Rapture - 23rd September 2015

[ddt]

Let's start with the meaning of the word "is".

 

[barehl]

I now understand your "logic".

I think what is clear more than anything else is that even when something is explained to you in great detail (as multiple people have done), you still either fail to grasp it or perhaps you simply reject it without consideration. You quoted my entire post (I have no idea why) but didn't include a single critique of your own. I'm reminded of Kreecher saying over and over, "Won't, won't, won't, won't, won't..."

 

[tsig]

Let's start with the meaning of the word "is".

No we have to start with the meaning of the letter "W".

History
A 1693 book printing that uses the "double u" alongside the modern letter

The sounds /w/ (spelled ⟨V⟩) and /b/ (spelled ⟨B⟩) of Classical Latin developed into a bilabial fricative /β/ between vowels in Early Medieval Latin. Therefore, ⟨V⟩ no longer represented adequately the labial-velar approximant sound /w/ of Germanic phonology.

The Germanic /w/ phoneme was therefore written as ⟨VV⟩ or ⟨uu⟩ (⟨u⟩ and ⟨v⟩ becoming distinct only by the Early Modern period) by the 7th or 8th century by the earliest writers of Old English and Old High German.[3] Gothic (not Latin-based), by contrast, simply used a letter based on the Greek Υ for the same sound. The digraph ⟨VV⟩/⟨uu⟩ was also used in Medieval Latin to represent Germanic names, including Gothic ones like Wamba.

It is from this ⟨uu⟩ digraph that the modern name "double U" derives. The digraph was commonly used in the spelling of Old High German, but only sporadically in Old English, where the /w/ sound was usually represented by the runic ⟨Ƿ⟩ wynn. In early Middle English, following the 11th-century Norman Conquest, ⟨uu⟩ gained popularity and by 1300 it had taken wynn's place in common use.

Scribal realization of the digraph could look like a pair of Vs whose branches crossed in the middle. An obsolete, cursive form found in the nineteenth century in both English and German was in the form of an en whose rightmost branch curved around a

After we nail that down we can go on to "O", "R" and "D".

 

[barehl]

and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,"

That phrase in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 which is commonly translated as "son of perdition" is the same phrase used to describe Judas in John 17:12.

I suppose everyone that's a Christian is responsible to study the text and learn from it. It is a great book with much meaning written into it. Some folks will see what they want to see, true.

There is a theme that runs from the book of Daniel through Revelations that I've never heard anyone talk about. The theme is in plain text but for some reason people want to pretend otherwise.

Israel was a tiny, backwater country of no particular importance. The only reason why anyone ever heard of Israel was that if you were traveling by land there was no way to travel to or from Egypt without passing through Israel. This theme of Israel as a crossroads was even mentioned as Armageddon (the hill where crowds gather) in the book of Revelations. The Bible was not above exaggeration such as claiming that Solomon received 25 tons of gold per year. There wasn't that much gold mined in the entire hemisphere and the only good source near Solomon was the Sudan. In comparison, it took the Spanish 90 years to obtain 160 tons of gold from Central and Middle America using slave labor. That's less than 2 tons per year.

The main problem for Israel was not being assimilated by larger cultures. They had to deal with Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman culture. Assimilation of Roman culture is all too clear in Jesus' time since he exhibits it himself.
Matthew 26:20 When evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the Twelve.

Contrary to the scene painted by Da Vinci, they weren't sitting in chairs at a banquet table. They were actually lying down while eating in the style of Romans. It was also common for Temple priests at that time to have multiple Roman baths in their homes. The caution against assimilation is clear in 2 Thessalonians 2:9

He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing.

But this passage is the same as Matthew 24:24
For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

You can see other messages about not assimilating other cultures such as Elijah's struggle against the worship of Baal in 1 Kings.

It is particularly interesting that the Romans tried to destroy Jewish culture by destroying the Temple. The ironic thing is that they actually did them a favor. The Temple priests were extremely corrupt and were destroying the culture of the Jews. By getting rid of the Temple, the Romans actually removed the cancer from their culture. The center of Jewish scholarship shifted to Babylon where it was still a stronghold since the time of the Babylonian captivity (as referenced in Daniel). And, Christianity itself ended up taking over as the dominant religion within the Roman Empire.

I'm puzzled though how you could read a passage like Matthew 24 and not see the similarity to other passages such as:

Malachi 4
1“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the Lord Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them. 2 But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its rays. And you will go out and frolic like well-fed calves. 3 Then you will trample on the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I act,” says the Lord Almighty.

5 “See, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes. 6 He will turn the hearts of the parents to their children, and the hearts of the children to their parents; or else I will come and strike the land with total destruction.”

 

[Leumas]

Many Jewish commentators have taken a different view. May I refer you to the various writings of the late Hyam Maccoby, who believes Jesus to have been a messianic agitator. I sympathise with this. Although Jesus is depicted in some of the ways you describe, he is also depicted as an observant Jew. It is only too likely that later hands introduced the anti-Jewish material into the NT, but why would they then depict him as a Jew, attending the Temple? Or being immersed in the Jordan by John for the atonement of sins. There seems here to be a core of material identifying him as a Jewish preacher.

As to the "generations", you are without question right. The prophecy is clear, and was falsified with the decease of that generation. But why assume Jesus to have been a liar? Perhaps he was, but only too many religious enthusiasts in times of stress think they see the signs of the coming Kingdom of God, and proclaim this to anyone who will listen. They are deluded, but not necessarily deceitful.

Well said!!

... he is also depicted as an observant Jew. ... core of material identifying him as a Jewish preacher.

According to the Torah Jesus was a blasphemer and thus he could not have been an observant Jew nor a Jewish preacher. Jews do not pick up stones to stone an observant Jewish preacher unless his "preaching" is non-observant blasphemy (see below).

Here is how the Torah describes Jesus

Deuteronomy 13:1-3

• 13:1If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
• 13:2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
• 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

To add to the IRONY, even Jesus himself says so

Matthew 7:15-16

• 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
• 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

What do you call this stuff other than blasphemy according to a REAL OBSERVENT JEWISH PREACHER's Torah?

John

• 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
• 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
• 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
  _
• 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
• 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
• 8:59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

...There seems here to be a core of material identifying him...

What process of CHERRY PICKING illogical fallacies enables one to arrive at that "core material"?

Why would you reject the blasphemous CORE MATERIAL and Cherry Pick the other wishful thinking stuff while assigning the INCONVENIENT core material as "introduced"?

... It is only too likely that later hands introduced the anti-Jewish material into the NT,...

The blasphemy and anti-Jewish CORE MATERIAL is permeated throughout the entire NT and I think picking that out is no less a process of self-delusion than when one picks up a sandwich out of the sewer and proceeds to pick through the "introduced material" leaving what he thinks is "core material" and then proceeds to eat it while telling himself every time a crunchy bit crumbles between his teeth that maybe he should have picked that "cherry" out.... are we really that pathetically and desperately hungry for "core material"?

 

[Leumas]

Nominated! I never, in a million years, would have thought of that argument: The use of the word "generations" (plural) vs. "generation" (singular.) My only regret is that I wish I had seen this post years ago. But better late in learning, than to have never learned at all.

Your words have lifted my spirits after having been told that my post

.. demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the texts of the Bible. I find your presentation lacking, filled with uneducated assumptions and more to do with hate speech rather than any sort of educated debate.

Coming from someone who is not even a Christian nor even a theist.

I'm not a religious type. If I was to pick a religion to follow, most likely it'd be Buddhism.

Made me doubt myself.... so thanks for restoring my FAITH.

 

[Leumas]

Ya know, I grew up in the Catholic Church. Went to Catholic school. Catholics believe that there will just simply be a "Second Coming" of Christ.

Then I started dating this girl when I was like 16, from a so-called "non-denominational church," (Read: "Baptist." I never really understood why some Baptist churches claim to be "non-denominational." But whatever.) They were certainly Evangelical.

Their "Second Bible" was the Left Behind series. They preached and preached and preached about how there would be a nuclear war and famine and whatnot, and that Israel and most of the Jews would be destroyed after the initial Rapture. I remember distinctly hoping, deep down, that it would happen, and happen soon.

I have since become absolutely disgusted and appalled at my 16 year-old self. It is true that Evangelical Christians are disgusting creatures on the order of Nazis. Not a Godwin. They truly are as disgusting, filthy, and ignorant as the Nazis.

Frightening that in the 21st century there are people that utterly ignorant and deluded.

But what boggles my mind is that amidst all that delusion it never occurred to them that Jesus can come back any time he wishes being the God he is supposed to be.... so why would a loving god want to have DESTRUCTION AND MAYEHM and an entire people exterminated to pave his way with the spilled crimson blood of "the entire Jewish race"?

Moreover, has none thought about why would Jesus have needed to come back in the first place had he FINISHED THE JOB THE FIRST TIME ROUND?

Why exactly does A GOD need to come down to sit inside a virgin little girl’s womb for 9 months and then ooze out from there and then wait 30 years to get tortured to a pretend death and then fake a pretend zombie act and then NOT FINISH THE JOB.

Why exactly does he need to wait to finish the job.... why could he not have done it the FIRST TIME AROUND.

Why does Jesus need a MULLIGAN?

This Christian cultism is nothing but a BLOOD WORSHIP.

It is supposed to be the religion of love while everything about it is BLOOD THIRSTY and torture and gnashing of teeth and suffering.

Here is Jesus advising people that they should castrate themselves... if every early Christian followed that advise out of reverence for Jesus' DIVINITY we would not have had any of this and today we wouldn't be having this.

Matthew 19:10-12

• 19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
• 19:11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
• 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

At least the Catholics I can stomach. They may have a misplaced faith in something for which there is no evidence exists. But at least they do not preach and believe in such filth while longing for something as gross as a thermonuclear war, starvation, and famine in a nation full of "those J00s" just so they can go and be all nice and comfortable up in the heaven.
It's kinda like millionaires snubbing their noses at the working class. While they get to go and drink and party on their yachts down in the Caribbean, thy force their workers to work extra overtime hours every Saturday.

The problem is that it is not even that... have a look at this article called Eternal Heavenly Servitude.

haha, "holy spook." Love it!

Holy Casper!!

 

[Leumas]

...Although Jesus is depicted in some of the ways you describe, he is also depicted as an observant Jew. It is only too likely that later hands introduced the anti-Jewish material into the NT, but why would they then depict him as a Jew, attending the Temple? Or being immersed in the Jordan by John for the atonement of sins. There seems here to be a core of material identifying him as a Jewish preacher.

Well... let's see!

If my consulting company were to be employed by a new startup company aiming at drawing customers from among the customer base of say IBM as well as new and young customers who despite being young happen to respect and revere the well-established technology and technological knowhow of IBM... what would be my advice for an ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN?

Could it be?

Our product is every bit as good as the IBM product....but cheaper and easier to use and anyone can afford it.

Our CEO is an ex-IMB top engineer who decided that our company is THE FUTURE.

His executives too are ex-IBM executives who share his vision for a BETTER FUTURE where our product can be afforded by all people instead of just the ELITE BRIGANDS!
​

Imagine if the above new startup company later became dissatisfied with my consultations and went to another consultants who did not see exactly my point of view on how best to advertise... maybe they might copy some of my better ideas and then modify some of the lesser ones and throw away the really bad ones that would not quite work for the new demographic they are aiming at.

What might be their modifications and entirely new ideas of their own new advertising campaign I wonder?

Say they repeat the same again and again along the development of the company and its expansion into new and unexplored demographics and geographic zones.... how would their advertising campaigns reflect this EVOLUTION?

Could they one day grow big enough to become OSSIFIED TOO just like IBM?

Could one of their engineers one day decide to start his own startup new company that claims similarity in product… say they even call it ComeBack?

 

[Craig B]

Here is how the Torah describes Jesus

Deuteronomy 13:1-3

• 13:1If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
• 13:2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
• 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

To add to the IRONY, even Jesus himself says so

Matthew 7:15-16

• 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
• 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

What do you call this stuff other than blasphemy according to a REAL OBSERVENT JEWISH PREACHER's Torah?

John

• 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
• 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
• 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
  _
• 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
• 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
• 8:59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

That is nonsense. The Torah says nothing about Jesus. gJohn contains little or no genuine historical material, but is late and elaborated.

What process of CHERRY PICKING illogical fallacies enables one to arrive at that "core material"?

No process at all of that kind.

Why would you reject the blasphemous CORE MATERIAL and Cherry Pick the other wishful thinking stuff while assigning the INCONVENIENT core material as "introduced"? ... are we really that pathetically and desperately hungry for "core material"?[/B]

There are reasons for supposing that some gospel material is more likely to be authentic than other material. Your ad hominem remarks are absurd and unworthy of considered response. You very evidently have a "thing" about this, which inhibits you from rational consideration of the subject.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

AMEN!! AMEN!!

Yet again another great SERMON.

But a question Brother Chris.... what does the husband do to his virginal bride?

Is Jesus supposed to "spiritually" take away our virginity?

Now that might be a jolly nice METAPHOR to use for women and men who do not mind that Jesus take them as virginal brides.

But what about those who do not CHERISH THE THOUGHT of being "JOINED" to Jesus in the manner that a husband "joins" with his virginal bride? Are they to be shut out from the room behind closed doors? Are they to remain out in the cold night without any Jesus to cuddle with? Or are they to be burnt on a stake for not submitting to Jesus as the groom and them as a virginal bride?

Will they be exterminated along with "the entire Jewish race" and felled down like the fruitless fig tree which is the "Jewish nation"?

Or is that another metaphor like Jesus is the SHEPHERD and we are his SHEEP?

Do you know what Shepherds do to their sheep?

No... not that ... I was referring to this

[imgw=400]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Lamb_shank.jpg[/imgw]

[imgw=400]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/Tom_Roberts_-_Shearing_the_rams_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg[/imgw]

[imgw=200]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Bernhard_Plockhorst_-_Good_Shephard.jpg[/imgw][imgw=195]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Sheep_shearing.jpg[/imgw]

Now that's funny. It's not a sermon though it's how most modern Christians interpret "the word".

One must keep in mind that the "spiritual marriage" is symbolic and not literal. It's the duty of Christians to remain pure while Jesus is away. Those that are tempted by the false prophet aka "the beast" will not be "pure".
That's it in a nut shell. Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I think what is clear more than anything else is that even when something is explained to you in great detail (as multiple people have done), you still either fail to grasp it or perhaps you simply reject it without consideration. You quoted my entire post (I have no idea why) but didn't include a single critique of your own. I'm reminded of Kreecher saying over and over, "Won't, won't, won't, won't, won't..."

That phrase in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 which is commonly translated as "son of perdition" is the same phrase used to describe Judas in John 17:12.


There is a theme that runs from the book of Daniel through Revelations that I've never heard anyone talk about. The theme is in plain text but for some reason people want to pretend otherwise.

Israel was a tiny, backwater country of no particular importance. The only reason why anyone ever heard of Israel was that if you were traveling by land there was no way to travel to or from Egypt without passing through Israel. This theme of Israel as a crossroads was even mentioned as Armageddon (the hill where crowds gather) in the book of Revelations. The Bible was not above exaggeration such as claiming that Solomon received 25 tons of gold per year. There wasn't that much gold mined in the entire hemisphere and the only good source near Solomon was the Sudan. In comparison, it took the Spanish 90 years to obtain 160 tons of gold from Central and Middle America using slave labor. That's less than 2 tons per year.

The main problem for Israel was not being assimilated by larger cultures. They had to deal with Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman culture. Assimilation of Roman culture is all too clear in Jesus' time since he exhibits it himself.
Matthew 26:20 When evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the Twelve.

Contrary to the scene painted by Da Vinci, they weren't sitting in chairs at a banquet table. They were actually lying down while eating in the style of Romans. It was also common for Temple priests at that time to have multiple Roman baths in their homes. The caution against assimilation is clear in 2 Thessalonians 2:9

He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing.

But this passage is the same as Matthew 24:24
For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

You can see other messages about not assimilating other cultures such as Elijah's struggle against the worship of Baal in 1 Kings.

It is particularly interesting that the Romans tried to destroy Jewish culture by destroying the Temple. The ironic thing is that they actually did them a favor. The Temple priests were extremely corrupt and were destroying the culture of the Jews. By getting rid of the Temple, the Romans actually removed the cancer from their culture. The center of Jewish scholarship shifted to Babylon where it was still a stronghold since the time of the Babylonian captivity (as referenced in Daniel). And, Christianity itself ended up taking over as the dominant religion within the Roman Empire.

I'm puzzled though how you could read a passage like Matthew 24 and not see the similarity to other passages such as:

Malachi 4
1“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the Lord Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them. 2 But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its rays. And you will go out and frolic like well-fed calves. 3 Then you will trample on the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I act,” says the Lord Almighty.

5 “See, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes. 6 He will turn the hearts of the parents to their children, and the hearts of the children to their parents; or else I will come and strike the land with total destruction.”

I'll discuss this one as it seems you appear to have done some work.

Bolded section: Israel was actually quite a military power at one time. The pass you mentioned was a valley located between two mountains and in that pass was a city called "Megiddo". Since there is no way to march an army over the mountains on either side of it, taking the city of Megiddo was the only way to move your army thru the area via the pass. This little town changed hands about as often as Westerners change socks. The Hebrew pronunciation "Har Megiddo" (The mount of Megiddo) is where the word "Armageddon" comes from. And since it was relatively "THE" hotspot of the day for conflict, of course the final battle between good and evil is supposed to take place there.

The next section I disagree with. Paul's letters to the Thessalonians were simply to use the Church of the Thessalonians as an example for all other churches to follow. Because they had been persecuted and had suffered because of their Christian faith and yet still remained faithful. Paul had no need to lecture them on the cautions of assimilation because they had already proven they would have none of it. That's the common misunderstanding of the first letter to the Thessalonians and that's exactly why Paul sent the 2nd letter, to clear it up.

As far as not mentioning the Malachi passages, I'm not really arguing for or against "the Rapture" I can see the correlation though and it's a good one. Good work, nice post.

Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Your words have lifted my spirits after having been told that my post




Coming from someone who is not even a Christian nor even a theist.



Made me doubt myself.... so thanks for restoring my FAITH.

Yep, I'm not on either side.


Sorry about that. It was unintentional I assure you.

Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Yes... it looks like you are the one who is doing that.

YOUR VERY OWN CITATION disagrees with you.

Have a look at your very own citation telling you that in Matthew 24:34 the word generation means what it is supposed to mean


Here have a look from your link

3. the whole multitude of men living at the same time: Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 1:48 (πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί); ; Philippians 2:15; used especially of the Jewish race living at one and the same period: Matthew 11:16; Matthew 12:39, 41f, 45; Matthew 16:4; Matthew 23:36; Mark 8:12, 38; Luke 11:29f, 32, 50; Luke 17:25; Acts 13:36; Hebrews​

I'll just quote this one response even though looks like you have made several that all say the same thing. Which is incorrect by the way, all of them.

Did I accidentally blow your agenda out of the water or something? Strong's Concordance, and the other references I gave previously, ALL list "Race" as one of the definitions for "generation". Not just some of them, but ALL of them list it in the definition. Why is that so upsetting?
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I understand the concept what I don't understand is why your opinion is better than anyone elses's opinion.

I think you'll find I do. Some things which you think of as opinion (Pakistan being in the Middle East, for instance), are not. You are the one who suffers from the confusion: you confuse your opinions with facts.

As to the differences between Muslim tribes.....do you not see how repugnant the idea of lumping all Muslims together into one homogeneous block is? The Muslims of the Bandiagara Escarpment in Mali could hardly be more different from those in Indonesia if they tried. As with christians, it is beyond stupid to consider discussing the "Muslim culture" as though there were only one.

I noticed your posts in this thread are eager to ridicule me for some reason. Did you miss me? If you have a comment that is relevant to the topic please share. If you're here to only ridicule me personally, I'd suggest posting in the Bigfoot threads where the posers reign supreme beyond skeptical question. Chris B.

 

[barehl]

Israel was actually quite a military power at one time.

There was never a time that I'm aware of in Israel's history when they had much of a military. But, okay, let's entertain that idea. Name any large battle involving a Jewish army from a source other than the Bible. Clearly if Israel was a great military power then others would have known about this.

 

[barehl]

Strong's Concordance, and the other references I gave previously, ALL list "Race" as one of the definitions for "generation".

Since we are talking about Greek, you could settle this pretty easily just by giving a reference in the Iliad or Odyssey where the word is used to mean race rather than generation. These are lengthy, classic documents considered to be of great importance to both educated Greeks and Romans. Both use the word a number of times. Can you give a reference in either document where it means race?

 

[Craig B]

Since we are talking about Greek, you could settle this pretty easily just by giving a reference in the Iliad or Odyssey where the word is used to mean race rather than generation. These are lengthy, classic documents considered to be of great importance to both educated Greeks and Romans. Both use the word a number of times. Can you give a reference in either document where it means race?

Yes. That's the test. Well done. But not to be restricted to Homer, which is very archaic Greek. Later works (pre-Christian) should be looked at too.

 

[Craig B]

There was never a time that I'm aware of in Israel's history when they had much of a military. But, okay, let's entertain that idea. Name any large battle involving a Jewish army from a source other than the Bible. Clearly if Israel was a great military power then others would have known about this.

The "Solomonic empire" is not clearly attested in the archaeological record.

 

[ddt]

Yes. That's the test. Well done. But not to be restricted to Homer, which is very archaic Greek. Later works (pre-Christian) should be looked at too.

Hans, above, suggested Herodotus, or Xenophon. For my part, include Plutarch who was a contemporary of the gospel writers.

The "Solomonic empire" is not clearly attested at all in the archaeological record.

FTFY.

 

[dejudge]

There are reasons for supposing that some gospel material is more likely to be authentic than other material.

Authenticity is not directly related to veracity.

There are no good reasons to suppose anything.

Any manuscript which contains inauthentic and supposed "authentic" are themselves INAUTHENTIC.

It is virtually impossible to show that any part of the Gospel is authentic when we don't know who wrote them, when they were first composed and their contents.

You don't know what an authentic gospel would look like or when authentic gospels should have been written.