

        You don’t have to be deceived.

    • #3075333

      The Spiritualist’s viewpoint.

      by deepsand ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      I’ve a friend who is a Reverend in the Spiritualist Church.

      Some time ago she told me that the Christian characterization of Judas was quite wrong; and that, in fact, in the Spirit realm Jesus & Judas were/are the closest of friends!

      • #3287181
        Avatar photo

        Actually it makes a lot of sense

        by hal 9000 ·

        In reply to The Spiritualist’s viewpoint.

        If you needed something nasty done to you and at your own planning who better to trust than one of your closest friends who is willing to lay down their life for you or worse?

        Col ]:)

        Well just to finish off the week properly after upsetting at least 2 of the TR Staff I’ll post this and see if they throw me off all together.

        http://tinyurl.com/jrfm9

        [b]Jay look and Suffer!!!!!!!!![/b] :p
        Remember I have my eye on you all!

        • #3287165

          I like your artistic effort

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Actually it makes a lot of sense

          but I am more than a little concerned about your understanding of basic mathematics.

        • #3287113
          Avatar photo

          Jules I didn’t do it [this time] :p

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to I like your artistic effort

          It was a present from one of the Peers and since I’ve upset a few people this week I couldn’t help myself from using it. :^0

          As far as my understand of Basic Maths is concerned aren’t you now Glad that I wasn’t put in charge of the Cyclotron that was proposed to be built at Lucas Heights? I could have taken out all of Sydney in a Fission Reaction by accident. 😀

          NAAH I wouldn’t have done it [b]Accidentally[/b] It would have been on [b]Purpose![/b] B-)

          Col ]:)

        • #3287085

          Eminently logical.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Actually it makes a lot of sense

          And, from personal experience, I can attest to the fact that such ocassions do indeed arise.

        • #3287057
          Avatar photo

          Well if you look at the facts

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to Eminently logical.

          Jesus was a direct descendant of the House of David and hence the Rightful Ruler of the Jewish People.

          Judea at the time was an invaded land controlled by the Roman Empire.

          All through their History the Jews had a history of being subservient to overseers or even to be seen as nothing more than slaves. This predates the time in Egypt even according to the Old Testament.

          Now if that part of the New Testament is correct that Jesus was a direct descendant of the House of David I would look at the movement that he started as a Political Movement and an attempt to rid his Land of the Invaders, Oppressors or however you like to view them. If that is correct he would have needed 2 distinct circles of inner advisers those with a Military insight on how to throw out the Romans and those who where True Believers in his supposed powers Paul fell into the latter group and not the former group while Judas was in the former group and a Loyal Servant of Jesus so much so that he would do anything necessary to allow Jesus to rise to his rightful place in Judea and over through the Invading Romans.

          Paul on the other hand would have been necessary to stir up the People and get them to do his bidding we have seen something similar to this recently when the population rose up against the Shar of Iran and threw him out. Judea at the time could not hope to win a Military Victory against Rome so it had to sustain a Popular Uprising and rely on People Power to throw out the Romans and make it distasteful for them to return.

          There are several references to Jesus heritage the most obvious one being the title bestowed on him as [b]King of the Jews[/b] at his crucification. There is also an obvious time problem in the time taken for Jesus to die as it happened too quickly as with any form of crucification the cause of death was suffocation because a person can not breath while being suspended by the arms and have all their weight hung off them in that fashion. The Vinegar told in the story of the Crucification is misunderstood as at the time it was used as a sedative not some form of cruel punishment as alluded to by the latter writers of that passage of the bible. They simply [b]Didn’t understand the consequences of using one chemical in conjunction with another and what it would do.[/b]

          Then there is the story of Lazarus and the way that the Magdalen approached Jesus and spoke to him at the time no woman could have spoke to a male like that unless she was close family example a sister or wife could get away with it but not as supposed by the people who currently interpret the Bible a complete stranger.

          The story of Barabbas is another furphy as well as the Romans never let a convicted prisoner go for any reason and the idea of pacifying the Jews would have been so foreign to their way of thinking as to be unbelievable. If they wanted to pacify the Jews they would have used one of their Legions not let a prisoner go. While it sounds good now at the time it was not only unthinkable it was impossible to comprehend the Romans held their Empire with the [b]Might Makes Right Idea.[/b]

          Anyway I’ve said enough to upset the Rabid Christians and I’ll be expecting a solid wall of flame to descend upon me for having the audacity to post the above so I’m about to climb into my fireproof clothing. :^0

          Col ]:)

          Well just to finish off the week properly after upsetting at least 2 of the TR Staff I’ll post this and see if they throw me off all together. :^0

          http://tinyurl.com/jrfm9

          [b]Jay look and Suffer!!!!!!!!!
          Remember I have my eye on you ALL![/b]

        • #3287043

          Happy Easter!

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Well if you look at the facts

          Perfect timing for your post.

          But then you planned it that way, did’nt you.

        • #3287022

          people only….

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to Well if you look at the facts

          ..get upset when their own insecurity is threatened. (one learns that in begining ab-normal psyc.) 🙂

      • #3287168

        Spiritualists

        by jardinier ·

        In reply to The Spiritualist’s viewpoint.

        I have actually had quite a lot of contact with these people over the years.

        I have found mediums in general to be a very unreliable source of factual information.

        • #3287146

          spiritualists aren’t they the people who work

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Spiritualists

          for Dewars, Bells, Jim Beam etc that test the batches and tell them they have the spirit mixed properly and it is now ready for bottling etc.

        • #3287111
          Avatar photo

          OOH :_|

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to spiritualists aren’t they the people who work

          That’s such a great job and one that I wouldn’t mind doing if I wasn’t mentally deficient and working IT. :8}

          Just keep the Wine and Beer out of the Job Description and I’d be as happy as a Pig in Mud. :p

          Col ]:)

        • #3287086

          Only those with a small “s.”

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to spiritualists aren’t they the people who work

          Those with a big “S” cost to much to hire.

        • #3287088

          Spiritualist Reverends vs Mediums

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Spiritualists

          Unlike mediums, Reverends are the clergy of the Spiritualist Church. It is important to not equate the latter with the former.

          As an agnostic, I make no claims re. the legitimacy of the beliefs of said church, but simply offer my personal observations of several of their members.

          I can say that there are several who are repeatedly sought out by law enforcement to aid in their investigations.

          I can also say that the particular Reverend noted is amazingly accurate in predicting the outcome of sporting events; in fact, accurate enough to “make book” on. This from a woman who knows nothing of sports!

        • #3287053

          Whoa!!!

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Spiritualist Reverends vs Mediums

          Hey Boone, does she know if Bret Favre will return?? ?:| 😀

        • #3287045

          She does’nt even know who Bret Favre is.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Whoa!!!

          She is presented with a list of blind questions, identified to her as simply, for example, Question No. 1, Question No. 2, etc..

          For each question, she is asked to select from a list of blind answers, identified to her as simply Answer A, Answer B, etc..

          In short, she does not know the actual content of either the questions or the answers.

        • #3105143

          A happy medium

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Spiritualist Reverends vs Mediums

          is a clairvoyant who charges $150 per private session, and is booked up six months ahead. 🙂

          I am not aware of there being spiritualist churches in Sydney which have ordained persons. In fact I cannot imagine how any spiritualist could legitimately carry the title of “Reverend.” However in American I guess anything is possible in the area of religious sects.

          More than 20 years ago I was given readings by two amateurs. One attended one of the most respected Spiritualist Churches in Sydney, and the other was a Charismatic Christian who was afraid to reveal her gift.

          Everything these two girls predicted has come true, with the exception of publishing a book. I have written the book, but not attempted to publish it so even that might come true.

          What amazed me especially was that both girls said I would do “a lot of writing.” This baffled me at the time, because writing was not on my list of planned projects. But sure enough, eight years later I acquired my first computer and wrote a science fiction novel as well as other things.

        • #3105064

          The reluctant Reverend.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to A happy medium

          Yes, the General Assembly of Spiritualists does has such title; a Reverend is the equivalent of a Pastor in other churches.

          The Reverend in question too is given to hiding her light under a bushel.

          For some time she has her own congregation, give instructions on Spiritualism to members and perspective members, and gave readings for members.

          She relied on voluntary donations for her support; such ultimately proved to be insufficient for her basic needs.

          Being unable to bring herself to charge for her services, she sought gainful employment elsewhere, and now give readings, still at no charge, only to close friends and those recommended by such. This she does infrequently, as she finds it quite emotionally draining.

    • #3103690

      For what it’s worth

      by jardinier ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      Here is a list I found on the web of the most likely authors and dates of the books of the New Testament.

      MATTHEW: Matthew , 60s A.D.
      MARK: John Mark, late 50s ? early 60s.
      LUKE: Luke, 60.
      JOHN: John, late 80s ? early 90s.
      ACTS: Luke, 61.
      ROMANS: Paul, 55.
      1 CORINTHIANS: Paul, 54.
      2 CORINTHIANS: Paul, 55.
      GALATIANS: Paul, 49.
      EPHESIANS: Paul, 60.
      PHILIPPIANS: Paul, 61.
      COLOSSIANS: Paul, 60.
      1 THESSALONIANS: Paul, 50 ? 51.
      2 THESSALONIANS: Paul, 50 ? 51.
      1 TIMOTHY: Paul, 62.
      2 TIMOTHY: Paul, 63.
      TITUS: Paul, 62.
      PHILEMON: Paul, 60.
      HEBREWS: (Paul, Apollos, Barnabas…?) 60’s.
      JAMES: James, half brother of Jesus, 40’s or 50’s.
      1 PETER: Peter, 63.
      2 PETER: Peter, 63 ? 64.
      1 JOHN: John, late 80’s – early 90’s.
      2 JOHN: John, late 80’s – early 90’s.
      3 JOHN: John, late 80’s – early 90’s.
      JUDE:Jude, half brother of Jesus, 60’s or 70’s.
      REVELATION: John, late 80’s – early 90’s.

      • #3103632

        Good list and I have no info that contradicts this,

        by x-marcap ·

        In reply to For what it’s worth

        Good consensus list of dates…
        Hebrews is considered by many to be strictly the work of Paul, I have no opinion, as I haven’t done research on it…

      • #3103503

        Do you have references for known copies with

        by deadly ernest ·

        In reply to For what it’s worth

        those dates. All the books etc that I have read give similar dates but they are ‘assigned’ dates – that is the scholars believe them to be written at those dates for particular reasons from research not physical evidence. The datings of the epistles are assigned by the reports of the travels of the apostles and some of the matters referred to in them. I have not seen anything that has copies of those works scientifically proven to be from those dates.

        Carbon dating is good. However, they tend to assign dates plus or minus so many years (often 30 to 50) but where additional dating support has been available carbon dating has been accurate to within plus / minus 10 years. Technically a document carbon dated as 130 AD could be from 80 AD to 180 AD but the reality is that it most likely 120 AD to 140 AD.

        BTW Most scholars are now sure that the John who wrote the books of John is different to the one who wrote Revelations and that niether is John the Beloved, Disciple of Jesus. Yet many non scholars think they are all the same person.

        • #3105681

          That is recent discussion, and I believe false.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Do you have references for known copies with

          Since The writer of Revelation descibes himself as the disciple Jesus loved, it was either John, or a massive fraud.

          I understand that John was much older and writing in Greek, a second language that he was becoming more fluent in. It would be like me writing in French now that I am much older. My construction is widely different than it would have been 20 years ago. In fact since I have been writing in French daily for work for the last 5 years, I am much more fluent in French. We have a Canadian subsidiary and there are people whom I cannot communicate with in English… We have less communications problems in French, or German.

          When I look back at my writing from 5 years ago, it was text book French. Now I am more literate, and my sentance structure has changed, and I am less gramatical…

        • #3105672

          Q

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to That is recent discussion, and I believe false.

          Where in Revelations does John state he is the disciple Jesus loved? I do not remember seeing that, and if it is there, why is there so much speculation that it is not the same John? ?:|

        • #3105601

          That is not what the scholars believe nor did

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to That is recent discussion, and I believe false.

          Dionysius, that is the lead guy who decides, in the 3 rd century AD, what was acceptable books for the Bible at what was not. His list was later ratified at the Council of Nicea. From

          http://www.abu.nb.ca/Courses/NTIntro/Rev.htm

          C. Although he did not reject its inspiration and canonicity, as some of his predecessors did, Dionysius of Alexandria (died 265) still did not accept the Johannine authorship of the Book of Revelation. He correctly observed that there were substantial differences between the Gospel of John and the letters, on the one hand, and the Book of Revelation, on the other, too many, in his opinion, to allow for the attribution of Johannine authorship to the latter. The following are the differences noticed by Dionysius (as quoted by Eusebius, H.E. 7.25):

          1. In the Book of Revelation, the author identifies himself as John, whereas in the Gospel of John and the Johannine letters there is no such self-identification: “For the evangelist nowhere adds his name, nor yet proclaims himself, throughout either the Gospel or the Epistle….But he who wrote the Apocalypse at the very beginning puts himself forward.” Moreover, the John who wrote the Book of Revelation did not identify himself as the one whom Jesus loved, the one who leaned back on Jesus’ breast, or as an eyewitness and hearer of the Lord, as one would expect John the apostle to have done. (Dionysius speculated that the author could have been John Mark.)

          2. The theological conceptions of the Gospel of John and the letters on the one hand and the Book of Revelation, on the other, are very different: “In other words, it is obvious that those who observe their character throughout will see at a glance that the Gospel and Letter have one and the same complexion. But the Apocalypse is utterly different from, and foreign to, these writings; it has no connection, no affinity, in any way with them; it scarcely, so to speak, has even a syllable in common with them.” What he presumably means is that the theological content of the two differ significantly.

          3. The vocabulary and style of the Gospel of John and the Johannine letters are different from those of the Book of Revelation: “For the former are not only written in flawless Greek, but also show the greatest literary skill in their diction, their reasonings, and the constructions in which they are expressed. There is a complete absence of any barbarous word, or solecism, or any vulgarism whatever….But I will not deny that the other writer had seen revelations and received knowledge and prophecy; nevertheless I observe that his style and that his use of the Greek language is not accurate, but that he employs barbarous idioms, in some places committing downright solecisms.” The author of the Book of Revelation did not compose according to the stylistic conventions of standard literary Greek, but is characterized by a peculiar Greek style that has a Semitic flavor to it, which Dionysius found uncultured and offensive. For example, the author often does not use the proper case of a noun after a preposition (see Rev 1:4) What is even more significant for the question of authorship, however, is the fact that the author of the Book of Revelation uses different words or forms to express the same idea found in the gospel and the letters. For example, although Christ is called metaphorically a “lamb” in both, in the Book of Revelation the word used is arnion, whereas in the Gospel of John it is amnos. Similarly, the author of the gospel uses the form Ierosoluma for the city of Jerusalem, whereas the author of the Book of Revelation uses the form Ierousal?m.

          end quote

          So the person whose judgement you support in what are the appropriate gospels says Revelations is NOT written by John the Beloved. Do you now say he is wrong in his judgement? If so then was his judgement about what to include wrong also? Feel like your caught in a cleft stick?

        • #3105680

          Try the Vatican and see if they’ll part with a scrap of the scrolls

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Do you have references for known copies with

          When they get done laughing, I would then say please.

          I expect that the early manuscripts are treated like the other Vatican treasures, hermetically sealed rooms, controlled humidity, kept in the dark, etc…

          Have you seen the Vatican treasures when they were touring the US. I saw them in Cleveland. They were magnificent. The cross with a piece of the true cross made my hair stand on end. I was spooked…

          Tim

    • #3103539

      Cutting through

      by faradhi ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      IMHO, i think we tend to take all religion too literally and seriously.

      I believe God has a sence of humor. How do I know this? My wife told me that she once prayed to God to let her marry a boy named “Bryan” she had a crush on. God sent her Me! 😀 So, I make the following statements not intending to offend but instead to keep a little humor in the converstation.

      There are three western religions (broken into various sects) that all have different points of view of what happened in the first century. All the Sects will have a different point of view.

      I am not a religious scholar. I am sure I have proven this by my comments in both the religious discussions I have participated in. Therefore, what I have learned is that there is no way anyone can prove that any writing is the absolute correct one.

      Additionally, I have learned that Satan will try to trick me into following him by trying to trick me in to believing that he is the Christ.

      So what am I left with. First, all the three religions that talk about that time in history believe in One God the creator, that will send a messiah. One believes that has happened, two are still waiting. (I think Muslims are still waiting, I may be wrong.)

      Second, other than some rituals and don’t do’s like eating pork or meat on fridays and the like, all can be boiled down to Be Nice and Play well with others, Help those who need help, and Believe in God.

      Again, I am not a religious scholar (I know that because my pastor never used the phrase Be Nice as scripture), But as I understand it, as long as I do those things, I am set. Since, other than the believe in God part, I would do if I was an atheist, it seems simple enough.

      So in summation, I believe. Be specific in prayer or I might end up with someone like myself. And All the other stuff is periphery. If Judas was a traitor or not is meaningless to the overall point that Jesus gave his life for us. (If you believe in Christianity as I do.) Including who wrote what and when.

      Just my two cents. (let the floggings begin!)

      • #3103508

        Floggings?

        by oneamazingwriter ·

        In reply to Cutting through

        Of course God has a sense of humor. I am his joke on mankind! That I continue to survive amazes even me! 😀 It is when I am able to laugh at myself that I feel closest to God, and I feel close VERY often each day.

        When I was new to prayer, I prayed for a car that I thought I “needed”. While I was on my knees asking the phone rang. A woman offered me a car for free! When the hair on the back of my neck settled down, I went to her home and picked up the car. It then sat in my driveway for two months while I worried about how I would register and insure it, since I was as poor as a church mouse.
        I finally decided to give it away. When a man came to pick it up, he found that it had died in my driveway. (He was able, though, to get $25 for junking it.)
        So now I ask God what I need!! It’s simpler!!

        • #3103479

          Floggings

          by faradhi ·

          In reply to Floggings?

          Yep, I usually get pounded about how I don’t understand and I am going to hell whenever I make comments about how I practice my spirtuality. Which is simply and with humor.

          Maybe, stoning would be more relevant.

          Oh well, It seems there is a lot of us who try to avoid religious discussions that got sucked into this one.

        • #3103444

          Ah, faradhi,

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Floggings

          some people just haven’t had their joy click in yet. With some who knows if it ever will! “Be of good cheer; I have overcome the world” is something I take seriously… 😀 When I lose my sense of humor I know that there’s something wrong with me and the way I am looking at life. I go off alone and look for the punch line. I know it’s in there somewhere.
          That doesn’t mean that I never know sorrow, for there’s a thin line between sorrow and joy. It just means that I keep falling over the line into joy once again.
          My mother used to say that I was a child that couldn’t be punished because I got happy wherever I was at. As an adult I became childlike again after I passed through the nonsense that we all go through at one point or another. I’m an anti-terrorist. I figure terror is simply a form of fear, and those who try to inflict fear are more afraid than I am. Joy is the opposite of terror. That I am usually in the minority tells me about the state of affairs in the world around me. The only affairs that I have to take care of are my own, and I do that with a smile on my face. On an off moment I can join the majority, but it never lasts for long. My God laughs.

        • #3103433

          See, faradhi this is why it’s nice being Buddhist.

          by mickster269 ·

          In reply to Floggings

          I can read all the statements here, follow the arguements/discussions, and nod my head wisely.

          In that it really doesn’t matter to me what is true or false in the Christian writings, and it’s not going to bother me either way, I can watch, and even comment, and not ruffle feathers.

          Finally, (again, being Buddhist) I can smile, and say- “Yep, yer probably right. Or Not. But I’m really glad you believe in what you believe.”

          Now, excuse me while I go “Kung-Fu” all over this balky mail server. In a Shao-Lin / Zen sorta way, of course.

        • #3105762

          I’m not so sure

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to See, faradhi this is why it’s nice being Buddhist.

          I remember Buddist B-B-Qs when I was on the other side of the Earth. Wasn’t very pretty & did nothing to make me see any more sense in any Religion. (God, yes, Religion, no thanks)

        • #3287689

          Buddhist BBQ?

          by mickster269 ·

          In reply to I’m not so sure

          Are you refering to the Vietnam protest in the 60’s ?

          If you are, that’s about as close as a Buddhist Terrorist you’ll ever get.

          – edited to fix an amazing typo in the title.

        • #3287322

          That would be it

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to Buddhist BBQ?

          That is what I was talking about, the monks who thought it made things better somehow. And terrorists / freedom fighters, who would pray to Budda during the day, and kill you come nightfall. NO Religion is inocent. And fanatical believers of any religion are dangerous people. Just, Please don’t blame God for it. It’s people.

        • #3287293

          I resemble

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Buddhist BBQ?

          that remark! “- edited to fix an amazing typo in the title.” 😀

        • #3105574

          Praying for what you want

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Floggings?

          In a previous incarnation (well it seems like that) — well 40 years ago, I dispensed with most of my material possessions and set out to live by faith alone, according to the precepts of Jesus as laid out in the Sermon on the Mount. A colleague joined me in this venture into hitherto (to our knowledge) unmapped territory.

          We very soon found that we were given (through voluntary donations by individuals) everything we NEEDED — food, shelter and so forth.

          We WANTED other things, but we were given precisely what we needed — no less, no more.

          Nowadays I don’t pray at all, because I figure God can read my thoughts. So I just accept gratefully what comes my way, and don’t waste any energy suggesting to God what I would like.

          Without ever STRIVING to acquire material things, I now find myself enjoying a much higher quality of life (materially) than I would ever have imagined.

        • #3105565

          Relationship

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Praying for what you want

          Jules, as I am sure you know, praying is ‘talking’ with God (if you take the time to listen too).

          It is about building the relationship with God, if you want a solid relationship, you need to cultivate it. This is just as much the same for the relationship with God as it is with any other human being. IMHO.

        • #3105553

          That shows

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Relationship

          in the smile on your daughter’s face, Jellimonsta. 🙂

        • #3105552

          Why Thank You! :)

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to That shows

          I wish I could take credit for the smile, but the truth of the matter is; that would be my wife who makes her smile like that! 😀

        • #3287196

          Each to his/her own

          by jardinier ·

          In reply to Relationship

          I am not telling you how to practise YOUR faith.

          Perhaps you can extend the same courtesy to me.

          This is something that really bugs me about so many Christians. They presume to KNOW what is my relationship with God. I also have a totally different concept of God to that held by most Christians, as most of you well know.

          I fail to comprehend the apparently subtle distinction between “talking to God” and “thinking to God.”

          I have actually had far greater blessings heaped on me than I would ever have thought to “pray” for.

          I will stand beside Colin who, in the way he leads his life, would put most Christians to shame.

          [Edited to add afterthought]

        • #3287141

          I am not…

          by jellimonsta ·

          In reply to Each to his/her own

          telling you how to do anything. I was just merely expressing my opinion on prayer. Just as you expressed yours.

          I do not pray out loud most of the time anyway, so I am inasmuch ‘thinking to God’ also. In fact, I think I am going to go do some ‘thinking’ right now! :p

        • #3105555

          At no time

          by oneamazingwriter ·

          In reply to Praying for what you want

          have I seen prayer as a waste of my energy. Prayer is my pipeline to the Most High. It is my understanding that mankind was created to be good company for God. If someone I loved walked through life expecting me to serve him and never turned to me to say “Hello, I love you, is there something I can do that you would like me to do?”, our relationship would grow stale very quickly. He asks nothing of me that He doesn’t give me the grace to perform, so there’s no way to ever “get even”, but it’s ever so much fun to try! Sometimes my part in prayer is one word: “Wow!”

    • #3105580

      Anyone watch this last night?

      by jellimonsta ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      I actually saw (most) of this on National Geographic, Science of the Bible last night.

      Interesting to watch, but I did not buy into it too much. I saw the ‘Gospel according to Mary’ on Weds too. Again, interesting, but not really convincing.

    • #3287214

      SOB – You didn’t get enough with EL???

      by sleepin’dawg ·

      In reply to What??? – The Gospel According to Judas?

      Here we go again on another exercise in futility. Why Dan??? What’s the point??? It is all speculative!!! Do you expect any real intelligent information will be learned or will it be the usual group of religious whackos dispensing their born again mumbo-jumbo???

      [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

      • #3287123

        wait one damn minute Dawg

        by faradhi ·

        In reply to SOB – You didn’t get enough with EL???

        I a may be Wacko. But Don’t blame religion for it.

        I am wacko by Divine Grace 😀

        • #3287106
          Avatar photo

          But where you ever CRAZY enough to become

          by hal 9000 ·

          In reply to wait one damn minute Dawg

          Involved in that Green horrible festering EL Thread?

          If the answer is no then you are not completely Wacko just slightly Wacko. :p

          Col ]:)

        • #3105130

          Earnest if you had a piece of Christ’s cross, would you allow testing.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to wait one damn minute Dawg

          All testing that is even moderately accurate usually involves destructive testing. Why give history to be destroyed? At some place faith is beyond proof. See Thomas those are holes in his hands, and his sides.

          Blessed are they who have not seen, and yet believe.

          Happy Easter All…

        • #3105087

          Actual one piece of the True Cross has been

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Earnest if you had a piece of Christ’s cross, would you allow testing.

          carbon dated and scientifically tested. It was proven to have come from the correct era and the writing on it was also consistant with the correct era – early 1st century AD.

          Since they have allowed some items, like the cross and the Shroud of Turin, to be scientifically tested and examined by experts it makes it more than a bit odd that they refuse to have others checked the same way.

          BTW The Shroud of Turin has been proven to be a medieval fake – many suspect it is one of da Vinci’s greatest works.

          As for taking their word on things – you are talking about an organisation that for centuries was a byword in lying for political gain. Take the crusades, Christians had no trouble visiting the sights of the holy land while it was under Muslim rule, they had less troubles than after the crusaders took over. But when a dispute arose between the Vatican and senior Muslim leaders about charges and taxes on goods coming in on the ‘silk route’ the Vatican decided that they needed to ‘control the holy land to make it safe for pilgrims’. And the Borgias are great examples of papal conduct; ditto the pope (forget which) that decided the Knights Templar should give him most of their riches and had them declared heritics when they said no. You can sure trust the word of such people.

        • #3105056

          How to differentiate between A Cross and The Cross.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Actual one piece of the True Cross has been

          Of the many crosses that saw use during the period in question, how can one determine whether of not the piece tested was from a specific cross?

        • #3105041

          Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to How to differentiate between A Cross and The Cross.

          and set it to that time. However, regarding the item known as a piece of the True Cross that had been found by Helena – the wood dates from that period and place, it is a part of the identification name plate and the text is consistant with that period, method of writting etc changes towards the end of the first century AD.

          It could very well be a 1st century AD fake relic, but the industry in relic fakes did not get really going until much later. Also Helena testified of finding that relic buried in the ground, some metres down. It is these last two points that cause many academics to think it may be an original. Others think it a bit interesting that the find occurs just when this very rich and influential widow is in town looking for Christian relics. And this was in a period when persecuting and killing Christians had been a major sport until a couple of years earlier. Very suspicious – no real evidence that it is or is not of the true cross.

          I like the current status of the Shroud of Turin. To start with when Jesus was entombed shrouds were put in place by wrapping the cloth around the body and haveing a lot of overlay, thus only a small section of each inner wind is in actual contact. The Turin Shroud is as if he lay on it and they folded it over him. Also the holes in the hands and feet in the shroud are in the wrong place for a crucifixtion, the Romans actually nailed through the wrist and ankles. The hands and feet themselves would never take the weight and the accused would quickly fall of the cross.

          Recent scientific investigations shows that the material is of a type and weave that was used in medieval Europe not 1st century Judea, and dating methods support this. The general concensus amongst the academics is that it is a medieval fake, probably one of da Vinci’s greatest works as they think he is the most likely candidate.

          desoite all this some of the church hierachy and many of the church members still believe that it is a true relic of Jesus.

          But then that is in a church where they teach people to ask various saints and Mary to intercede for them when Jesus himself said that he was the only intermediatory that you could call upon. So why do they tell people to pray and ask help of those that have no right to help? Darned if I know. But this is the same church whose leaders advocated celibacy except for married couples, celibacy for priests and nuns, yet had unmarried archbishops and popes who sired enough children to populate entire towns. Seemed they failled to practice what they preached.

        • #3104840

          And, technique to produce image of type on Shroud of Turin …

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          has recently been demonstrated.

          One of the criticisms of those who believe the Shroud to be authentic was the absence of an explanation of how to produce an image that seemed to contain 3-dimensional data.

          The technique for accomplishing such turns out to be quite simple.

          1) Paint an image on glass.
          2) Place a piece of linen on the ground where it will be exposed to bright sun light.
          3) Place the glass on the linen, with the side bearing the [b]image on the top[/b], so that it is separated from the linen by the glass.
          4) Wait until several days of clear skies with bright sunshine have passed.

          Voila; a miracle!

        • #3104107

          I prefer the ‘heated bust’ explaination

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          as it gives the exact result wanted, 3D and all. It is also very simple to do.

        • #3104101

          I’m not familiar with that technique.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          Please describe.

          Thanks.

        • #3104052

          The heated bust method works by

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          taking one brass or steel bust or statue of the required size and then heating it up until it is hot but not red hot. Tightly wrap one layer of light cloth around this to stop too much burning and then apply your intended ‘relic’ to the bust or statue, wearing protective pads push the ‘relic’ onto the bust or statue. Enough heat comes through to lightly scorch the ‘relic’ material but not actually burn it. The light scortch marks look like heavy stains but the material is not as deformed as if applied direct to the hot metal.

          A few years back some people did this and got a finished product that look exactly like the shroud of Turin. The trick is getting the metal hot enough to scortch but not burn.

        • #3104017

          Ok. But, why do you prefer that method?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          Is not the photo-bleaching technique physically both simpler and easier? And, it can be used to produce both positive and negative images.

        • #3104002

          I like the hot bust method because

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          1. I like the concept of playing with a ‘hot’ bust.

          2. It is simple and does not need any knowledge of chemicals or science.

          3. It is emminently possible with the technological levels in use at the time the ‘relic’ was created.

          4. I just can’t get past the concept of playing with one hot, very hot bust – sorry.

        • #3287009

          Ah, a man with a real feel for his craft.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          Nice work if you can get it.

        • #3286786

          Crucifiction was through wrists for some.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          Crucifixion was brutal.

          Quite often, ropes were used to fasten the miscreant?s arms to the cross. The stand was there and to help the victim live longer. If he pushed up with his feet, he wouldn’t die of pneumonia as fast. Those who were nailed through the hands and tied to the cross were known to have stolen from the temple, or from a taxe collector…

          This would be better known except for tons of disinformation that is out there… Ropes or long cloths were started under the armpits while the victim was still alive. If they were flogged or beaten cloths were used because a rope wouldn?t sick to the wounds as painfully as would the cloths. If someone was flailed raw, then it really didn?t matter, everything hurt.

        • #3286716

          Give me celibacy and constancy, but dear God not yet!

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          Celibacy not chastity. Celibacy is don’t marry. Chastity is don’t fool around two different words. two different meanings… The purpose of celibacy was to prevent more papal control like the Borgias and Medicis…

        • #3287613

          Celibacy in the RC church has been about

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Easy once you develop a time viewing machine

          since the papal edicts of the 7th century which well and truely predates the medieval Borgias and Medicis. Even then it is based on older papers by Augustine. Celibacy by priests has NO scriptual support what so ever – as a matter of fact the Old Testament supports priests being married and having families. Which is why I wonder the RC ever got into this concept.

          BTW Don’t you just hate that ‘Maximum message depth notation’

        • #3286795

          If the templar’s had been obedient, they would have not been destroyed?

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Actual one piece of the True Cross has been

          The issue became one of control. The Medici Pope was elected without the preceptor of the Templar’s being allowed to vote in the election. (at the time a voiolation of church rules.) The Templar’s tried to pull a Martin Luther and withdraw from the Catholic Church.

          The pope said “Give us your lands, and your treasury collected in the name of the church” The templar’s response “Go pound sand.” At that time the Templar’s believed that the church wouldn’t begin a war to control the church and it’s assets. They were wrong. They were rooted out and killed.

          Follow the money. and Never insult a man’s pride. The Borgias and the Medicis are the reason priests can’t marry today…

        • #3105061

          Nonetheless, faith does not constitute proof.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Earnest if you had a piece of Christ’s cross, would you allow testing.

          And, no matter how hard you may try, you cannot require that faith be accepted in lieu of proof.

          In this instance, if one claims to have a piece of the cross in question, then the burden of proof rests with that person, and he must, if he expects his claim to be given credence, produce said artifact for examination.

          Otherwise, his claim remains unsubstantiated.

      • #3287104
        Avatar photo

        Hey Dawg

        by hal 9000 ·

        In reply to SOB – You didn’t get enough with EL???

        Did you realise that I caught Maxwell Feeding that [b]Horrible Festering Monster recently?[/b] Not even the Great and the Mighty Maxwell could not keep away from that nightmare of a Disgusting discussion. :_|

        Max being such a nice Pro Lifer just has to sneak off and feed that deformed monster every so often so it remains alive to haunt the rest of us. :_|

        [b]There is NO JUSTICE in this world.[/b] 🙂

        Col ]:)

        • #3105055

          Perhaps EL is its own reward.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Hey Dawg

          Or, in this case, its own punishment.

      • #3287102

        Pat…pat…nice dawg

        by oneamazingwriter ·

        In reply to SOB – You didn’t get enough with EL???

        …scratch behind the ears…
        You just lie there and I will pray you into dawgie heaven, OK? 😀 I had an Irish Catholic mother (that’s like having a Jewish mother, but with beer opted over wine) and an atheist father and they both made it. The one thing they agreed upon was to let a sleepin’ dawg lie.
        …picking off a flea…
        What do you say we start an ET thread and discuss what life might be like on another planet?
        :X (Boy I hope I got this emoticon right. I’m as tired of typing reasons for edit as you are of religious discussions!)
        Edit: Argh! try again! : x
        Edit again: to say “Help, dawg! I’m never gonna get this thing right! 😡

      • #3105008

        You tawlking to me??

        by dmambo ·

        In reply to SOB – You didn’t get enough with EL???

        I did worry about the ravings, but I also thought it would have interesting points. I’m a merciful dude, and the idea that one of the most reviled individuals in human history could possibly be thought of in a sympathetic light is very interesting to me.

        I don’t expect the same for Hitler, Saddam, Brutus, Benedict Arnold or GWB though!! 🙂

        BTW – don’t you think that “SOB” is a little harsh???

        Edit – Anyway, I generally just stick to the top level posts in a topic like this. I takes a few responses and replies to get to the real crazy stuff.

Viewing 12 reply threads