Origins of 'Gospel of Jesus's Wife' Begin to Emerge

[milk and honey]

Absolutely, brother. I knew of this one man who told me he didn't believe in Jesus because he wasn't raised Christian. He told me he made an honest effort but couldn't come to believe in the Word. Unfortunately this individual passed not too long ago. Now he has to pay for his decision for all eternity in pain and anguish.

Fellow CDC'ers, Brother Milk & Honey speaks the truth! Believe! Repent! Be saved!

I think you are making fun of me but its ok. My Bible told me when I was younger that it would happen and it has continue to happen.

You don't have to be "Raise Christian" to be saved of God. I believe in predestination so I will continue to trust in Jesus

There is no way you aren't trolling. Nobody is that blind.

If God is real, he is a total child and a complete immature asshole.

Believe in me or rot in hell. You aren't from America? Never heard of me? Rot in hell.

I am not trolling and I am not blind.

No need for such language especially with younger people on here

The people who have never heard of Jesus are in the far minority. Like I said Heaven is for those who come unto God and believe in him. Why let in everyone when most of them are against him. There has to be punishment for those who reject Jesus. Jesus died on the cross as a way to cover all of our sins but our saves aren't cover till we come to Jesus.

Jesus gave his life and he wants the people who follow and love him. Its totally fair and just for God to send people to hell who reject him.

[thejazz97]

I never understood why repenting should make a difference. Get a get out of hell free card just because you admit doing it? Bonus. Maybe it's just a way to keep people going to church.

Repentance only makes a difference if your heart is in it.

There is no way you aren't trolling. Nobody is that blind.

If God is real, he is a total child and a complete immature asshole.

Believe in me or rot in hell. You aren't from America? Never heard of me? Rot in hell.

Technically, we're all supposed to rot in hell because of sin. And it doesn't matter if you believe in him or not - even demons do.

Relationship over religion, that's how it was meant to be.

I believe for those who have never heard of the one true God do go to heaven. For us who aren't on a desert island and heard of God many times and refused to come unto him he will condemn.

It's not about condemnation, it's about salvation bud.

"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." - John 3:17

[milk and honey]

If you father brought you a bike and give u a option all your childhood to take it and ride it but you never touch it. What do you think the father will do when you leave the house? He will take it away and offer it to others to use. Also will probably refused to buy extra gifts that aren't needed to survive (skate board, scooter ect...)

Why would the father give his more gifts when he doesn't take the gift he offered

If we don't take a free gift that Jesus lovingly gave to us then why should God accept us into heaven?

[inane]

This is getting creepy.

[milk and honey]

Repentance only makes a difference if your heart is in it.

Technically, we're all supposed to rot in hell because of sin. And it doesn't matter if you believe in him or not - even demons do.

Relationship over religion, that's how it was meant to be.

It's not about condemnation, it's about salvation bud.

"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." - John 3:17

Oh I agree its about salvation but salvation isn't base on works. Its good to warn people about what might happen to them if they reject the gift of salvation.

[Bill Sikes]

We started by discussing whether "most Biblical scholars" considered Josephus a forgery, and are now at an article on examiner.com published by a freethinker quoting a linguist (who doesn't make any claim of being a Biblical scholar or speaking/knowing the language/history/culture that he's commenting on).

I'll reiterate that I am not a Biblical scholar myself, but I do know personally many who are...who know the language, history, culture, etc... of what we are speaking about, and I can assure you that "most Biblical scholars" do not question Josephus' account of either followers of Jesus or a historical figure named "Jesus, the so-called Christ".

Following is a list of important Christian authorities who studied and/or mentioned Josephus but not the Jesus passage:

• Justin Martyr (c. 100-c. 165), who obviously pored over Josephus's works, makes no mention of the TF.
• Theophilus (d. 180), Bishop of Antioch--no mention of the TF.
• Irenaeus (c. 120/140-c. 200/203), saint and compiler of the New Testament, has not a word about the TF.
• Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-211/215), influential Greek theologian and prolific Christian writer, head of the Alexandrian school, says nothing about the TF.
• Origen (c. 185-c. 254), no mention of the TF and specifically states that Josephus did not believe Jesus was "the Christ."
• Hippolytus (c. 170-c. 235), saint and martyr, nothing about the TF.
• The author of the ancient Syriac text, "History of Armenia," refers to Josephus but not the TF.
• Minucius Felix (d. c. 250), lawyer and Christian convert--no mention of the TF.
• Anatolius (230-c. 270/280)--no mention of TF.
• Chrysostom (c. 347-407), saint and Syrian prelate, not a word about the TF.
• Methodius, saint of the 9th century--even at this late date there were apparently copies of Josephus without the TF, as Methodius makes no mention of it.
• Photius (c. 820-891), Patriarch of Constantinople, not a word about the TF, again indicating copies of Josephus devoid of the passage, or, perhaps, a rejection of it because it was understood to be fraudulent.

Another authority, Bishop Warburton, called the TF a "rank forgery, and a very stupid one, too." Remsburg further related the words of the "Rev. Dr. Giles, of the Established Church of England," who stated:

"Those who are best acquainted with the character of Josephus, and the style of his writings, have no hesitation in condemning this passage as a forgery, interpolated in the text during the third century by some pious Christian, who was scandalized that so famous a writer as Josephus should have taken no notice of the gospels, or of Christ, their subject...."

In addition, the Rev. S. Baring-Gould remarked:

"This passage is first quoted by Eusebius (fl. A.D. 315) in two places (Hist. Eccl., lib. I, c. xi; Demonst. Evang., lib. iii); but it was unknown to Justin Martyr (fl. A.D. 140), Clement of Alexandria (fl. A.D. 192), Tertullian (fl. A.D. 193), and Origen (fl. A.D. 230). Such a testimony would certainly have been produced by Justin in his apology or in his controversy with Trypho the Jew, had it existed in the copies of Josephus at his time. The silence of Origen is still more significant. Celsus, in his book against Christianity, introduces a Jew. Origen attacks the argument of Celsus and his Jew. He could not have failed to quote the words of Josephus, whose writings he knew, had the passage existed in the genuine text. He, indeed, distinctly affirms that Josephus did not believe in Christ (Contr. Cels. I)."

http://truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

[aGENT]

If you father brought you a bike and give u a option all your childhood to take it and ride it but you never touch it. What do you think the father will do when you leave the house? He will take it away and offer it to others to use. Also will probably refused to buy extra gifts that aren't needed to survive (skate board, scooter ect...)

Why would the father give his more gifts when he doesn't take the gift he offered

If we don't take a free gift that Jesus lovingly gave to us then why should God accept us into heaven?

The bikes a woman, right?

[Shift-4]

This is getting creepy.

if by 'creepy' you mean hilarious then you are right

Because I am laughing my ass off right now

[thejazz97]

if by 'creepy' you mean hilarious then you are right

Because I am laughing my ass off right now

Is this what I was like 6 months ago?

[TOMapleLaughs]

Repentance only makes a difference if your heart is in it.

How's that quantifiable? I guess God will know. But in that case, a person could live a life absolutely full of sin, but then repent with his dying breath, and his heart would be in it, due to imminent death and the threat of hell. So he still receives a get out of hell free card? Or no? What exactly are the guidelines? And who are they set by? The Bible? I doubt that. It can be interpreted a million different ways.

Anyway, this is OT. The topic is about Jesus being married. This would have happened after the crucifixion, meaning he did not ascend to heaven, hence, not son of God? Hence, no Christian faith? (Yeah right.)

[Cerridwen]

Can a mod just re-title this "The God Thread v.5703943953450475, please?

[aGENT]

Is this what I was like 6 months ago?

Worse

[Shift-4]

Is this what I was like 6 months ago?

I don't recognize you now, how would I know about 6 months ago.

[thejazz97]

Worse

Oh wow lol.

How's that quantifiable? I guess God will know. But in that case, a person could live a life absolutely full of sin, but then repent with his dying breath, and his heart would be in it, due to imminent death and the threat of hell. So he still receives a get out of hell free card? Or no? What exactly are the guidelines? And who are they set by? The Bible? I doubt that. It can be interpreted a million different ways.

Guidelines are set by God, given to men, and recorded. (Unfortunately, some people have used that to their own gain, and that's what you guys know as Christianity and Christians - the judgmental, "our way or hell", unmerciful people that western culture knows and despises.)

Hitler could be in heaven for all we know. If he really, truly, actually had a change of heart, then there is grace for those. I'm not sure about the people who are doing it to get out of hell, but I hope that there's grace for them too.

[thejazz97]

I don't recognize you now, how would I know about 6 months ago.

It was more of an open question to the likes of Webster, LC, and JR, etsen, pretty much anyone I was debating with over what Milk is arguing now. I had some not-so-good moments back then

[theminister]

I thought the real controversy for extra-testamental writings was how Timothy was hot for some serious Saviour on Disciple action...

[RUPERTKBD]

I believe for those who have never heard of the one true God do go to heaven. For us who aren't on a desert island and heard of God many times and refused to come unto him he will condemn.

I think pretty much everyone has heard of him, maybe with the exception of some deep Amazon tribes and possibly some remote south Pacific islands.

The fact is, they choose not to believe in him because they didn't grow up bombarded with the fire and brimstone propaganda that we in the west are subjected to because some people believe that a book written by humans and translated several times is literally the word of God.

[Putgolzin]

Following is a list of important Christian authorities who studied and/or mentioned Josephus but not the Jesus passage:

• Justin Martyr (c. 100-c. 165), who obviously pored over Josephus's works, makes no mention of the TF.
• Theophilus (d. 180), Bishop of Antioch--no mention of the TF.
• Irenaeus (c. 120/140-c. 200/203), saint and compiler of the New Testament, has not a word about the TF.
• Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-211/215), influential Greek theologian and prolific Christian writer, head of the Alexandrian school, says nothing about the TF.
• Origen (c. 185-c. 254), no mention of the TF and specifically states that Josephus did not believe Jesus was "the Christ."
• Hippolytus (c. 170-c. 235), saint and martyr, nothing about the TF.
• The author of the ancient Syriac text, "History of Armenia," refers to Josephus but not the TF.
• Minucius Felix (d. c. 250), lawyer and Christian convert--no mention of the TF.
• Anatolius (230-c. 270/280)--no mention of TF.
• Chrysostom (c. 347-407), saint and Syrian prelate, not a word about the TF.
• Methodius, saint of the 9th century--even at this late date there were apparently copies of Josephus without the TF, as Methodius makes no mention of it.
• Photius (c. 820-891), Patriarch of Constantinople, not a word about the TF, again indicating copies of Josephus devoid of the passage, or, perhaps, a rejection of it because it was understood to be fraudulent.

Another authority, Bishop Warburton, called the TF a "rank forgery, and a very stupid one, too." Remsburg further related the words of the "Rev. Dr. Giles, of the Established Church of England," who stated:

"Those who are best acquainted with the character of Josephus, and the style of his writings, have no hesitation in condemning this passage as a forgery, interpolated in the text during the third century by some pious Christian, who was scandalized that so famous a writer as Josephus should have taken no notice of the gospels, or of Christ, their subject...."

In addition, the Rev. S. Baring-Gould remarked:

"This passage is first quoted by Eusebius (fl. A.D. 315) in two places (Hist. Eccl., lib. I, c. xi; Demonst. Evang., lib. iii); but it was unknown to Justin Martyr (fl. A.D. 140), Clement of Alexandria (fl. A.D. 192), Tertullian (fl. A.D. 193), and Origen (fl. A.D. 230). Such a testimony would certainly have been produced by Justin in his apology or in his controversy with Trypho the Jew, had it existed in the copies of Josephus at his time. The silence of Origen is still more significant. Celsus, in his book against Christianity, introduces a Jew. Origen attacks the argument of Celsus and his Jew. He could not have failed to quote the words of Josephus, whose writings he knew, had the passage existed in the genuine text. He, indeed, distinctly affirms that Josephus did not believe in Christ (Contr. Cels. I)."

http://truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

I don't think you know what you're arguing anymore, right?

Like, I know you've found this one source after you watched Religulous (which is fair enough; most people don't know enough about these things to have even a starting point to work from)...but I'm not questioning that there are discussions and controversy over ancient texts...pretty much every Biblical text with any point of controversy has been discussed ad nauseam through the centuries, and this from people who are on the "same side"! This is really no different, nor is the timbre of the 'controversy'.

I'm not sure you've actually read everything you've cut and pasted, but of course Josephus didn't believe Jesus was the Christ, he wasn't a Christian.

As far as the actual discussion (that most Biblical scholars regard Josephus as a forgery) a quick reading of the Wikipedia article on the subject of "Josephus on Jesus" is actually more in line with where Biblical scholars land.

[theminister]

I think pretty much everyone has heard of him, maybe with the exception of some deep Amazon tribes and possibly some remote south Pacific islands.

The fact is, they choose not to believe in him because they didn't grow up bombarded with the fire and brimstone propaganda that we in the west are subjected to because some people believe that a book written by humans and translated several times is literally the word of God.

Becoming an apostate is one of the best things I've ever done for myself.

Of course, that damns me to Hell... or so I hear.

[RUPERTKBD]

Becoming an apostate is one of the best things I've ever done for myself.

Of course, that damns me to Hell... or so I hear.

I think with less and less believers in the world these days, Satan is probably going to have to open up a new wing...