- ( My answers would be in this same format.)
NHORDZ DIAMAL SAID:
Refuting john shamoun,,
Ngaun gusto nyang patunayan na may historian na si hesus nabuhay,,
Wala po syang naibgay na matibay na proof,kung kaya nagsusuffer sya dto pero may napulot syang isang #historian_kuno,
Ngaun ang historian na ito ay isang hudio,,
So lets examined the word of his favorites historian, ,
Kasi itong historian na ito ang kaisa isang historian nya na matatawag kong PANGLIMANG GOSPEL ng kristyano, ,
So ilatag natin
Ito po ang pahayag ng historian na ito:
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
( Flavius Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 h)
SO ESUSUMARIZE KO ANG PUNTO NG HISTORIAN NYA
(1) Jesus is more than just a Human (god).
(2) Miracles he performed.
(3) His Ministry among Jews & Gentiles.
(4) He is the Messiah.
(5) He is condemned by the Jewish Priests.
(6) Sentenced by Pilate.
(7) He died on the Cross.
(8) Came back to life on the third day.
(9) He fulfilled the Divine Prophecy.
nakita nyo ang comments ng isang jews na historian kuno??
Maniniwala ba kau na yang 9 points na yan ay sasabihin ng hudio??
The common sense refute us
THE ANSWER IS NO,
Now lets see,anu ang sabi ng mga scholars dto
But look at the point 9 jesus according to supposed word of josephus,,jesus fullfilled the prophecies in old testament, ,but yet josepgus did not believe jesus is the christ,,
(Paragaph 8 and 9)
He did not accept Jesus as Christ”
(((Vol. IX, Origen on Matthew, Origen’s Commentary on Matthew, Book X by Origen, translated by John Patrick Chapter 17 – http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-Nicene_Fathers/Volume_IX/Origen_on_Matthew/Origen%27s_Commentary_on_Matthew/Book_X/Chapter_17 ])))))
SEE how the christian distort the word of josephus???
- (see? Though some claimed na corrupted text yan. The point is, nhordz has no evidence to disprove resurrection either. Josephus referring to Jesus as Messiah or christ e proof na corrupted ito as jews dont consider him as christ at para sabihing nabuhay siya sa third day as fulfillment of the prophecies e false din kasi walang prophecy na ganon. Gayunpaman, kahit walang clear historical proof of jesus resurrection, is not proof na walang resurrection of Jesus. The thing is, halos lahat ng scholars have a general consensus na yung part sa josephus account na pinatay si hesus e true.
- Wikipedia says:
- Of the three passages found in Josephus’ Antiquities, this passage, if authentic, would offer the most direct support for the crucifixion of Jesus. The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate which was then subject to interpolation. James Dunn states that there is “broad consensus” among scholars regarding the nature of an authentic reference to Jesus in the Testimonium and what the passage would look like without the interpolations.
- Moreover, nhordz said:
According to the scholars
Leonhard Goppelt writes:
“Ant. 20.9.1 reported briefly that ‘a man James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ,’ was executed. This could have been genuine. In contrast, however, ANT 18.3.3 #WAS_SURELY_INTERPOLATED: ‘About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.’ To what extent the interpolator used Josephus text as a source #CANNOT_BE_DETERMINED. The places that mentioned Jesus in the Slavic text of the War are inauthentic.
( The Ministry of Jesus in Its Theological Significance By Leonhard Goppelt Volume 1 [Copy Right 1981] page 18 – 19
Professor Oskar Holtzmann who is a Christian:,
#THUS_tHE_PASSAGE_ATTRIBUTED_tO #JOSEPHUS_iS_UNQUESTIONABLY_SPURIOUS. And as there no inherent contradictions discernible in it, it would be a piece of pure arbitrariness to #ATTEMPT_TO_PICK_OUT_GENUINE_KERNEL #fROM_WAS_IS_AS_A_WHOLE_SPURIOUS.
((( The life of Jesus (1904) Professor Oskar Holtzmann D.D. Translated by J.t. Bealby, B.A. And Maurice A. Canney, M.A. [London Adam and Charles Black 1904] page 15 – 16))
SO as we have seen ang pinka malakas na proof ng kristyano sa paniniwala nila liban sa bible ay isang fabricated na historian, ,inamin mismo ng kapwa nila kristyano :
So again my argument stll stand
Anyway kung ang historian ay kayang edistort ng kristyano noon,bible pa kaya????
- ( Kung ang history about Jesus resurrection is distorted by who-knows-who kahit walang proof to validate who-distort-which, bible pa kaya di madistort? Iyan ang paduda niya. Parang sinabi niya basta true christian nandidistort yan. So kung christian e me evil heart to distort, muslim kaya e walang evil heart to distort? Para niyang sinabi, meron din, di ba? Muslims with evil hearts distort quran is reality. Di ba merong corrupted quran?
- Wikipedia says:
- (So kung bad copy lang ang Sanaa Quran, then it proves, merong distortion sa quran, much like the bible, me bad copy at good copy.)
Indeed, the bible speak for itself
Matapos iwanan ng mga apostle si hesus ay nagtago sila dahil sa takot sa jews hanggang sa dumating ang time na si hesus ay nabuhay na dw,,
So ang tanong ay
Kung andun sila sa pagkapako,
Anung dahilan bakit pa sila nagtatago??
Eh nakita na nga sila ng jews sa panahon pagpako eh,
So bkt pa sila nagtatago at natatakot kung di naman sila dinamay ng jews sa panahon nandun sila pagpako? ????
- ( Yes, Nagtatago sila dahil meron silang kinatatakutan pero si john e matapang at maaaring kinilos ng dios para pumunta sa crucifixion at doon inihabilin ni Jesus si maria. Hinde siya namukhaan ng mga hudyo at Romano dahil maaaring pinagmukha ng dios na si piolo pascual siya tulad ni allah, pinagmukha yung nakapako na kamukha ni jesus, kaya ganon din siguro si john, pinagmukhang si piolo pascual kaya hinde namukhaan ng kalaban pero namukhaan Nina maria. Kaya nandon si john bilang witness sa crucifixion. So bakit nga sila nagtatago? Dahil me kinatatakutan.
- So nhordz, asan ang distortion in the bible?)
Let me answer it and lets debunk the christianity
KAYA SILA NAGTAGO KASI MASKIN SA PAGPAKO WALA NA SILA,,kasi natatkot silang madamay, ,,
Si pedro sumunod nung hulihin si hesus,pero nung ituro ng mga tao na si pedro ay kasamahan ni hesus,,NAGDENY SYA NA KILALA NYA SI HESUS,,at sya ay umalis, ,
Bakit umalis kasi NAKILALA SYA NUNG MGA TAO AT nangamba na madamay,,
Kaya malabong may apostle sa panahon ng pagkapako kay hesus kasi kung andun sila,siguradong damay damay silang lahat dahil ituturo sila ng tao,,
Kaya un ang dahilan kaya sila nagtago sa john 20:19,,,
SO SINU ANG SUMULAT NG GOSPELS KUNG WALA DUN ANG APOSTLE??
- (REPOST: Yes, Nagtatago sila dahil meron silang kinatatakutan pero si john e matapang at maaaring kinilos ng dios para pumunta sa crucifixion at doon inihabilin ni Jesus si maria. Hinde siya namukhaan ng mga hudyo at Romano dahil maaaring pinagmukha ng dios na si piolo pascual siya tulad ni allah, pinagmukha yung nakapako na kamukha ni jesus, kaya ganon din siguro si john, pinagmukhang si piolo pascual kaya hinde namukhaan ng kalaban pero namukhaan Nina maria. Kaya nandon si john bilang witness sa crucifixion. So bakit nga sila nagtatago? Dahil me kinatatakutan.
- So nhordz, asan ang distortion in the bible?)
The christian scholar said:
The fact that all four gospels of the New Testament are anonymous.
( Ehrman, Bart D. Lost Christianities. p. 3, 235. Also, see Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. p. 49.)
The Gospel according to . . .’) were not part of the original manuscripts, for they were added only early in the second century
(Stanton, Graham N. p. 19.)
It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the NT in which the MS [manuscript] tradition is wholly uniform.
((((Buttrick, George Arthur (Ed.). 1962 (1996 Print). The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Volume 4. Nashville: Abingdon Press. pp. 594–595 (Under Text, NT).))))
- (True. There is no known authors of the four gospel pero hinde proof yan, na hinde sa dios ito kasi tinawag itong parts ng writing of god as it say:
- ISAIAH34:16 Seek ye out of the “writing of the lord” and read, none of it shall fail, none want an additional one….his spirit it hath gathered “them” (the many writings as one).
- Historically, me isang set ng manuscripts as source of the true bible. These manuscripts as collective one writing after textual criticism was beforehand gathered and called the writing of god in Isaiah 34:16.
- True also that the greek text has no headings like “gospel according to John or Mark…etc” pero it doesn’t prove that these gospel manuscripts are not part of the writing of god as the verse implied above. Parte yan ng writing of god na collected or gathered as one collective writing called writing of the lord so reliable ito kasi writing of god nga.
- Isaiah 34:16 seek from the SEPHER (writing) of the lord…none of it wants her REUTH (additional one)…his spirit it has gathered them (manuscripts)
- Ngayon, sa alin nangyari yan? Aling writing ANG considered divine scripture, complete at di nangangailangan ng additional religious writing na it was gathered as one collective writing from gathered manuscripts?
- Bible lang yan Nhordz G Diamal proving the bible as writing of god.
- To say, there is not one sentence in the NT manuscripts that is not wholly uniform is probably true, pero naniniwala ako that it conveys a harmonious message. Those manuscript text as product of textual criticism have a harmonious message, its contextual message is consistent kahit hinde consistent yung textual structure nito.
- Ngayon, maaaring walang certain historical proof to back up Jesus resurrection pero still, maraming historical proof na nagpapakitang namatay siya, which is totally, nakakasira sa islam na naniniwalang hinde namatay si Jesus.
- Historians or islam?
- Wikipedia says:
- Of the three passages found in Josephus’ Antiquities, this passage, if authentic, would offer the most direct support for the crucifixion of Jesus. The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate which was then subject to interpolation.
- One of such historian is Tacitus:
- Wikipedia says:
- The talmud. The jews, na anti-christian, e naniniwala dito as written in the talmud:
- (There are probably others but the historicity of Jesus death is undeniable debunking islam.
- Historians and bible or Islam?
- The first two is credible.
- So kahit hinde mapapatunayan historically ang Jesus resurrection, hinde naman maikakaila na irrefutable ANG historical Jesus death account. Nakakasama pa rin sa Islam.
- So nhordz, aling parte ng bible ang distorted at aling parts ng historian account of Jesus death ang Mali? At bakit?
- Let’s give time for nhordz diamal to answer. )
- Heto sagot niya:
- (Eto sagot ko. Click the link below for my answer:
- GOD PROVES THAT IN REALITY JESUS DIED! ⬅click this!
- Here is part of the article:
- (Proof yan supporting the historical death of Jesus. Clearly, the miraculous fulfillment of the prophecy validates the bible as truthful kaya lahat ng sinasabi nito tulad ng death and resurrection of Jesus ay reality.)