| |
| Name Correspondence in the Gospels |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| Lynx_Fox |
 Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:02 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Moderator
Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 938
Location: Washington State
|
| Apopohis Reject wrote: |
Incidentally, as tombs often held more than one individual, the identification of the deceased person, was not usually on the tomb itself, but rather on the ossuary inside the tomb. |
Why be deliberately obtuse? It would be more honest to acknowledge your mistake and admit that the name of the period that's now commonly translated into the English form "Jesus" was in fact very common name of that period and move the thread into a more constructive direction.
Or can you show anything credible that puts Hachlili's work in doubt?
_________________
Meteorologist/Naturalist & Soldier |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Apopohis Reject |
| Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Bachelors Degree
Joined: 15 Aug 2008
Posts: 405
|
| Lynx_Fox wrote: |
| Apopohis Reject wrote: |
Incidentally, as tombs often held more than one individual, the identification of the deceased person, was not usually on the tomb itself, but rather on the ossuary inside the tomb. |
Why be deliberately obtuse? It would be more honest to acknowledge your mistake and admit that the name of the period that's now commonly translated into the English form "Jesus" was in fact very common name of that period and move the thread into a more constructive direction.
Or can you show anything credible that puts Hachlili's work in doubt? |
I do not know Hachlili's work, so it would be petty at the very least, for me to have any issue with it. I only know of your interpretation of it, which so far seems to be rather on the rubbery side.
In any case, your original position has now apparently flipped - no longer being in contradiction to my post of the 19th., so I would suggest that perhaps you might acknowledge your mistake, and now let it go.
Finally, it doesn't surprise me either, that you entirely missed this point - ONLY the (very late) addition of the letter 'J' suggests the name 'Jesus' is in any way an English translation, otherwise it remains entirely GREEK!
_________________
sunshinewarrior: If two people are using the same word, but applying different meanings to it, then they're not communicating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| stlekee |
| Posted: Sat Sep 04, 2010 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 03 Sep 2010
Posts: 12
|
I have no problem with people not believing that there is a God, but this really has nothing to do with the Bible. The Bible is a book written long ago by people who really didn't know much of anything except how to survive in this world. They tried to write down their history and explain things the best they could.
Try to imagine what it must have been like to live in those days thousands of years ago. Their knowledge must have been so minimal that they would seem like a different species compared to modern people. So why do we expect any more from them then the few, very few surviving accounts and stories that managed to survive. In that sense they are sacred, a record of the past. But not just a record of what happened, a record of how primitive people saw the world and thought about the world and lived in the world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
