[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

Let me remind you have the little discussion started.



I pointed out that you were wrong, factually wrong, you got the facts wrong.

But your never one to let the facts get in the way of a good story.


Yet the days of the week are named after Norse and Roman Gods, these are just quirks of history, and do not alter the FACT that your original statement was WRONG.

Here is another article on the subject at hand you might enjoy.

http://www.bethinking.org/bible-jesus/advanced/the-historicity-of-the-new-testament.htm

Notice that, unlike you, I actually stick to the subject of discussion without shifting ground when it seems advantageous, and I do my best to answer your objections and concerns, all of them, not just those I pick and choose to make myself look better.

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

Let me remind you have the little discussion started.



I pointed out that you were wrong, factually wrong, you got the facts wrong.

But your never one to let the facts get in the way of a good story.


Yet the days of the week are named after Norse and Roman Gods, these are just quirks of history, and do not alter the FACT that your original statement was WRONG.

As far as the days of the week are concerned, where I come from they are named after the event of Jesus' resurrection. Sunday in Russian is Voskreseniye (word for resurrection). Saturday is Subbota (meaning Sabbath). Monday is Ponedelnik, which means the day that marks the beginning of the work week. Tuesday, Thursday and Friday derive their names from numbers 2,4 and 5 - marking the second, fourth and fifth days after the resurrection. Wednesday is called Sreda (middle) marking the middle of the week with 3 days before and three days after.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Hello, Friends!

My original statement was wrong TO YOU, as I already explained. There is nothing FACTUALLY wrong with what I said.

How many time do I have to point out where you are factually incorrect

There are accounts by historians who were Jesus' contemporaries and unbiased ones at that. Josephus is a good example of such a historian - he was a Roman citizen and his accounts are available and have been proven valid. He wrote about Jesus' birth and life and also recorded events surrounding His resurrection. I am not sure that he was a believer himself but he did record events accurately as a historian employed by the Roman government. Look him up: Josephus Flavius.

Josephus (37 – c.100 CE)
Jesus (allegedly 7–2 BCE to 30–33 CE)
So at the closest you boy had been gone 4 years before Josephus was born, and at least 20 before he started writing.

You keep trying to cloud the issue with distractions, going off in tangents, those distractions I will keep ignoring, as the question is was Josephus contemporary to Jesus (if he even existed) and no version of the dates supports that argument.

I challenge one of your beliefs. that Josephus was contemporary to Jesus, and you keep withdrawing deeper into the shell of self delusion, unable to accept the facts that show your belief is wrong.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Hello, Friends!

As far as the days of the week are concerned, where I come from they are named after the event of Jesus' resurrection. Sunday in Russian is Voskreseniye (word for resurrection). Saturday is Subbota (meaning Sabbath). Monday is Ponedelnik, which means the day that marks the beginning of the work week. Tuesday, Thursday and Friday derive their names from numbers 2,4 and 5 - marking the second, fourth and fifth days after the resurrection. Wednesday is called Sreda (middle) marking the middle of the week with 3 days before and three days after.

Sunday - The Sun
Monday _ The Moon
Tuesday - Tiw or Týr, the god of single combat
Wednesday - day of Wodanaz otherwise know as Óðinn or Wōden
Thursday - Thor's Day
Friday - day of Frigg, the wife of Óðinn
Saturday - Saturn's Day

But yet again you try to go off at a tangent, to distract from the issue in question.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Hello, Friends!

Notice that, unlike you, I actually stick to the subject of discussion

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

How many time do I have to point out where you are factually incorrect


Josephus (37 – c.100 CE)
Jesus (allegedly 7–2 BCE to 30–33 CE)
So at the closest you boy had been gone 4 years before Josephus was born, and at least 20 before he started writing.

You keep trying to cloud the issue with distractions, going off in tangents, those distractions I will keep ignoring, as the question is was Josephus contemporary to Jesus (if he even existed) and no version of the dates supports that argument.

I challenge one of your beliefs. that Josephus was contemporary to Jesus, and you keep withdrawing deeper into the shell of self delusion, unable to accept the facts that show your belief is wrong.

If Jesus did not exist why do you care if He had contemporaries who wrote about Him? I already agreed with you that Flavius was born after the death of Jesus, I never really argued about that with you. I conceded right away that Josephus was not a contemporary of Jesus in the strict sense of the word and explained that I used the term rather loosely in a sense that from the perspective of the 21 century -2000 years later - it seems close enough to me. I then proceeded to address other concerns that you voiced and, I believe, did so timely and politely. I also attempted to deal with other, in my opinion, more important issues, such as your attitude about faith - Christian or any other. From you I heard many an insult, implicit and explicit, and never attempted to go down to your level and get even. I am, quite frankly, disgusted with your behavior and do not want to carry on this pointless conversation. You still have not addressed several of my posts and self-delusion has nothing to do with it. There is nothing delusional about the last link that I posted and the answers I gave to everyone of your posts (see above).

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

Sunday - The Sun
Monday _ The Moon
Tuesday - Tiw or Týr, the god of single combat
Wednesday - day of Wodanaz otherwise know as Óðinn or Wōden
Thursday - Thor's Day
Friday - day of Frigg, the wife of Óðinn
Saturday - Saturn's Day

But yet again you try to go off at a tangent, to distract from the issue in question.

I did not go on a tangent - you did, and i simply addressed your post, as I did at every other instance of "going off topic". By the way, as always, you were first to respond to my post that was not addressed to you - you have done this on several instances before. My post about Flavius was addressed to a different person, and it answered the concern that he voiced quite adequately, and that would have been the end of it, but you came in... And you know how it went from there. As a matter of fact, right after my first post, Pastor Ezekiel posted a video on the topic containing similar information to what I have provided and addressing many, if not all, of your concerns. But you seem keen on arguing with me personally, and not really addressing the issue, so I am beginning to wonder if you have some sort of a personal issue with me? I suspect from your posts that your disagreement with me runs deep and way beyond the topic of Jesus's contemporaries.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Hello, Friends!

If Jesus did not exist why do you care if He had contemporaries who wrote about Him?

I care that people that believe in him use their belief in his existence to attempt control the lives of others.

I already agreed with you that Flavius was born after the death of Jesus, I never really argued about that with you. I conceded right away that Josephus was not a contemporary of Jesus in the strict sense of the word and explained that I used the term rather loosely in a sense that from the perspective of the 21 century -2000 years later - it seems close enough to me.

But there is still no record of him written at the time, only documentation of the myths of a religious sect.

I then proceeded to address other concerns that you voiced and, I believe, did so timely and politely. I also attempted to deal with other, in my opinion, more important issues, such as your attitude about faith - Christian or any other.

You have posted nothing that addressed the other concerns that I voiced, had you done so successfully we would not be still having this conversation.

From you I heard many an insult, implicit and explicit, and never attempted to go down to your level and get even. I am, quite frankly, disgusted with your behavior and do not want to carry on this pointless conversation.

To challenge an idea is not to insult anyone.

You still have not addressed several of my posts and self-delusion has nothing to do with it. There is nothing delusional about the last link that I posted and the answers I gave to everyone of your posts (see above).

As for the links you keep posting, I have never disputed that the fairy tale was set in a context of people and events that actually existed, just that there is nothing ion the historical record to support the existence of the main character in the story, and many of the events, concerning him, in the story are of such a nature that their absence from the historical record draws in to question whether they were real or fantasy.

Take this link you like so much..

"The day and date of the crucifixion (Good Friday) are known with a fair degree of precision," he said. But the year has been in question.

The day is know because the myths around it tell us it was on The Day of Frigg, the yet the year, no clues to pin it down in the historical record, I say again you would think that someone would have noticed this...

And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Well they must be using a very lose definition of the word "many" as NO ONE outside of the bible mentions it.

Yes I know they are talking of the crucifixion and I am taking about the resurrection, but get a year for one and you've nailed it for the other.

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

I care that people that believe in him use their belief in his existence to attempt control the lives of others.



But there is still no record of him written at the time, only documentation of the myths of a religious sect.


You have posted nothing that addressed the other concerns that I voiced, had you done so successfully we would not be still having this conversation.


To challenge an idea is not to insult anyone.



As for the links you keep posting, I have never disputed that the fairy tale was set in a context of people and events that actually existed, just that there is nothing ion the historical record to support the existence of the main character in the story, and many of the events, concerning him, in the story are of such a nature that their absence from the historical record draws in to question whether they were real or fantasy.

Take this link you like so much..

The day is know because the myths around it tell us it was on The Day of Frigg, the yet the year, no clues to pin it down in the historical record, I say again you would think that someone would have noticed this...

Well they must be using a very lose definition of the word "many" as NO ONE outside of the bible mentions it.

Yes I know they are talking of the crucifixion and I am taking about the resurrection, but get a year for one and you've nailed it for the other.

I think calling someone delusional (or accusing them of going deeper into self-delusion) is an insult, an explicit one. Accusing someone of going on tangents when they are simply responding to your posts is an implicit insult - implying that your respondent is either stupid or inattentive. Which concerns of yours did I not address? I repeated several times that I have no problem disagreeing with you, and I never attempted to control your life - or anyone else's - far be it from me! I am not arguing with you about anything and have conceded to your point that no source about Jesus was written during His life, although I do not see it as a good reason to quit my adherence to Christianity.

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

I care that people that believe in him use their belief in his existence to attempt control the lives of others.



But there is still no record of him written at the time, only documentation of the myths of a religious sect.


You have posted nothing that addressed the other concerns that I voiced, had you done so successfully we would not be still having this conversation.


To challenge an idea is not to insult anyone.



As for the links you keep posting, I have never disputed that the fairy tale was set in a context of people and events that actually existed, just that there is nothing ion the historical record to support the existence of the main character in the story, and many of the events, concerning him, in the story are of such a nature that their absence from the historical record draws in to question whether they were real or fantasy.

Take this link you like so much..

The day is know because the myths around it tell us it was on The Day of Frigg, the yet the year, no clues to pin it down in the historical record, I say again you would think that someone would have noticed this...

Well they must be using a very lose definition of the word "many" as NO ONE outside of the bible mentions it.

Yes I know they are talking of the crucifixion and I am taking about the resurrection, but get a year for one and you've nailed it for the other.

The only reason I sent you to that link I like so much is because I attempted to respond to your concern about no evidence supporting an earthquake at the time of crucifixion. I do not like this link all that much but it was interesting as an example of addressing your post about the earthquake.

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

I care that people that believe in him use their belief in his existence to attempt control the lives of others.



But there is still no record of him written at the time, only documentation of the myths of a religious sect.


You have posted nothing that addressed the other concerns that I voiced, had you done so successfully we would not be still having this conversation.


To challenge an idea is not to insult anyone.



As for the links you keep posting, I have never disputed that the fairy tale was set in a context of people and events that actually existed, just that there is nothing ion the historical record to support the existence of the main character in the story, and many of the events, concerning him, in the story are of such a nature that their absence from the historical record draws in to question whether they were real or fantasy.

Take this link you like so much..

The day is know because the myths around it tell us it was on The Day of Frigg, the yet the year, no clues to pin it down in the historical record, I say again you would think that someone would have noticed this...

Well they must be using a very lose definition of the word "many" as NO ONE outside of the bible mentions it.

Yes I know they are talking of the crucifixion and I am taking about the resurrection, but get a year for one and you've nailed it for the other.

What offends me most about your behavior is your mean and arrogant attitude. You seem to spew hate with your every post and you apparently enjoy feeding off the negative emotions that you cause others to experience. Now, that could constitute an attempt to control others by playing this emotional blackmail game that you are so good at. You have accused me - and not only me - of using condescending tone, but, as is typical of your type of people, you do this yourself all the time. How very unoriginal of you.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Hello, Friends!

I think calling someone delusional (or accusing them of going deeper into self-delusion) is an insult, an explicit one.

If it adequately describes the mental state of the person concerned it is not an insult, that person may not like the statement, but just because you don't like something does not make it an insult.
This is just an other example of a Christian accusing people of persecuting them and nothing of the sort is happening.

Accusing someone of going on tangents when they are simply responding to your posts is an implicit insult

A statement of fact when the response IS going off tangentially.

Which concerns of yours did I not address?

That there is no contemporary historical record of Jesus.

have conceded to your point that no source about Jesus was written during His life

Thank you, but you continue to hold up that likes of Josephus as beeing valid historical records when there are not even close. Yes Josephus write much that is based on Roman records, but his passages on the Jesus character to not have the depth of information that is passages based on real records do. The text we have today are not even consistant and there is speculation that parts may have been added in the 16th century.

I never attempted to control your life - or anyone else's - far be it from me!

I accused your religion of that, not you personally.

although I do not see it as a good reason to quit my adherence to Christianity.

It does not bother you that the Book you hold up as being TRUTH™ may not have a firm basis in fact?

The only reason I sent you to that link I like so much is because I attempted to respond to your concern about no evidence supporting an earthquake at the time of crucifixion. I do not like this link all that much but it was interesting as an example of addressing your post about the earthquake.

That part of the world as constant tremors, so not that hard to find evidence of some seismic activity, but if and earthquake had been followed but a zombie invasion don't you think someone would have made a note of it that confirmed the story in the bible?

What offends me most about your behavior is your mean and arrogant attitude. You seem to spew hate with your every post and you apparently enjoy feeding off the negative emotions that you cause others to experience. Now, that could constitute an attempt to control others by playing this emotional blackmail game that you are so good at. You have accused me - and not only me - of using condescending tone, but, as is typical of your type of people, you do this yourself all the time.

There you go again, you can't support your argument in a rational debate you you have to resort to...

Oh look at that nasty Pirate persecuting me! How very unoriginal of you.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Hello, Friends!

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

If it adequately describes the mental state of the person concerned it is not an insult, that person may not like the statement, but just because you don't like something does not make it an insult.
This is just an other example of a Christian accusing people of persecuting them and nothing of the sort is happening.


A statement of fact when the response IS going off tangentially.


That there is no contemporary historical record of Jesus.


Thank you, but you continue to hold up that likes of Josephus as beeing valid historical records when there are not even close. Yes Josephus write much that is based on Roman records, but his passages on the Jesus character to not have the depth of information that is passages based on real records do. The text we have today are not even consistant and there is speculation that parts may have been added in the 16th century.

I accused your religion of that, not you personally.

It does not bother you that the Book you hold up as being TRUTH™ may not have a firm basis in fact?

That part of the world as constant tremors, so not that hard to find evidence of some seismic activity, but if and earthquake had been followed but a zombie invasion don't you think someone would have made a note of it that confirmed the story in the bible?

There you go again, you can't support your argument in a rational debate you you have to resort to...

Oh look at that nasty Pirate persecuting me! How very unoriginal of you.

I do not feel persecuted by you. I merely stated that you are mean and rude. I am not arguing with you because I have nothing to prove to you.
I did address the fact that there is no contemporary record of Jesus' existence written during His life on earth by agreeing with it and stating that it is not a sufficient reason for me to disbelieve the records that do exist. I did not agree with your position of disbelief but I acknowledged it and attempted to answer your objection as well as I found possible, just scroll a few entries up and you will see. I am sorry about not posting specific paragraphs or phrases in my responses: I am using a small mobile device (a phone) and I find it difficult to perform more intricate operations on it, so I stick to quick replies. Again, I apologize for the inconvenience.

[Irinka the repentant jewess]

Re: Hello, Friends!

Also, I did not resort to anything when I had no proof to make my point. You call me repellent by changing my name in every post, so I simply pointed out of you the fact that you are mean-spirited, not because it makes me feel persecuted but because it shows that you are full of hate (see above). I have resorted to occasional name-calling myself, for which I apologize.