Posted on 03/05/2004 1:17:40 PM PST by presidio9
Looking back in the thread, I cannot see where I made that statement. I can see where I ASKED if the Gospels claimed to record historical events. I don't see where I said they do NOT make that claim. Perhaps you can provide a quote.
OK. Luke claims to be recording historical events. However, we know Luke was not always truthful. In Acts 5, he claims that a false messiah named Theudas is mentioned at the trial of Peter and James. That is impossible. Theudas came too late to have been mentioned at that trial.
BUMP
You line of reasoning all along was based on the fact that the New Testament is historical. The very fact that you would make this argument is laughable. BTW, if you actually had read the New Testament, rather than (I suspect) a couple of books about the New Testament, you would know that this is hardly the only time that they are proclaimed to be truth.
Luke claims to be recording historical events. However, we know Luke was not always truthful. In Acts 5, he claims that a false messiah named Theudas is mentioned at the trial of Peter and James. That is impossible. Theudas came too late to have been mentioned at that trial.
Josepus marks the appearance of Thaudas in 42AD. Peter was martyred in 67AD. Once again you are simply incorrect.
Look, it's been fun, but I can't keep doing this with you. The you obviously have issues, but I simply don't have the time to keep addressing your erroneous points. You are not a good debater, and you are not up to speed on Catholic scripture.
This is not a date, that is a referrence.
Are you saying that the trial of Peter and John was later than 42AD?
And, by the way, how is it that you know when Peter died, but not when Jesus was crucified?
You are merely avoiding the question I asked you as to whether you believe the trial of Peter and John occured after 42 AD.
The fact is it could not have because Caiaphas presides over the trial and Caiaphas left office in 37 AD. Therefore, the trial had to have occured before that. So the trial occured at least 5 years before the Theudas rebellion. The mention of Theudas in Acts 5 is a mistake by Luke.
Answer the following question: If Jesus never existed, as you say, and he was forged into Josephus, as you say, why does he appear in the arabic Josephus? Is it Divine Intervention?
The Arabic version of Josephus is dated about 900 AD. The insertion of the passage about Jesus probably was made sometime in the 300's.
The key point is that Josephus has obviously been tampered with over the years.
This is exactly what I am talking about. Your religion is that of the Antichrist. You are not interested in intellectual honesty, so I see no point in researching your compulsive nitpicks. None of the points you are making are new. People have been attacking Jesus since before they killed him. If your line of questioning is one of intellectual curiosity, your answers are available here. Since your last response is simply another evasion (why would the ARABS have tampered with their text, and if they did, why would they have made ROME the center of Christianity?). I can rightly surmise that were I to continue answering your questions, you would simply try to think of others. Because thats what you do. You hate Christ. Good for you. He loves you anyway, and He still died for you. He has more patience than me however. So I'll be on my way. Have fun with your obsession.
But even if you were trying to convert, so what? People claim to believe in free speech in this country but when it comes to religious free speech they go nuts. They act like it's a violent assault or some kind of hate crime. Everyone has a right to try and covert (if that's their cup of tea) and everyone also has the right to say "no thanks." I never have understood why some people get their knickers all twisted when someone tries to convert them. People come to my door all the time trying to convert me. I shake their hand, take their literature, wish them well, and then go back to what I was doing before they came. But I don't get mad at them. I don't consider their attempts to convert me to be a hate crime. They have their point of view and I have mine. That's life in the big city.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.