/truth/ - Paranomal

>>4332
Your image is anime.

I didn't think anyone was using this board really. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HpPEdNOyK0

>>4332
based

>>4331
talking like a redditor who watched a couple videos on medieval history isn't going to convince me to worship the god of the jews.

>>4337
1769 KJV is actually considered fully modern english.

Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter. So Paul departed from among them. Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them. (Acts 17:22-34)

There is not one god but many. Yaheweh is an usurper to thrones he cannot claim, and in truth doesn't claim, for his name is carried on banners by those he has rejected as he sits in the enclosure of Eden. The way to Yahweh and Eden may be through Christ, and through Christ may there be realization of the crimes of the godless Jews, but Christ and Yahweh are not the rules of the hereafter. Merely a path out of this false reality and a return to the pantheons of the true reality.

>>4340
>There is not one god but many. Yaheweh is an usurper to thrones
that alone would make all the "e-Christians" ecelebs seethe to the point of trying to dox you and making them getting drunk as fuck.

So what are the oldest copies of the New Testament still surviving today? The oldest pieces that have survived are from the 2nd century and 3rd century. The oldest full copies of the New Testament are from the 4th century.
Emporer Diocletian (244-312 AD) was the final Emperor who persecuted Christians (303-311 AD), the first Christian Emporer being only one year after the persecution. Unlike previous Emperors, Diocletian was determined not just to destroy christians but Christianity as a whole in a calculated fashion destroying the texts of christians. For this reason we have many New Testament full books after 303 AD but only pieces from before 303 AD. This was the closest the Church ever came to complete extinction before its expansion shortly thereafter. During the persecution christians split pieces of the scriptures among one another to preserve the writings.

For a list of pre-Diocletian New Testament fragments: http://earlynewtestament.com/Manuscriptlist.htm

It was in the nineteenth year of the reign of Diocletian, in the month Dystrus, called March by the Romans, when the feast of the Saviour's passion was near at hand, that royal edicts were published everywhere, commanding that the churches be leveled to the ground and the Scriptures be destroyed by fire, and ordering that those who held places of honor be degraded, and that the household servants, if they persisted in the profession of Christianity, be deprived of freedom. Such was the first edict against us. But not long after, other decrees were issued, commanding that all the rulers of the churches in every place be first thrown into prison, and afterwards by every artifice be compelled to sacrifice. (Eusebius' Church History Book VIII 2:4)

>>4338
>Luke was a Greek man who wrote Acts of the Apostles. This is a book from around 64 AD
Stopped reading there.

Do I need to abstain from eating pork? The Lord told the Isralietes to not eat various animals and parts of animals like the fat, most notably for us: pigs. This command was given to Israel along with many other healthy laws about things such as keeping the body clean. These laws were not given to anyone before Moses or the nations outside of Israel, even rabbinic Jews understand these laws would be fulfilled in some way such as Chaim ibn Attar (1696-1743) who wrote in his commentary on the Torah that the pig would become clean to eat by changing its physical appearance. Rabbinic Jews consider many things temporary until the Messianic age comes when many things will change, however according to them usually nothing in the Torah itself will change or become obsolete.

Laws were in place, while strict, not meant to be to the detriment of the people. Such as when the Lord allows leniency to previous laws about eating sacrificed food if the Israelite lives far away from the altars:
If the place which the LORD thy God hath chosen to put his name there be too far from thee, then thou shalt kill of thy herd and of thy flock, which the LORD hath given thee, as I have commanded thee, and thou shalt eat in thy gates whatsoever thy soul lusteth after. Even as the roebuck and the hart is eaten, so thou shalt eat them: the unclean and the clean shall eat of them alike. Only be sure that thou eat not the blood: for the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh. (Deuteronomy 12:21-23)

Likewise this is how Jesus taught, during his time the Jews treated the Sabbath day extremely strictly not to even lift anything:
And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? (Matthew 12:11)

These laws are part of the old covenant God made with Moses and the children of Israel, a covenant that was given to keep Israel on track and away from the evils other nations were involved in, it was to help keep the line of Abraham pure until the Messiah would come. This covenant was broken and God promised a new covenant which he introduced through Jesus.

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. (Jeremiah 31:31-33)

None of us are part of the old covenant God made with Moses and Israel. Not only did we never agree to enter that covenant but it is no longer even available as it has vanished away (Hebrews 8:13) for a new better covenant (Hebrews 7:22). This is why Paul wrote:
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Colossians 2:16-17)
And Jesus said he came to earth to fulfil the law, which he accomplished (John 19:28).
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Matthew 5:17)

This spiritual understanding of the law of freedom is seen during the Jerusalem Council of 50AD when the Apostles decided:

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. (Acts 15:5-11)
For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. (Acts 15:28-29)

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. (Galatians 2:16)

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes. (Romans 3:10-18)

For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:3-7)

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. (I John 1:8)

God cannot be just unless He punishes to correct wickedness, so to have an eternal paradise of free people. But because all have sinned God sent his Son Jesus Christ who went to the cross, who was lifted up on the cross so that all our sins may be placed on Him to take our punishment for evil. The Bible says: But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8). Christ gave His life up in love for sinners, the people who spit on Him and beat Him, the Bible says He died even for them. John says in the Bible: For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.(John 3:16).
Jesus was taken down from the cross, but three days later He was raised to life again. And this has been preached from the beginning until now and Christ's words have reached the whole earth as the Lord Jesus said they would.

Jesus didn't want the world, only the treasure in the world: his sheep. I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. (John 10:11). It wasn't the nails that held Him to the cross but his love for you and me. Redeeming us cost Him everything, it cost Him all He had. He died with nothing, He was buried in a borrowed burial robe and in a borrowed tomb, being totally sinless and innocent, he gave up everything. And with all the wicked evil that man does, what did God see in us that He would pay so much to offer us redemption.

And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. (Luke 23:39-43)

When the thief on the cross turned to Jesus and believed on Him Jesus said He would be in Paradise with Him. The thief didn't have time to be baptised he didn't have time to do any good works he had time for nothing except faith in Christ. He accepted his own evil deeds and plead to Jesus the Saviour.

>>4350
Steve Mason has shown that Acts couldn't have been written any earlier than the 90s due to its reliance on Josephus, and there's no evidence that the Gospels were written by the people their authorship was traditionally ascribed to. Next you'll be calling the Gospels eyewitness testimonies.

Dark Souls, 40k and Elder Scrolls lore is better than (((Bible))) lore.

>>4352
There is no reliance on Josephus from Luke's two books. If you think there is please show examples. Because Luke actually disagrees with Josephus on the Census of Quirinius.
https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/54/54-1/JETS_54-1_65-87_Rhoads.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVR0jXxJDn0

Acts was written by who it claims to be written by, the companion of Paul, Luke, I don't know if you're claiming it is or isn't. And I would ask you: Why does Acts not record the death of Paul despite half the book being about Paul's ministry, what reason does it end abruptly with 61 and 62 AD being summarised as Paul in Rome. Being that this is church history why does it say nothing of Nero's persecution. You can even track where Luke was in Acts by his subtle references and often he actually wasn't with Paul. I display where he was on the image.
All claims to place Acts after 60's AD have always been weak and never accepted and I'm not sure which arguments you would even put forward. Modern secularist might suddenly like to imagine these things, but there's never been a question about who wrote Acts, just as there is no question to who wrote Josephus. The difference being the oldest surviving copy of Josephus is 800 years after he died and Luke's Acts being less than 200 years, Acts has always been possibly the most important historical book in history and is well preserved and known about and all early documents claim that it was written by the companion of Paul.
Another new secularist thing is to imagine the Gospels were not written by who they were written by. I would need to see some evidence for this as it's a strange idea. The earliest Church documents certainly don't support this claim and there is no reason I have ever seen to believe this in fact quite the contrary.

A book stands on its own, if you want to disprove a book you can try, that's fine, I can answer questions, but you do need specific reasons why John who said he was a disciple of Jesus isn't actually a disciple of Jesus and how he tricked the world as well as many other issues with these new theories.
But you can put any specific thing forward if you wish to say.

>>4354
There's a garbled mishmash of specific references that almost have to be from the Antiquities.

>>4355
Oh no, not this guy. You're sending me MythVision! You can send me a video of Paulogia too if you want. Then I can link Erik Manning videos and we can let the college kids battle.

As I say specific examples. The fact that Josephus and Luke mention same things or terms or anything is of course not going to mean anything. Josephus and Luke both talk about Herod dying, that's a real event that Luke, Josephus and everyone else knew about. And I would say again Josephus and Luke's mention of it you can't assume somehow one is getting information from the other. Josephus is very specific about Herod's horrible diseased death, whereas Luke comes off much more like he's getting his information from general knowledge.

But now Herod's distemper greatly increased upon him after a severe manner, and this by God's judgment upon him for his sins; for a fire glowed in him slowly, which did not so much appear to the touch outwardly, as it augmented his pains inwardly; for it brought upon him a vehement appetite to eating, which he could not avoid to supply with one sort of food or other. His entrails were also ex-ulcerated, and the chief violence of his pain lay on his colon; an aqueous and transparent liquor also had settled itself about his feet, and a like matter afflicted him at the bottom of his belly. Nay, further, his privy-member was putrefied, and produced worms; and when he sat upright, he had a difficulty of breathing, which was very loathsome, on account of the stench of his breath, and the quickness of its returns; he had also convulsions in all parts of his body, which increased his strength to an insufferable degree. It was said by those who pretended to divine, and who were endued with wisdom to foretell such things, that God inflicted this punishment on the king on account of his great impiety; yet was he still in hopes of recovering, though his afflictions seemed greater than any one could bear. He also sent for physicians, and did not refuse to follow what they prescribed for his assistance, and went beyond the river Jordan, and bathed himself in the warm baths that were at Callirrhoe, which, besides their other general virtues, were also fit to drink; which water runs into the lake called Asphaltiris. And when the physicians once thought fit to have him bathed in a vessel full of oil, it was supposed that he was just dying; but upon the lamentable cries of his domestics, he revived; and having no longer the least hopes of recovering, he gave order that every soldier should be paid fifty drachmae; and he also gave a great deal to their commanders, and to his friends, and came again to Jericho, where he grew so choleric, that it brought him to do all things like a madman; and though he were near his death, he contrived the following wicked designs. He commanded that all the principal men of the entire Jewish nation, wheresoever they lived, should be called to him. Accordingly, they were a great number that came, because the whole nation was called, and all men heard of this call, and death was the penalty of such as should despise the epistles that were sent to call them. And now the king was in a wild rage against them all, the innocent as well as those that had afforded ground for accusations; and when they were come, he ordered them to be all shut up in the hyppodrome, and sent for his sister Salome, and her husband Alexas, and spake thus to them: "I shall die in a little time, so great are my pains; which death ought to be cheerfully borne, and to be welcomed by all men; but what principally troubles me is this, that I shall die without being lamented, and without such mourning as men usually expect at a king's death. For that he was not unacquainted with the temper of the Jews, that his death would be a thing very desirable, and exceedingly acceptable to them, because during his lifetime they were ready to revolt from him, and to abuse the donations he had dedicated to God that it therefore was their business to resolve to afford him some alleviation of his great sorrows on this occasion; for that if they do not refuse him their consent in what he desires, he shall have a great mourning at his funeral, and such as never had any king before him; for then the whole nation would mourn from their very soul, which otherwise would be done in sport and mockery only. He desired therefore, that as soon as they see he hath given up the ghost, they shall place soldiers round the hippodrome, while they do not know that he is dead; and that they shall not declare his death to the multitude till this is done, but that they shall give orders to have those that are in custody shot with their darts; and that this slaughter of them all will cause that he shall not miss to rejoice on a double account; that as he is dying, they will make him secure that his will shall be executed in what he charges them to do; and that he shall have the honor of a memorable mourning at his funeral. So he deplored his condition, with tears in his eyes, and obtested them by the kindness due from them, as of his kindred, and by the faith they owed to God, and begged of them that they would not hinder him of this honorable mourning at his funeral. So they promised him not to transgress his commands. That's Josephus

And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost. But the word of God grew and multiplied. And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark. (Acts 12:21-25). That's Luke. He doesn't even care about Herod, he just mentions the general knowledge everyone probably knew about him and if anything he again disagrees with Josephus saying that he was eaten by worms, that's not what Josephus says at all because Josephus is a professional historian working with Roman documents and Luke who wrote long before Josephus is working from ground-level view and yet who is writing the scriptures of God: Luke.

And this is all on top of the fact: if you believe the book of Acts wasn't written by its author or that it was written after the 60s AD I would like the situation for that. Who wrote it why and why did he end it where he did and how it tricked the world and so on.

The sceptic internet community is dangerous. Because an Atheist who doesn't know the Bible but thinks he does is dangerous. Why? Because the Bible is the devil's number one weapon. The devil used scripture against Jesus. It's his top level strategy to deceive people by misrepresenting scripture. If you want to know christian scripture, you go to a christian, specifically one with the gift of knowledge on scripture history and things if that's what it is about. Christians actually want to know the truth. The Bible says if Christ is not raised from the dead then your religion is worthless and really just a waste of time or worse. Christians challenge what is true and what isn't. Paul's letter to the Laodiceans.. fake! Gospel of Thomas…fake! No christian wants uninspired books in their Bible, in the 1880s people started taking out the Apocrypha for that reason. The book of Enoch, not in the Bible because christians consider it fake.

For the Atheist however: All thirty 1st century christian documents must be fake. They must be full of lies and deception and 1st century people must just have been both the biggest deceivers and the biggest idiots. They need to invent a whole new narrative. Because the only explanation for the 1st century is Jesus was raised from the dead, there's a reason we call it the FIRST century. It's not because a peasant who preached for three years saying he would become the most important person in the world was just another street crazy.

I've seen one full thing from them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGvcRnlId4k
He's trying to use scripture to convince people Hell isn't real and Jesus never talked about a real eternal Hell. And if you didn't know the Bible and you just watched this video you would come away thinking Jesus never talked about eternal punishment and that in fact the Jews never used to believe in an afterlife. Do not trust these false teachers: For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. (2 Corinthians 11:4)

>>4356
>Oh no, not this guy. You're sending me MythVision! You can send me a video of Paulogia too if you want. Then I can link Erik Manning videos and we can let the college kids battle.
Derek Lambert's a shithead and a prick, but like his fellow prick Jacob Berman he's had some good guests on. Steve Mason is one of them.
>As I say specific examples. The fact that Josephus and Luke mention same things or terms or anything is of course not going to mean anything. Josephus and Luke both talk about Herod dying, that's a real event that Luke, Josephus and everyone else knew about. And I would say again Josephus and Luke's mention of it you can't assume somehow one is getting information from the other. Josephus is very specific about Herod's horrible diseased death, whereas Luke comes off much more like he's getting his information from general knowledge.
The parts about "the Egyptian" leading people out into the desert and the sicarii. These were written about in The Jewish War as separate events and don't make sense in the contexts they're used in Acts, and Josephus is the only known Greek writer to have used the word "sicarii," which is Latin and not Greek.
https://youtu.be/wvfPxFQCpCU?t=5119
I was mistaken about the Antiquities, although the mention of Theudas could be derivative of that:
https://youtu.be/wvfPxFQCpCU?t=4133

>>4358
Josephus mentions sicarii, pharisees and many other groups of the second Temple era. Luke and Josephus are writing about the same era. They are the two biggest historians of the first century and it is impossible that they wouldn't mention the same people. And there's many people and things that one mentions that the other doesn't. Josephus says σικάριοι while Luke says σικαρίων so clearly if Luke is copying Josephus he didn't have the writings with him, though that's from the transcribed texts I have not looked directly at the original greek manuscripts I don't think it'll change anything, and the idea that he heard Jospehus being read would be silly over the much more likely idea that he is writing what Paul told him happened, what the Roman guard said to him, as we have documents of Paul and Luke being together outside of Acts and that the Sicarii are a group that anyone would have known about anyways, Luke kept it in and he is writing Acts to one person Theophilus, who must have been paying a lot of money to Luke this apparent liar and story telling of great magnitude who clearly must have had no proof of connection with Paul but Theophilus hired him anyways, or something, things start to get ridiculous when you don't just take the text for what it is. What's funny is Luke didn't write about the Egyptian and Sicarii, a Roman captain mentioned it to Paul. Maybe you should question the Roman guy for more questions, ask him if he read select bits of Josephus and just confused them all together for no reason, his name was Claudius Lysias by the way and he's not mentioned by Josephus so did Luke make him up or is he just recording what happened. In Acts the Sicarii are mentioned by Claudius at the exact right time that Josephus also mentions they were active. So that's in perfect harmony.

Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers? (Acts 21:38)

Josephus mentions in Wars of the Jews, basically: Sircarii were bad guys. There were also some people who led people in the wilderness with false divine deception, and there was an Egyptian false prophet. And he mentions all these things existing in the time of Felix and up to Festus which is in the time Acts 21. Now Josephus says 30,000 men were led by the Egyptian which is ridiculous. So again, which historian has the better track record Luke or Josephus the one who inflates numbers to make Roman victories seem more impressive in this case.
The Egyptian mentioned in Josephus (we're assuming it's the same as mentioned in the Bible) wanted to overthrow the Romans in Jerusalem, as many people did all through the Roman occupation, Josephus mentions that the citizens and Roman guards fought back against the Egyptian and his followers but the Egyptian escaped.
So, when Paul was being beaten up by the crowd and people calling him a false prophet, is it any surprise that Claudius Lysias asks him if he is the Egyptian. It's not strange mashup copying but rather it just works together because it's all real history, well Acts is, Josephus has most details somewhat correct probably. 30,000 men or 4,000 brings up the debate of how many Romans were stationed at Jerusalem but I don't want to get into that.
As for the mention of Sicarii, Josephus mentions the Egyptian false prophet wanted to take over Jerusalem, well who did he want to take it over with? Who was on his side? Little Sholmo on the street with no weapons, or did he team up with the gangsters of Jerusalem. And that's all Sicarii was being used as: gangsters, bandits. So when Claudius Lysias asks Paul are you that Egyptian who took 4,000 Sicarii with him, that just matches Josephus' description of the state of the city at the time. It was a statement Paul probably remembered because he had no idea what the Roman was talking about because he just arrived back in Rome. If Josephus mentioned that some of the men the Egyptian led away were "Sicarii" IE bandits, then there wouldn't even be a question, but Josephus doesn't specifically point out what kind of men joined the Egyptian, but he just got done explaining the city was full of wicked short dagger murderers.
I hope this is all follow-along-able.

>>4353
This, for unironically.

>>4359
Also the second group Josephus mentions is irrelevant.

If we assume Acts and Josephus are talking about the same Egyptian then both Josephus and Luke mention that this Egyptian led people outside into the wilderness. And both agree they were on the run. So the fact that two people mention this historical fact does not imply copying.
Then, there is a conflict between the two texts and it's the most common conflict: numbers. Luke says 4,000 Sicarii. Whereas Josephus says: 30,000 men. And you could even argue it was 26,000 regulars and 4,000 of the these sicarii gangster short dagger types. Josephus mentions all of this within the same section because it's all within the same time frame, the Egyptian, and the Sicarii group who were all destroyed within a few years when Festus came.

JOSEPHUS: When the country was purged of these, there sprang up another sort of robbers in Jerusalem, which were called Sicarii, who slew men in the day time, and in the midst of the city; this they did chiefly at the festivals, when they mingled themselves among the multitude, and concealed daggers under their garments, with which they stabbed those that were their enemies; and when any fell down dead, the murderers became a part of those that had indignation against them; by which means they appeared persons of such reputation, that they could by no means be discovered. The first man who was slain by them was Jonathan the high priest, after whose death many were slain every day, while the fear men were in of being so served was more afflicting than the calamity itself; and while every body expected death every hour, as men do in war, so men were obliged to look before them, and to take notice of their enemies at a great distance; nor, if their friends were coming to them, durst they trust them any longer; but, in the midst of their suspicions and guarding of themselves, they

JOSEPHUS: But there was an Egyptian false prophet that did the Jews more mischief than the former; for he was a cheat, and pretended to be a prophet also, and got together thirty thousand men that were deluded by him; these he led round about from the wilderness to the mount which was called the Mount of Olives, and was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place; and if he could but once conquer the Roman garrison and the people, he intended to domineer over them by the assistance of those guards of his that were to break into the city with him. But Felix prevented his attempt, and met him with his Roman soldiers, while all the people assisted him in his attack upon them, insomuch that when it came to a battle, the Egyptian ran away, with a few others, while the greatest part of those that were with him were either destroyed or taken alive; but the rest of the multitude were dispersed every one to their own homes, and there concealed themselves.

(Acts 21:38) Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers[Sicarii]?

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/54/54-3/JETS_54-3_547-558_Brighton.pdf

So again, it's much like the idea the Gospels copy each other "they copy each other because they are similar but also contradict each other."

If something sounds similar but is not the exact same, it's probably not copying. Does that not sound a lot more like: Based on real events from the perspective of different people.

Also men of /truth/ I noticed your thread of Earth's figure and so what does true TRUTH teach on this manner.

Pliny the Elder was the father of Pliny the Younger who was famous for his description of his persecuting Christians in 112 AD. Pliny the Elder wrote Natural History in 77 AD, an important book of current sciences, animals and geographies. In it he writes about Palestine: Herodotus saith it lies close by the Mountain Casius; but now it is a small Lake. The Towns are Rhinocolura; and within the Land, Raphea: also Gaza, and within, Anthedon, and the Mountain Angoris. Samaria, the Region through the Coast; the free Town Ascalon, and Azotus: the two Jamnes, whereof one is within the Land; and Joppe, in Phoanicia, which, by report, is more ancient than the Deluge over the Earth.
Joppe is the town we know as Jaffa. And this is an excuse to post lofi trend which I think is dead now. Most of the world knows the name Jaffa, but they don't know the city survived the flood.

Now that's some fun. Does the Bible teach a flat Earth? No.

It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in: (Isaiah 40:22).

Some may say circle means flat circle. But ancients understood the Earth was a sphere and a circle inasmuch as a line drawn across it would be a circle. Which Pliny the Elder mentions: THE first Thing that offereth itself to be considered, is her Figure, in which by a general Consent we all agree. For surely we utter nothing more commonly than the round Ball of the Earth ; and confess that it is a Globe enclosed within two Poles. But yet the Form is not that of a perfect Globe, considering so great Height of Mountains, and such Extent of Plains; nevertheless, if the Compass thereof might be taken by Lines, the End of those Lines would meet just in Circuit, and prove the Figure to be an accurate Circle. (…) But the common Sort ask, How, then, it happeneth, that they who are opposite against us, do not fall into Heaven ? as if there were not a Reason also ready, That the Antipodes again should wonder why we also fell not off?

In 65 AD Paul was imprisoned in Rome for the Gospel, as Christians fled the city due to Nero's persecutions. Paul's brothers in Christ abandoning and denying him to save themselves torture. Paul wrote his final letter to his best friend he met 15 years ago: Timothy. Asking and knowing in fact that despite the situation at Rome his friend would swiftly come to his aid from Colossae. Even told him to get his coat in Troas which is not on the way to Rome except the long way there even though Paul told him to hurry before winter. Such is Paul.
By the end of his life he could say he fought a good fight, kept the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ. He didn't say he kept the law, didn't even say he won the fight, in the end his ministry in Rome abandoned him, only Luke is with me, then he got his head chopped off. But not without living a true life fully dedicated to Christ. And let it be known for 2,000 years that Alexander the coppersmith did Paul much evil.
Paul always wrote in his letters "our ministry" or "the ministry" but in his final letter knowing his death was soon he wrote to Timothy "thy ministry". The Apostle Paul wrote more documents included in the Bible than anyone else. He gave up everything to preach the good news of Jesus and the true Gospel of salvation.

Do thy diligence to come before winter. Eubulus greeteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren. The Lord Jesus Christ be with thy spirit. Grace be with you. Amen. (2 Timothy 4:21-22)

>>4360
Any of the Elder Scrolls religions are better than what we have today, sadly the kikes subverted the entirely western/middle east religions and cultures

>>4368
You care about religion, and not what is true. Pagans hate God because they hate His ways, they are desperate to invent all their silly idol gods to worship like fools. You might love to worship Zeus because he is known fiction, Jesus is real. Worship Vishnu and Gaia and the silly elephant multi-armed gods, see where it leads. This is exactly what Paul was speaking about in his Mar's hill speech which I said unto you in the beginning of this thread. Man invents gods to worship (Isaiah 44:15), man has to worship, and if you don't follow science, history, reason, law, goodness, then you're gonna get a god of your own and not the true Creator. But the pagan hates the Creator and so he will continue to believe in ridiculous nonsense like the idea he evolved from a sea sponge or that god doesn't care. As far as we know the most interesting and complex thing in the universe is the lives of humans. There's nothing else out there but physics bumping into one another. So the idea god doesn't care and that you're just good enough even if there is a heaven. Don't bet on such a weak thing, there is a real God and a real history of humanity. If anyone has even the slightest pull towards God then answer that call. Because as of now your conscious has not been seared (I Timothy 4:2). The most common emotion Jesus expresses in the accounts of his life is compassion. And the prophets said about Him: A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth. (Isaiah 42:3). However, on the other hand: many people will reject God and hate Him and they will never accept Him nor apologise much less repent nor believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (II Thessalonians 2:11-12)

>>4353
t. virgin breath

For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. (John 5:46). Jesus says Moses wrote of him, and he's staking an awful lot on that reality. Is Moses really the author of the torah books? Yes. Moses wrote at lots of the Torah or proto-Torah which was then put together sometime after his death.

And the LORD said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. (Exodus 17:14)
And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. (Exodus 34:27)
And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. (Exodus 24:4)
And Moses wrote their goings out according to their journeys by the commandment of the LORD: and these are their journeys according to their goings out. (Numbers 33:2)
And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and unto all the elders of Israel. And Moses commanded them, saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles, (Deuteronomy 31:9-10)
Moses therefore wrote this song the same day, and taught it the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy 31:22)

https://archive.org/details/patterns-of-evidence-the-moses-controversy

Back then, with the ancient Hebrews
They did not have a, e, i, o's or u's
And so Moses had no vowels he could buy
Wheel of Fortune shows were so dry
That's why sometimes there when you read
You'll find capitalized letters L-O-R-D
There's a place there for the YHWH
You can just pronounce it Yahweh

The Torah records Moses was writing things down while he was alive. The tradition that Moses wrote the Torah is old. Obviously some of the Torah is not written by Moses. Not just the famous funny passage: "Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth." But Deuteronomy 34:10: And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face
Hebrews in 1400 BC were more than capable of writing as Patterns of Evidence has proven with their series and even that the Hebrews invented the alphabet, not the Phoenicians, which Eupolemus of the 2nd century BC says.
Eusebius quoting Alexander Polyhistor: But Eupolemus says that the first wise man was Moses, and that he was the first to teach the Jews letters, and from the Jews the Phoenicians received them, and from the Phoenicians the Greeks, and that Moses was the first to give written laws to the Jews. (Praeparatio Evangelica Book 9 26:29)
And the evidence shows that yes obviously the Torah (the most widely known book in the world) was written by the people who we know wrote it and it had a massive impact on the world. Moses was the first historian forget about Herodotus a thousand years later. The Hebrew language become the most influential language of the world, so why not allow the fact they began it? Who cares about the Phoenicians what did they ever do? It is perfectly ridiculous to suggest Proto-Sinaitic came from the Canaanites or some other random pagan nation in the Levant who did nothing with it. We find the most Proto-Sinaitic right where the Torah says the Hebrews were living and travelling.. HMMMMMM who could it have been then? Who could have invented the alphabet!? Could it be:
Exhibit A) This one nation that has no writing or history or anything to speak of and people used to make fun of the Bible for even mentioning their existence because they were clearly a made up fact fantasy nation until we discovered in the early 20th century yes these people really existed.
Exhibit B) Literally the only reason anyone even cares about Proto-Sinaitic in the first place: The Israelites.

I don't think Moses invented the alphabet, but the Hebrews themselves took the Egyptian hieroglyphs and made them actually usable for recording events and maybe even Joseph himself did this but certainly we know it was around his time. The Hebrews were capable and recorded the history of their Exodus and the great miracles which are now proven facts. When the Bible says a thing, we can go to the location and find the thing. And so this is the kind of stuff you start to realise about these atheist academic fraudsters. They hate the Bible so much they will ignore the obvious at all costs and shut it down to preserve a lie (II Thessalonians 2:11-12).
These lies like the Canaanites and Hittites and Jebusites invented language, keep in mind Atheists thought these people didn't even exist until recently. But now they exist and invented the alphabet, not the Hebrews who everyone has always known did. Yeah, go tell some ancient person and get absolutely laughed to death at when you tell him Hyksos or some generic Phoenician group invented letters. Not the most important people on the planet. The Bible talks about how everyone around them *at this time) knew God was with Israel, He's not the God of the Hebrews only. The Edomities had land given to them by God. And it is all evil and wicked what lies people are being told about real human history, instead they are being fed not what our ancestors said but being told the lie of literal Planet of the Apes and "you share a common ancestor with an oak tree". Your history recorded on stone is much more interesting than to settle for any fantasy fairy tale nonsense like that.

And you wonder why these people don't look at what they actually believe. Why is it that civilisations seem to have spread out from the exact location Noah's Ark landed, hmmm? "No no no humans were actually around all these other places just doing nothing for TENS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS or more, just suddenly civilisation began around where the Ark landed. Maybe we should start to respect just a little our ancestors and listen to what they wrote because they did indeed believe the flood happened and they weren't stupid, no more stupid than us in fact we know indeed they were smarter.

Please consider these things friends.

But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. (Galatians 2:17-21)

>>4376
Does the bible mention the JBalvin meal anywhere in it?

Does Jesus even HAVE a fast food meal?

Do not give a penny to any justice system. If a justice system requires money then it is corrupt. If your persecutors have plenty of money and therefore advantage then you are not in a Godly system of judgement. When the judge tells you it's impossible to represent yourself or that you will surely fail in this or that you must by all means go out and spend money for a lawyer or in anywise spend money: this is not of God and do not partake in it. If a penny is involved in justice, then the riches tip justice and wealth perverts righteousness. The scales are corrupt and the weigher is not blind to monetary value. A justice system which requires money to be represented in unfair measures is one that seeks after wealth and is filthy, making the house of justice to emulate the final divine judgement a den of thieves (Jeremiah 7:11). And these of the false legal system go around in long robes and devour whatever little money the under represented have (Luke 20:46-47), while their persecutors are throwing heaps of gold from tax payers and the masses from their wicked corporations to do ill to the poor. I have seen a family member who just spent so much money and time put into this corrupt system and get nothing out of it. It's never worth working with man's system compared to God's system. Don't play society's games. Let them do unjustice to you and do all manner of evil against you, but keep the Lord's commandments.

Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment: Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause. If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him. Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of thy poor in his cause. (Exodus 23:1-6)
Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour. (Leviticus 19:15)
Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure. Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have: I am the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt. (Leviticus 19:35-36)
Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it. (Deuteronomy 1:17)
Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous. (Deuteronomy 16:19)
Thus saith the LORD; For three transgressions of Israel, and for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof; because they sold the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes; That pant after the dust of the earth on the head of the poor, and turn aside the way of the meek: and a man and his father will go in unto the same maid, to profane my holy name: And they lay themselves down upon clothes laid to pledge by every altar, and they drink the wine of the condemned in the house of their god. (Amos 2:6-8)
They hate him that rebuketh in the gate, and they abhor him that speaketh uprightly. Forasmuch therefore as your treading is upon the poor, and ye take from him burdens of wheat: ye have built houses of hewn stone, but ye shall not dwell in them; ye have planted pleasant vineyards, but ye shall not drink wine of them. For I know your manifold transgressions and your mighty sins: they afflict the just, they take a bribe, and they turn aside the poor in the gate from their right. Therefore the prudent shall keep silence in that time; for it is an evil time. Seek good, and not evil, that ye may live: and so the LORD, the God of hosts, shall be with you, as ye have spoken. Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate: it may be that the LORD God of hosts will be gracious unto the remnant of Joseph. (Amos 5:10-15)

>>4377
No, and the only fags in it are dead. Too bad you are a fag.

>>4377
Goyim foreskin with roman bread