Announcement

Collapse

Church History 201 Guidelines

Welcome to Church History 201.

Believe it or not, this is the exact place where Luther first posted the 94 thesis. We convinced him to add one.

This is the forum where the Church and its actions in history can be discussed. Since CH201, like the other fora in the History department, is not limited to participation along lines of theology, all may post here. This means that anything like Ecclesiology can be discussed without the restrictions of the Ecclesiology forum, and without the atmosphere of Ecclesiology 201 or the Apologetics-specific forum.

Please keep the Campus Decorum in mind when posting here--while 'belief' restrictions are not in place, common decency is and such is not the area to try disembowel anyone's faith.

If you need to refresh yourself on the decorm, now would be a good time.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

More secular proof of Jesus' existence?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    It's not an "extrabiblical source"; it's a forgery intended to historically align with the gospels.
    Only some of the material doesn't perfectly align with the gospels. There are some conflicts. The second letter of Caiaphas aligns with the gospels almost ridiculously so.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by seanD View Post
      The parenthesis is an oddity for sure.
      This thread reminds me of an old joke.

      A man in the psychiatric ward thinks he is dead. The psychiatrist tries to convince him he isn't.

      "Do dead men feel pain?" asks the doctor

      "Of course not!" says the patient.

      The doctor sticks him with a needle.

      "Ow!!" says the patient.

      "See, you aren't dead! You felt pain!" says the doctor.

      "Well, what do you know! Dead people CAN feel pain!" exclaims the patient.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        This thread reminds me of an old joke.

        A man in the psychiatric ward thinks he is dead. The psychiatrist tries to convince him he isn't.

        "Do dead men feel pain?" asks the doctor

        "Of course not!" says the patient.

        The doctor sticks him with a needle.

        "Ow!!" says the patient.

        "See, you aren't dead! You felt pain!" says the doctor.

        "Well, what do you know! Dead people CAN feel pain!" exclaims the patient.
        Whatever, man. Back at ya.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by seanD View Post
          Only some of the material doesn't perfectly align with the gospels. There are some conflicts. The second letter of Caiaphas aligns with the gospels almost ridiculously so.
          Sure. Impious forgers (or ignorant pious forgers, or heretical pious forgers) are likely to include some conflicts. In the case of impious forgers, they're looking to sow doubt on the biblical narrative. In the case of heretical forgers, they're looking to bolster their heresy.
          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
          sigpic
          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            Sure. Impious forgers (or ignorant pious forgers, or heretical pious forgers) are likely to include some conflicts. In the case of impious forgers, they're looking to sow doubt on the biblical narrative. In the case of heretical forgers, they're looking to bolster their heresy.
            I don't think Mahan was that capable or that clever. You're giving his wit the benefit of the doubt. Fair enough.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              There is even one place where he uses the word "alma" and then in parenthesis mentions it's the hebrew word for virgin.
              He did not know his Hebrew either then.

              Almah means a young woman. Bethulah is the Hebrew for virgin.

              However, it should be noted that in both the Greek and Hebrew parlance of the Jews the term “virgin” was used flexibly. It was certainly not confined to denoting men and women without experience of sexual intercourse.
              "It ain't necessarily so
              The things that you're liable
              To read in the Bible
              It ain't necessarily so
              ."

              Sportin' Life
              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                He did not know his Hebrew either then.

                Almah means a young woman. Bethulah is the Hebrew for virgin.

                However, it should be noted that in both the Greek and Hebrew parlance of the Jews the term “virgin” was used flexibly. It was certainly not confined to denoting men and women without experience of sexual intercourse.
                Source: TWOT

                Since bĕtûlâ is used many times in the OT as a specific word for “virgin,” it seems reasonable to consider that the feminine form of this word ["almah"] is not a technical word for a virgin but represents a young woman, one of whose characteristics is virginity. This is borne out by the fact that the LXX translates it as parthenos in two of its seven occurrences, and that its use in Isa 7:14 was quoted to Joseph by the angel as a prediction of the virgin birth.

                Allan A. Macrae, “1630 עלם,” ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 672.

                © Copyright Original Source



                So "almah" does seem to imply virginity.

                Blessings,
                Lee
                "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                  Source: TWOT

                  Since bĕtûlâ is used many times in the OT as a specific word for “virgin,” it seems reasonable to consider that the feminine form of this word ["almah"] is not a technical word for a virgin but represents a young woman, one of whose characteristics is virginity. This is borne out by the fact that the LXX translates it as parthenos in two of its seven occurrences, and that its use in Isa 7:14 was quoted to Joseph by the angel as a prediction of the virgin birth.

                  Allan A. Macrae, “1630 עלם,” ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 672.

                  © Copyright Original Source



                  So "almah" does seem to imply virginity.

                  Blessings,
                  Lee
                  Purely for information.


                  In Hebrew, biblical and rabbinic, the term bethulah can indicate virgo intacta. The Pentateuch thus describes Rebecca as a very pretty girl, a virgin whom no man has known. The rabbis also explain that a virgin is a woman who has never had sexual intercourse.

                  Nevertheless, another well-established usage of bethulah associates virginity, not with absence of sexual experience, but with an inability to conceive. A virgin is a girl who has not yet attained puberty. This sort of “virginity” ends, not with intercourse, but with menstruation.

                  Asking “Who is a virgin?” the two earliest rabbinic codes, the Mishnah and the Tosephta, answer:

                  “Whoever has never seen blood even though she is married.”

                  The Tosephta, reflecting the teaching of the late 1st century CE. Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus adds:

                  I call a virgin whoever has not seen blood, even though she is married and has had children, until she has seen the first show.”

                  The Palestinian Talmud goes even further:

                  Who is a virgin? According to the Mishnah, whoever has never seen blood even though she is married. – She is said to be a virgin in respect of menstruation but not a virgin in respect of the token of virginity. Sometimes she is a virgin in the latter respect, but not a virgin in respect of menstruation.

                  It was possible, the evidence shows, for a girl to marry and cohabit with her husband before reaching puberty. In fact, it appears to have happened often enough to give rise to a dispute between the two leading rabbinic schools of the 1st century CE, on the subject of whether a bloodstain on the wedding night of a minor [i.e. a virgin in respect of menstruation] should be attributed to the rupture of the hymen or to her first period.

                  The more rigorous House of Shammai settled for the first alternative for the first four nights only. The House of Hillel decided similarly but until the healing of the wound.

                  Another consequence of such a state of affairs was that a girl could conceive while still a “virgin” in respect of menstruation, i.e. at the moment of her first ovulation. She could thus become a “virgin mother” of several children!
                  "It ain't necessarily so
                  The things that you're liable
                  To read in the Bible
                  It ain't necessarily so
                  ."

                  Sportin' Life
                  Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    The rabbinic writings come too late to be good commentaries on scriptures. Anything post-Messianic is liable to be altered to make the fulfilled Messianic prophecies less apparent. There is plenty of incentive to cover-up the message of the Messiah, after the fact.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                      He did not know his Hebrew either then.

                      Almah means a young woman. Bethulah is the Hebrew for virgin.

                      However, it should be noted that in both the Greek and Hebrew parlance of the Jews the term “virgin” was used flexibly. It was certainly not confined to denoting men and women without experience of sexual intercourse.
                      Good point. But, it could be like in English where we sometimes use the word "maiden" to mean "virgin." but the technical meaning of "maiden" is just "young girl."

                      My point was that this guy is a phony because if he was genuinely translating a letter from Hebrew, why would he leave a Hebrew word in the translation instead of just translating it? The whole thing is so obviously a fake for many reasons.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        Good point. But, it could be like in English where we sometimes use the word "maiden" to mean "virgin." but the technical meaning of "maiden" is just "young girl."

                        My point was that this guy is a phony because if he was genuinely translating a letter from Hebrew, why would he leave a Hebrew word in the translation instead of just translating it? The whole thing is so obviously a fake for many reasons.
                        Oh I agree that one finds many "wackos" around, particularly when it comes to religion.
                        "It ain't necessarily so
                        The things that you're liable
                        To read in the Bible
                        It ain't necessarily so
                        ."

                        Sportin' Life
                        Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          Oh I agree that one finds many "wackos" around, particularly when it comes to religion.
                          Yeah we tend to get a lot of nutty atheists around here who seem to have OCD and it seems their entire lives revolve around something they claim they don't even believe in.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            Yeah we tend to get a lot of nutty atheists around here who seem to have OCD and it seems their entire lives revolve around something they claim they don't even believe in.
                            Of course the dispassionate and critical historical analysis of texts and the socio-historical context in which they were composed is altogether something quite different.

                            Not being a believer does not prevent an individual having an academic interest in the history and comparative study of religions.
                            "It ain't necessarily so
                            The things that you're liable
                            To read in the Bible
                            It ain't necessarily so
                            ."

                            Sportin' Life
                            Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              Of course the dispassionate and critical historical analysis of texts and the socio-historical context in which they were composed is altogether something quite different.

                              Not being a believer does not prevent an individual having an academic interest in the history and comparative study of religions.
                              Riiight. That explains why you spend so much time hanging out on religious forums arguing with lay Christians about what you believe are mere fairy tales.
                              Last edited by Sparko; 07-10-2020, 12:51 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                Yeah we tend to get a lot of nutty atheists around here who seem to have OCD and it seems their entire lives revolve around something they claim they don't even believe in.
                                You are free to believe we do actually believe in God. This is just like believing that God exists. Just because you believe it, doesn't make it true.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X