Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah - The Exceptions (Paul blames the Jews for Jesus' death)
Uploader Comments (TruthSurge)
All Comments (21)
-
@TeesByTruthSurge the bible is not a history book. monotheism did not evolve until the 6th century BCE. historical isralites were not monotheists.
in judaism itself the terms "jew" and "hebrew" have the same meaning, but that is a deliberate inaccuracy (the reasons for which are obvious).
-
@TeesByTruthSurge Hebrews were peoples (not only the Israelites) of the Levant. Hebrews finally ceased to exist with the Assyrian and subsequent Babylonian conquest of the region when its inhabitants were resettled elsewhere and the area itself was settled with foreigners by the Babylonians.
Jews came into existence when returners from the "Babylonian Exile" mingled with the new inhabitants of Canaan. They then spoke Aramean and worshiped a single god. In Hellenistic times they mingled further.
-
Jesus was a Jew, not a Hebrew. And no, that's not the same.
-
Slightly off topic but do you have any good books on the subject of bible cannon and such you recomend? I've been reading the Karen armstrong books *bible a biography, and a history of god* and bart ernham books, "Jesus interrupted and misqouting jesus*
-
iow, it's always vilifying the OTHER nation instead of praising your own. The entire Bible is a vilification of SOME group (just read the gospels. How many passages are in there completely vilifying the Pharisees?)
-
I totally disagree. Daniel was written as another piece of us-vs-them fiction that inverted history. It certainly was written to make the Jews look like winners but at the expense of truth. In reality, the Jews were dominated by Nebuchadrezzar and so they decide later to write a tale where ole Nebby gets his and the Jews' god beats up the bad ole Babylonians. It's another piece of vilification propaganda. Yahweh good - Baal bad.
Holy shit you go in depth. This is GREAT!
Thanks for your research.
Once I got to Virgin Birth, that was the end of my research. Anything after that is moot.
Tee hee.
Seriously, though this is very interesting because my knowledge in this department is woefully inadequate. It's always good to pick up new ammunition for the inevitable showdown with a theist who thinks that 'well the old testament is brutal, but the new testament is perfect and jesus is like a squeezy toy, all sweet and nice...'
2eelShmeal 6 months ago
@2eelShmeal thank ya. yeah, I do go into some depth in these JM vids. Just seemed like the thing to do. hehehe
TruthSurge 6 months ago
TS: On Paul's death: I am hesitant to turn to Acts for any historical data, including Paul's imprisonment and seemingly impending death.
egrog225 1 year ago
@egrog225 yeah, I mean, I consider Acts only beneficial in the sense of seeing what THAT author believed at that time (roughly early 2nd century). It would be hypocritical to dismiss Acts as fiction but use some of it when it suits my cause. I pretty much dismiss all of Acts. It is just fiction about fictional characters (mostly). Jesus and the 12.
TruthSurge 1 year ago