Did Jesus actually walk this earth? Did he actually exist?

Gday,

Originally posted by Imago Dei
it is a mute point.

You mean 'moot point', but it's not that at all.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
The authors of the four Gospels, who ever they may be, claim to be eye witneses.

No they don't.

None of the Gospels contains a claim to personally be a eye-witness.

Which is why you failed to quote any such claim.


K.

That's correct. In fact, the author of Luke says this right at the start of his book:

"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the Word."

The earliest non-Christian testimony to the Lord’s existence is that of the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37-100). In Antiquities of the Jews, the historian twice referred to Jesus. In one passage he called Jesus “the Christ,” referred to His “marvelous deeds,” and alluded to His death and resurrection (18.3.3). In another place, Josephus commented on the trial of James, and identified Him as “the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ” (20.9.1).

Originally posted by Kapyong
Gday,

Originally posted by Imago Dei
it is a mute point.

You mean 'moot point', but it's not that at all.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
The authors of the four Gospels, who ever they may be, claim to be eye witneses.

No they don't.

None of the Gospels contains a claim to personally be a eye-witness.

Which is why you failed to quote any such claim.


K.

Here are just few to refute your LIES.

1. John. 1. 14...and we beheld his glory (beheld =. to observe; look at; see.)

2. John 21:24 - 25 This is the deciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things and we know that his testimony is true. And many other things also which Jesus did, which if they where written every one, I suppose that not even the world itself would contain the books written. (The deciple John stating clearly that he wrote the Gospel of John).

2. 1. John. 1-4 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, [what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld, and our hands handled concerning the word manifested and we have seen and witnesses, and declare to you the life, the eternal which was with the Father and was manifested to us what we have seen and heard declares we to you also that ye also may have fellowship with us yea and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ and these things we write that our joy be made full.

(Here the author of I. John makes it crystal clear that he witnessed Jesus Christ in the Flesh.)

So:

1. admit you are a LIAR
2. Leave the thread
3. put a sock in it.


However as I said, even if all books in the bible are anonymously written makes your point moot. Yes it does, if not, explain why your point is even worthy of discussion because it does nothing to refute the validity of the bible as a historical record of when God joined us on earth in the flesh.

IE Moot and now mute dead red herrings floating down the stream.











[edit on 3-7-2009 by Imago Dei]

Gday,

Originally posted by Imago Dei
Here are just few to refute your LIES.

You lied that I was a plagiarist, then when called on your lie, the best you can do is brazen it out and call ME a liar? Pathetic. I wrote that article myself after actually reading the ancient books - something you've never bothered to do. You didn't even know WHO wrote the Gospels!

Originally posted by Imago Dei
1. John. 1. 14...and we beheld his glory (beheld =. to observe; look at; see.)

The G.John was originally un-named. The author does not identify himself. This is not a 1st-hand account of meeting Jesus.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
2. John 21:24 - 25 This is the deciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things and we know that his testimony is true.

"... WE know HIS testimony is true"
is NOT 1st-hand testimony.

It's someone ELSE making a claim about a book.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
2. 1. John. 1-4 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, [what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld, and our hands handled concerning the word manifested and we have seen and witnesses, and declare to you the life, the eternal which was with the Father and was manifested to us what we have seen and heard declares we to you also that ye also may have fellowship with us yea and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ and these things we write that our joy be made full.

What did he handle?
What did he touch?
According to his words?

The 'word made manifested'.
That could mean many many things.
The writer had a spiritual experience, so real he could touch it.
But he certainly does NOT say he touched Jesus.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
(Here the author of I. John makes it crystal clear that he witnessed Jesus Christ in the Flesh.)

No he doesn't.
He saw the 'word made manifest' - not 'Jesus in the flesh' - that's just what YOU want to believe - he certainly doesn't say it.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
So:
1. admit you are a LIAR
2. Leave the thread
3. put a sock in it.

or -
4. show Imago is wrong. again.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
However as I said, even if all books in the bible are anonymously written makes your point moot.

Haha !
Learned the difference between 'mute' and 'moot', did ya ?


K.

Gday,

Originally posted by Beneia
The earliest non-Christian testimony to the Lord’s existence is that of the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37-100). In Antiquities of the Jews, the historian twice referred to Jesus. In one passage he called Jesus “the Christ,” referred to His “marvelous deeds,” and alluded to His death and resurrection (18.3.3). In another place, Josephus commented on the trial of James, and identified Him as “the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ” (20.9.1).

JOSEPHUS (c.96CE)

The famous Testamonium Flavianum (the T.F.) in the Antiquities of the Jews is considered probably the best evidence for Jesus, yet it has some serious problems :

* the T.F. as it stands uses clearly Christian phrases and names Christ as Messiah, it could not possibly have been written by the devout Jew Josephus (who remained a Jew and refused to call anyone "messiah" in his book which was partly about how false messiahs kept leading Israel astray.),

* The T.F. was not mentioned by any of the early Church fathers who reviewed Josephus.

* Origen even says Josephus does NOT call Jesus the Messiah, showing the passage was not present c.200CE.

* The T.F. first showed up in manuscripts of Eusebius, and was still absent from some manuscripts as late as 8th century.


An analysis of Josephus can be found here:
www.humanists.net...

In short - this passage is possibly a total forgery (or at best a corrupt form of a lost original.)
But, yes,
it COULD just be actual evidence for Jesus - late, corrupt, controversial but just POSSIBLY real historical evidence.


K.

Originally posted by Kapyong
Gday,

Originally posted by Imago Dei
Here are just few to refute your LIES.

You lied that I was a plagiarist, then when called on your lie, the best you can do is brazen it out and call ME a liar? Pathetic. I wrote that article myself after actually reading the ancient books - something you've never bothered to do. You didn't even know WHO wrote the Gospels!

Originally posted by Imago Dei
1. John. 1. 14...and we beheld his glory (beheld =. to observe; look at; see.)

The G.John was originally un-named. The author does not identify himself. This is not a 1st-hand account of meeting Jesus. Yes it is, He doesnt need to identify himself to state that he/she is an eye witness, he isnt on trial, unless you are counting your kangaroo court as a court room. [/u


2. John 21:24 - 25 This is the deciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things and we know that his testimony is true.

"... WE know HIS testimony is true"
is NOT 1st-hand testimony. yes it is, by the author, "we" implies that.

It's someone ELSE making a claim about a book. No it's a claim made in the book, not about a book, you are making unsubstantiated claims about a book, and until you prove the book invalid, your just full of hot air, questioningthe authorship does not do that, we Christians dont claim to know who the authors are, so agains, what exactly is your point?, You dont have one you see.


2. 1. John. 1-4 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, [what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld, and our hands handled concerning the word manifested and we have seen and witnesses, and declare to you the life, the eternal which was with the Father and was manifested to us what we have seen and heard declares we to you also that ye also may have fellowship with us yea and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ and these things we write that our joy be made full.

What did he handle? Jesus
What did he touch? JesusAccording to his words? Yes according to the word, yes, and? Your stating no Christian ever said they witnessed Christ. Retract that stamenet immediately and applogize. Ive poved you wrong.

The 'word made manifested'. Jesus is the word.
That could mean many many things. It means one thing only.
The writer had a spiritual experience, so real he could touch it.
But he certainly does NOT say he touched Jesus. Stop lieing. Yes he does...

Originally posted by Imago Dei
(Here the author of I. John makes it crystal clear that he witnessed Jesus Christ in the Flesh.)

No he doesn't. Yes he does, "in the beginning was the word the wrod was God, aka Jesus. Your lieing disinf merchant/terorist.


Yes he does. Liar liar pants on fire. Your pathetic mate.

Jesus is the word. Obvioulsy you dont know the scripture, so shut your lieing trap about the topic. Go and read another ancient book. Until you have read the bible you dont have the write to contibute on the topic, well you do its a free country, but it's a waste of time debating you, until you do. Clearly you haven't a clue about the topic a part from athiests dogma and lies you have believed without examining the evidence. I dont mind people not beliveing it, but I detest with a passion unbelivers like you who lie to their back teeth about waht is written in it, and or what is not.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
So:
1. admit you are a LIAR
2. Leave the thread
3. put a sock in it.

Originally posted by Imago Dei
However as I said, even if all books in the bible are anonymously written makes your point moot.

Haha !
Learned the difference between 'mute' and 'moot', did ya ?

You got the message the first time and still lhave ignored the point, dont correct my spelling until you stop lieing and ignoring valid points made by myself and others.

K.


Nobody knows who wrote the gospels. I thinks it's clear John wrote John though. so what?

You dont applogize when your wrong, so Im not going to either, not that I believe I am mind you. Brazen is our middle name.

The fact is we know God wrote the lot of them...Panin proved that. Its no longer blind faith, it's blind faith to ignore the reality.

Your now brazening out your crap, and when you make a blatant mistake about the number of books you exposed yourself as someone who knows nothing about the bible. Now you say you've read the ancient books, well so what? What ancient books? The edmonds cook book, that's pretty ancient!.


Now until you address the fact that scripture proves you wrong, and admit it, I cant see why any one needs to take anything you say serioulsy. I certainly wont be from this point on, not that I did from the outset mind you.








[edit on 3-7-2009 by Imago Dei]

reply to post by makinho21


Yes Jesus is walking the earth and yes he exists or you wouldn't be....well anything really.

Check this out. What I'm going to show you not only applies to Jesus name, but most any name in the bible be it a city, an area, a person, an animal and is a major key in understanding scripture. Why this is important is because the bible is plainly written, but there does exist an element that is hidden because people don't think to look there. Even though the hint is "MORE" then given, people still give it not even a second thought.

Here is the hint. "IN MY NAME"

Jesus is from Yahshua. This is a cognitive of two words.

Yahweh which means in Hebrew..."the self existent one".

and

Shua which means in Hebrew..."salvation".

This renders...."the self existent one is salvation".

So, the truth is that "the self existent one is salvation".

"He is the light of every person coming into the world"....You my friend can't be any closer to Jesus then you are your whole life. "For I am with YOU even until the end of life age"....Love Jesus

P.S. Remember the "word" is living and always occurring, so replace the names with the meanings..(this takes some earnest work) and you will find the story takes on a very person meaning....check out your own name sometime

Moses=Drawn out
Aaron=Exalted
Miriam/Mary=Spoiled
Issac=Laughter
Adam=Mankind
Eve=Life Giver
Cain=Spear
Able=Arrogent
Noah=Rest
Ham=Hot of Habitat
Shem=Name
Abraham=High father/Father of many
Japith=Expansion
Absolom=Father of Peace
David=Loved

"I regard no man, but those that DO the will of God"....All of these names are characteristics or actions of people even so the ones not listed of which there are many. Those people are the people around you every day and the things that light your life embodied into characters of an unexplained name.

Peace

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
reply to post by makinho21

 

Yes Jesus is walking the earth and yes he exists or you wouldn't be....well anything really.

Check this out. What I'm going to show you not only applies to Jesus name, but most any name in the bible be it a city, an area, a person, an animal and is a major key in understanding scripture. Why this is important is because the bible is plainly written, but there does exist an element that is hidden because people don't think to look there. Even though the hint is "MORE" then given, people still give it not even a second thought.

Here is the hint. "IN MY NAME"

Jesus is from Yahshua. This is a cognitive of two words.

Yahweh which means in Hebrew..."the self existent one".

and

Shua which means in Hebrew..."salvation".

This renders...."the self existent one is salvation".

So, the truth is that "the self existent one is salvation".

"He is the light of every person coming into the world"....You my friend can't be any closer to Jesus then you are your whole life. "For I am with YOU even until the end of life age"....Love Jesus

P.S. Remember the "word" is living and always occurring, so replace the names with the meanings..(this takes some earnest work) and you will find the story takes on a very person meaning....check out your own name sometime

Moses=Drawn out
Aaron=Exalted
Miriam/Mary=Spoiled
Issac=Laughter
Adam=Mankind
Eve=Life Giver
Cain=Spear
Able=Arrogent
Noah=Rest
Ham=Hot of Habitat
Shem=Name
Abraham=High father/Father of many
Japith=Expansion
Absolom=Father of Peace
David=Loved

"I regard no man, but those that DO the will of God"....All of these names are characteristics or actions of people even so the ones not listed of which there are many. Those people are the people around you every day and the things that light your life embodied into characters of an unexplained name.

Peace

Jesus is not in every individual when they are born, He does not enter in until one is born again, through faith in Christ. This is just more of the same old disinf. The holy spirit is in the world, Jesus is not walking the earth.

reply to post by Imago Dei

Jesus is not in every individual when they are born, He does not enter in until one is born again, through faith in Christ. This is just more of the same old disinf. The holy spirit is in the world, Jesus is not walking the earth.

Hi Imago/

Our souls are from God.
All mankind has a 'Soul' the spirit of God was breathed into us in creation.
It was the Lord Jesus who instituted Baptism.
It was the Lord Jesus who said "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark 16:16).
"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,
baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit..." (Matthew 28:19)....It's a nessasity!
And again...."Truly. truly, I say to you,
unless one is born of water and the Spirit,
he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5)A baptism is like a DEATH and a Resurrection....
Faith alone?
Does not the DEVIL too, have a belief in God?
And we have more ..... "But to all who received him,
who believed in his name,
he gave power to become children of God; who were born,
not of blood,
nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13)
Immersed into the baptisamal font(fully immersed)is like being buried and then rising again from the grave.
We die in our old sin of which was DEATH through the first man Adam,and rise with Christ in the Resurrection of Him in a new life.
HERE,read what St. Paul says: "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into his death.
We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death,
so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father we, too,
might walk in newness of life" (Rom 6:3-4).

ICXC NIKA
helen

Originally posted by helen670
reply to post by Imago Dei

 

Jesus is not in every individual when they are born, He does not enter in until one is born again, through faith in Christ. This is just more of the same old disinf. The holy spirit is in the world, Jesus is not walking the earth.

Hi Imago/

Our souls are from God.
All mankind has a 'Soul' the spirit of God was breathed into us in creation.
It was the Lord Jesus who instituted Baptism.
It was the Lord Jesus who said "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark 16:16).
"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,
baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit..." (Matthew 28:19)....It's a nessasity!
And again...."Truly. truly, I say to you,
unless one is born of water and the Spirit,
he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5)A baptism is like a DEATH and a Resurrection....
Faith alone?
Does not the DEVIL too, have a belief in God?
And we have more ..... "But to all who received him,
who believed in his name,
he gave power to become children of God; who were born,
not of blood,
nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13)
Immersed into the baptisamal font(fully immersed)is like being buried and then rising again from the grave.
We die in our old sin of which was DEATH through the first man Adam,and rise with Christ in the Resurrection of Him in a new life.
HERE,read what St. Paul says: "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into his death.
We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death,
so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father we, too,
might walk in newness of life" (Rom 6:3-4).

ICXC NIKA
helen

Hi Helen, I agree with you, although Im not sure why you posted this to me, because your post confirms what I said in the previous post.

However that said, John instituted baptisim, not Jesus, Jesus submitted to the baptisim of John.

reply to post by Imago Dei


Hi Imago/

Jesus came to SHOW us in PERSON what was needed for us to be reconciled with God.
He did all this to show us that MAN can be reconciled with God through HIS life on EARTH as Godman,also called the Second ADAM.
He became MAN to show US, how to do things HIS way.
The Baptism is a MUST!
Jesus Christ didn't NEED a baptism as He was God, but only DID this to SHOW us of the New Way...for The OLD way was passed away!

To remove the consequences of the 'original sin'.
To wash away all other sins committed before the time of Baptism if the person is beyond the age of infancy.
To unite the person to "The Body of Christ" (that is, the Church), and to open the door of salvation and eternal life to him or her.

Without a BAPTISM one is NOT a Christian!
Baptism is a MUST,it was done in early Christianity....otherwise one cannot be a Christian simply by FAITH alone!
The Holy Scriptures testify of this..."For as many of you as have been baptised in Christ,
have put on Christ" (Galatians 3:26-27).
"Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a newcreation; the old has passed away, behold the new has come" (2 Corinth 5:17).
“As many of you as have been baptised into Christ, have put on Christ. Alleluia” (Galatians 3:27).
St Paul’s Epistle to the (Romans 6:3-11) and the Reading from the Holy Gospel (Matt. 28:16-20) the Priest says to the child, “You are baptised; you are illuminated; you are anointed with the Holy Myrrh; you are hallowed; you are washed clean, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen”.
As the Lord Himself said, in His discourse with Nicodemus... Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God (John 3:5)

The baptism of John prepared a man for the reception of the Messiah and His Kingdom (Matt. 3:1-2; Luke 1:16; 3:3).
John's baptism was, in effect, a baptism of repentance (Mark 1:4; Acts 19:4) and not in the Name of the Holy Trinity.
Therefore those baptized by him were not reborn through the grace of the Holy Spirit and had to be rebaptized later (Acts 19:35).

Jesus Christ's WORD...He appeared to His disciples and said.
All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age (Matt. 28:18-20).
The necessity of this baptism was further stressed by the Savior when He said to them.
'' He who believes and is baptised will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned (Mark 16:16).
The Day of Holy Pentecost....And Peter said to the people, 'Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit'.
So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls (Acts 2:38,41).
Why Baptise, if FAITH was only thing that was needed?
The Holy Apostle Paul say's... if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature [2 COT. 5:17)
and thus the regeneration of man's personality begins with the Sacrament of Baptism.
As Scripture says, as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Gal. 3:27)....The Old way was Curcusition, the NEW TESTAMENT says the Old way has passed and the New way is through the Baptism of the Father,Son and Holy Spirit.
''In the Old Testament, circumcision was the prototype of the Sacrament of Baptism in the New Testament, by which the believer enters into a new covenant with God (Col. 2:11-12).

Again...Holy Scripture itself speaks of the baptism of whole families by the Apostles (Acts 16:14-15; 30-39;..why do THIS,again, if FAITH was all that was needed?
Early Fathers of the Church were of ONE mind and ONE Spirit...all doing EXACTLY as it was by the APOSTLES...nothing has changed.
As St. Paul says, we are called upon to confess one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism (Eph. 4:5)...ONE not, many faiths, many different ways of ding things our OWN ways!
Psalm 31 is read after the Immersion in Water..fully immersed and NOT just sprinkling of water, as the Roman Catholic do.

A Psalm of instruction by David.
Blessed (are they) whose transgressions are forgiven, and who sins are covered.
2 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin, and whose mouth there is no guile.
3 Because I kept silence, my bones waxed old, from my crying all the day. 4 For day and night thy hand was heavy upon me: I became thoroughly miserable while a thorn was fastened in [me]. Pause.
5 I acknowledged my sin and hid not mine iniquity

ICXC NIKA
helen

Hi helen, your preaching to the converted, why? Im a born again believer in Christ, I have been fully immersed in the waters of baptism. Three times in actual fact and heading for a fourth, mainly due to legalistic church leaders who would not accept my baptism from other churches before I could become a member of thiers. I dont play church any more, but I know the scripture and do my best to live my faith. You may not like my contentions with the heathen, I suggest in that case that you pray for me, however you would do better to pray for them.

God bless you.

PS. Its a shame we christian today can not be of one mind, instead it appears we like to publically chastise our brothers and sisters in front of unbelivers, no wonder people dont want a bar of it.








[edit on 5-7-2009 by Imago Dei]

Jesus is not in every individual when they are born, He does not enter in until one is born again, through faith in Christ. This is just more of the same old disinf. The holy spirit is in the world, Jesus is not walking the earth.

Assuming you mean Jesus here as in God. One of the trinity and not Jesus the person. I know, I know they are the same thing in your mind but not everyones so I wanted to make the distinction.

Since the thread is about proof I must bring up the point that only in the Gospel of John is Jesus the Divine. The other three gospels Jesus is mentioned as the son of God true, but only after his baptism and never once is he said to be God himself. Only in John does Jesus talk about the worship of himself as the way to heaven. The other three Gospels he preaches in one liners about the kingdom of God not HIS kingdom. The teaching of Jesus in the synoptic gospels is much the same is liberal Judaism it is only in John that his teachings seem to directly contradict Jewish beliefs.

I point this out so you can see that one of these things is not like the other. That to base your faith more upon one gospel is you right I am sure but is far from proof. I am sure some of you Thomas Christians out there would agree. If you haven't read the Gospel of Thomas give it a try. In it is a Jesus that preaches that we are all divine, that God is in all of us from the beginning.

Originally posted by Histopherness

Jesus is not in every individual when they are born, He does not enter in until one is born again, through faith in Christ. This is just more of the same old disinf. The holy spirit is in the world, Jesus is not walking the earth.

Assuming you mean Jesus here as in God. One of the trinity and not Jesus the person. I know, I know they are the same thing in your mind but not everyones so I wanted to make the distinction.

Since the thread is about proof I must bring up the point that only in the Gospel of John is Jesus the Divine. The other three gospels Jesus is mentioned as the son of God true, but only after his baptism and never once is he said to be God himself. Only in John does Jesus talk about the worship of himself as the way to heaven. The other three Gospels he preaches in one liners about the kingdom of God not HIS kingdom. The teaching of Jesus in the synoptic gospels is much the same is liberal Judaism it is only in John that his teachings seem to directly contradict Jewish beliefs.

I point this out so you can see that one of these things is not like the other. That to base your faith more upon one gospel is you right I am sure but is far from proof. I am sure some of you Thomas Christians out there would agree. If you haven't read the Gospel of Thomas give it a try. In it is a Jesus that preaches that we are all divine, that God is in all of us from the beginning.

Among many many things, the four Gospels show the four dimensions of Christ.

Mathew - King, shows his royal blood linked to David IE The son of David
Mark - Son of God
Luke - The saviour
John - God

Neither refute or diminish the value of each other as to who and what Christ is, so Im not sure what your point is.

The Gospel of Thomas is not icluded in the 66 books of the bible for one reason, it's not the inspired word of God. You may as well be reading the Gospel of Walt Disney.

I base my faith on the entire word of God, all of which points to Christ as the saviour of mankind. And the only means of salvation. If you don't belive that, thats fine, but dont try and tell me what the bible means because it is a Christian book and belongs to the Christian faith and to all those who will become believers in it.

Yes the knockers and mockers can have their fun with it, but they can't preach to the converted from it. LOL.

The gospel message is the same throughout the intire New Testament, it is "the gospel of the kingdom of the heavens" This is the gospel that Jesus preached and the gospel all the deciples and apostles preached, and the gospel that John the baptist preached. There is only one gospel, yes it has some 17 different variations, but all the same Gospel, and it is "the gospel of the kindom of the heavens"

That we are all divine is the anti Christ jesus and follows on from the lie from Satan in the garden of Eden. I dont suppose your one of those that believe that satan was coming to rescue us form the evil God yahweh are you ? Ie The satan christians?

By the way, my point was to refute the claim of Krapwrong who stated there are no eyewitness accounts of Christ by the any of the authors of the New Testament at all. Of that I have given poof.













[edit on 6-7-2009 by Imago Dei]

Hey Let the Reader Understand --

Your etymologies are a little muddled. Try to trace the roots back to the Canaanite-Hebrew or the Egyptian to get a more accurate sense of these names. Don't forget the H often existed (as in Hezekiel, or as in Henoch) as well...

Here is what you wrote

Moses=Drawn out
Aaron=Exalted
Miriam/Mary=Spoiled
Issac=Laughter
Adam=Mankind
Eve=Life Giver
Cain=Spear
Able=Arrogent
Noah=Rest
Ham=Hot of Habitat
Shem=Name
Abraham=High father/Father of many
Japith=Expansion
Absolom=Father of Peace
David=Loved

However you don't show the Hebrew derivations which were taken from the Egyptian and others from proto-Canaanite cognates

Mosheh (Moses) = Egyp. lit. 'born of', 'son of' as in Ra-Mosheh (Ramses) lit. son of Ra etc. The term has NOTHING to do with 'ma'aseh' to 'draw out'

A'aron = Egypt. 'chest, box, ark'

Miryam (Miriam) = Egypt. 'princess' 'royal'

Chayah (Eve) = rare singular form of the more normal Hebrew plural form of the word: Chayim (lit. 'life' --as in LeChayim, 'here's to life !')


Che'vel (Abel) = Heb. 'nothingness', 'zero', 'emptiness' (maybe 'full of hot air' would capture some of the the spirit !)

Adam = Heb. 'mudlike', 'red' (as in Edom) - sometimes referring to male and female in the plural cf: ('in the day in which they were created, male and female created he them in his own image and he called THEIR name Adam, and he blessed them...' (Bere#h chapter 5:1-2)

Shem = Heb. lit. 'platform', 'title', 'placard' 'mound' hence, 'reputation' (i.e. 'to make a name for ones'self')

Avraham (Abraham) - Heb. 'Father of the Tribes'


Linguistic roots betray cultural origins, and can show from whence character names originally derived, e.g. Mosheh (Moses), A'aron, Miryam (Miriam), Pahao-Nehesy (Phineas) are all Egyptian / Nubian names/titles which show where the characters derived...i.e. from Egypt &tc. so...one must be ALWAYS very careful when one translates ancient names into modern English...

Just my $0.02