Featured Paul mentions that “more than 500” saw the risen Jesus in a single early letter, but included this in no other letters. Why ? ?

[bbyrd009]

Jesus clowned the religious of His day, and praised the atheist (samaritan) and the pagan (roman centurion), so, ya

This is completely inaccurate. The Samaritans were not atheists. And the Roman Centurion came to Jesus as a believer. I recommend you fact check your posts. That will keep me from having to do it for you.

i think it goes that samaritans were considered atheists by devout Jews, whether they actually were or not? A Jew even talking to a Samaritan = stoning then, regardless, and we now basically have a lot of “good samaritan” journalism to overcome, when they were then considered strictly off limits to Jews, even if this has largely been suppressed now. Half Jew half gentile might be a better rep, but i think the main point is that they were shunned by Jews? So “atheist” maybe makes for a decent label, for us anyway

or iow what best reps “shunned” to a believer now? “atheist”

And the Centurion is not recorded as being a believer at the time, although that is a common interpretation, ya. But imo that would be adding to the text, which seems to go to some pains to record “Centurion” rather than “believer,” right, so i accept that at face value; at the time, at least, he repped the cult of sol, iow, at least as near as can be determined from the Bible

 

[bbyrd009]

The OT has plenty of lying, though; they just lied in a different way, by exaggeration, called “conquest genre.”

I started a thread concerning Biblical contradictions but you have yet to post anything. Also feel free to present any lies contained in the OT. If you cannot offer any lies contained in the Bible, I suggest you retract your statement.

i have a thing on that somewhere, lemme see if i can dig it up

Israelite Origins: Putting away childish things

Why what we learned in Sunday School doesn’t work.

biblicalhistoricalcontext.com

ya, so what i mean by “lies” is things written that are not literally true, and were never meant to be understood literally; so not what you are hearing, ok?

i think the link drops you in at chap 3 but you can revert or whatever, if you like. But. it turns out prolly no literal genocides of other races, No ppl in Nazareth in that century, No walls of Jericho in that era, etc, on and on, which idt means that the Bible is lying per se, ok, just should be read on a different level, as a contemporary would have understood it iow

Thus something like Jesus of Nazareth would denote Jesus’ wisdom school, as contemporary rabbis then identified themselves, rather than literally hailing from Nazareth, iow. I mean regardless, many believer-archaeologists have tried to establish habitation in Nazareth in that era and failed, although it was apparently lightly inhabited before and after

Which fwiw i struggled about this for quite a while myself, ok, and while i suspect i come off as blithe about it now it caused many sleepless nights lol. Reading the Bible as though it was journalism rather than mythology just causes endless problems and inconsistencies imo, that will also be inevitably reflected in the individual

Thus you end up believing in a literal world-wide flood rather than a retelling of Gilgamesh’s search for immortality, and etc, and you just depart further and further from reality as you go, and next thing you know you are postulating dates for Jesus’ return, see. I understand that i am not being so kind here, ok, but there just really is no kind way that i know of to say most of this, so again my apologies, ok

Now, is Jesus ever returning? I do not know, and for all i know He will come riding in on a cloud or a white horse today, ok. I do know that you cant Quote Jesus returning even once from the Bible, and that just strikes me as existential information, for what is not said as much as what is said, which forced a contemplation in me of hearing differently, and accepting what the text is trying to say rather than what i wanted to hear

Was there ever a world-wide flood? I do not know, but i do know that we have many doctors that spent years of their lives perfecting the craft of archaeology, who are ruthlessly subjected to peer revue, and anything not true tends to get burned off in that arena, and the verdict appears to be pretty near consensus; a worldwide flood would have left an indelible mark on the planet, that we simply cannot find

Now is it possible that some relevant info is being suppressed, and my understanding there is wrong? You bet

 

[Scooter]

i think it goes that samaritans were considered atheists by devout Jews,

No, not at all. The Jews considered Samaritans unclean people and refused to let them worship in the Temple. Therefore the Samaritans worshipped in their own land. Nothing indicates they were atheists.

 

[Scooter]

And the Centurion is not recorded as being a believer at the time

Then why would he come to Jesus seeking His help, if he didn’t believe? Your argument has no basis.

 

[Scooter]

i think the link drops you in at chap 3 but you can revert or whatever, if you like.

So I went to the link and this is what I found about the author. There is absolutely no reason to take his findings as legitimate:

A Christian layman’s perspective on the intersection between archaeology, historical criticism, text, and faith.
Follow

About​

HEALTH WARNING: I’m totally unqualified to be writing about the topics I cover on this site. I don’t have any training or qualifications in archaeology, biblical studies, biblical Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic, or the history of the ancient Near East. I’m just an overly-enthusiasic amateur who spends more on books than his wife would like.

 

[Scooter]

I do know that you cant Quote Jesus returning even once from the Bible

I don’t have time for silly semantic games. Jesus said He would come again. Just because He doesn’t use the word “return” does not negate the fact that He plainly said He would come back.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

When you are Quoted as saying “to be absent from the body is to be present with the lord” when you never said that,

So Paul never said that? What is your evidence that he did not say this?

2 Corinthians 5:8 - Our Eternal Dwelling

We are confident, then, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord.

biblehub.com

idt its even ever xlated that way into English, Scooter.

I asked for evidence and you post the verse.

Scooter, I thought you were all about the scripture, right?

 

[Scooter]

Scooter, I thought you were all about the scripture, right?

I absolutely am. But bbyrd indicated Paul did not write that verse. I was asking him for some evidence to support his view and he just quoted the verse.

 

[bbyrd009]

i think it goes that samaritans were considered atheists by devout Jews,

No, not at all. The Jews considered Samaritans unclean people and refused to let them worship in the Temple. Therefore the Samaritans worshipped in their own land. Nothing indicates they were atheists.

except in the minds of the contemporary Jews, prolly not, ya

 

[Scooter]

i think it goes that samaritans were considered atheists by devout Jews,

No, not at all. The Jews considered Samaritans unclean people and refused to let them worship in the Temple. Therefore the Samaritans worshipped in their own land. Nothing indicates they were atheists.

except in the minds of the contemporary Jews, prolly not, ya

No, apparently just in your mind.