The Historical Jesus III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Craig B said:
Paul often uses such expressions. When he wrote to the Corinthians, do you think he used the Nomen Sacrum here?

Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? (1 Cor. 9:5).

"The other apostles and the brothers of God, and Cephas". Nonsense.

And as wiki says: ... "it is not known precisely when and how the nomina sacra first arose". But sure as hell Paul didn't use them.
Click to expand...

What bizarre nonsense you post. You fall prey to your own fallacies.

Jesus is FROM HEAVEN in the Epistle to the Corinthians.

1 Corinthians 15:47--- The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man, from heaven.

Since you are " absolutely certain that Jesus is the "Lord" referred to by Paul" then Jesus is the LORD from HEAVEN in Galatians 1.19.

The HJ argument is the very worst kind known to mankind.
 
Craig B said:
...And as wiki says: ... "it is not known precisely when and how the nomina sacra first arose". But sure as hell Paul didn't use them.
Click to expand...

Paul did NOT use the NOMINA SACRA!!!!

Thank you very much Craig B.

The NOMINA SACRA is found in ALL the Epistles of Papyri 46.

Contents of ALL the Pauline Corpus are forgeries or falsely attributed to Paul if it is "SURE AS HELL" he did NOT use the NOMINA SACRA.
 
dejudge said:
Paul did NOT use the NOMINA SACRA!!!!

Thank you very much Craig B.

The NOMINA SACRA is found in ALL the Epistles of Papyri 46.

Contents of ALL the Pauline Corpus are forgeries or falsely attributed to Paul if it is "SURE AS HELL" he did NOT use the NOMINA SACRA.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you're on about. Now are you telling us that Paul is a complete forgery, and P 46 represents that forgery in its earliest form? Because it's the earliest substantial ms? We've already been through the problems with that approach, dejudge, and I think the NOMEN SACRVM fiasco is even further evidence that it is entirely unsound.
 
Craig B said:
IanS said:
If Max quotes you correctly in the highlighted passage above, then you specifically did say that in Galatians 1:19 the writer tells any readers that Jesus had a brother called James. That is exactly what those quoted words say. Are you quoted correctly saying that?

But instead of denying that you ever said what is given in Max‘s quote (where everyone here can easily see what it says), you should be very interested in what dejudge is saying about this, because if he is correct then it casts into very serious doubt that particular line in Galatians where it says “other apostles saw I none, save James the “the lords brother”.

Because if I understand him correctly, what dejudge is saying is that if you look at the actual words in P46, it does not in fact say “lord”. Instead it says (according to dejudge) “KY”, which dejudge says is a so-called “Nomina Sacra” meaning “the Lord God”.

In which case that line on Galatians is apparently referring to “James” as a brother of “the Lord God”.
Click to expand...


We haven't discussed this absurdity yet. Perhaps now's as good a time as any. I have asked for evidence that Paul thought that Jesus is God.

dejudge says that the image of P 46 contains that expression. Only when we enquire further, are we informed that it is a question of a nomen sacrum. In a second or third century Christian work. And it means "Lord God", we are asked to believe unquestioningly, because of course God is called Lord by Christians; and third century Christians believed Christ to be God. But that proves nothing about Paul, only the opinions of his copyists centuries later. Apart from dejudge, does anyone here believe that Paul is entirely a second or third century forgery?

Anyway, does the nomen sacrum in question (KY) mean "Lord God", or simply "Lord", often applicable to God? Or is there another NS specifically meaning "God"? Well, why the hell don't we look? Let's do that. It's in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomina_sacra#List_of_Greek_nomina_sacra.English
Meaning Greek Word Nominative (Subject) Genitive (Possessive)
God Θεός ΘΣ ΘΥ
Lord Κύριος ΚΣ ΚΥ
Now, I'm spending no more time on this nonsense. KY is NS for Lord. The Galatians expression means "brother of the Lord".
Click to expand...



OK, well first of all everyone will note from your above reply that you are no longer attempting to deny what Max pointed out in the quote of your own words where you had indeed previously said that in Galatians Paul wrote to say that "James" was the brother of Jesus. And that was actually the criticism which dejudge made of you, and which you had repeatedly denied.

So it now seems your repeated denials were untrue, and that Max and dejudge were right to point out that you had indeed previously claimed (probably you just "assumed" it?) that Paul's letter had in fact written that "James" was the brother of Jesus."

As to the other issue of whether or not dejudge was correct to say that a Nomina Sacra "KY" appears in P46 and that "KY" means "lord God" - first, thank you for that link which says that "KY" just means "Lord", and where if the copyist had meant to write God then he should have written that as "ΘΥ". However, a very brief Google search appears to show that the meaning of "KY" was changed over time, but that in the earliest translations it was originally used to mean "LORD", ie capitalised, where I think by capitalising it they mean God. I.e. see the quote and link below, and note the highlighted parts where for example the writer says a book by Trobisch explains that in the Greek Septuagint the Nomina Sacrea "KY" is used as a substitute for the tetragrammaton YHWH which is of course Yahweh = God = Jehova.



http://kurios.homestead.com/links.html

Review of Trobisch, The First Edition of the New Testament. (http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol06/Trobisch2001rev-x.html).

This review of Trobisch's book is replete with rare and important observations. Of special importance is note #4 that ends with this conclusion, "The upshot is that since the notation of nomina sacra does not appear to have originated with authors of the autograph texts (my emphasis), their presence reflects 'a conscious editorial decision made by a specific publisher' " A second interesting note is #11 which discusses the tradition of sacred name abbreviations as it is related to the translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek. Trobisch seems to conclude that the early scribes of the New Testament copied the word "kurios" (Greek for "lord") to replace the abbreviations for Jehovah found in the Hebrew text. He seems to conclude that the use of KY was the original designation for "lord" when used with the "Lord Jesus Christ." That is an odd conclusion since the Greek Septuagint uses KY as the substitute for the tetragrammaton. Still, he reaches an important conclusion that, over time, as more sacred name abbreviations were added to the New Testament, the distinctions between KY for LORD and KY for Lord became blurred. Hence, the need for this website. Man’s work has muddied the clarity of the sacred scriptures, but the truth of His word lives forever.
 
Craig B said:
I don't know what you're on about. Now are you telling us that Paul is a complete forgery, and P 46 represents that forgery in its earliest form? Because it's the earliest substantial ms? We've already been through the problems with that approach, dejudge, and I think the NOMEN SACRVM fiasco is even further evidence that it is entirely unsound.
Click to expand...

I am merely exposing your FARCE. Your argument changes like a chameleon to match its surroundings.

You openly contradict your OWN falacies.

1. Craig B---"Tell me where I have ever claimed that James is called by the words "brother of Jesus" in that text, dejudge.

2. Craig B----In Galatians 1:19, Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 we ARE TOLD that Jesus had a brother called James.


At one time you are absolutely certain that Jesus is Lord [KY] in Galatians 1.19 but now you are SURE AS HELL that Paul did not use the Nomina Sacra.


1. Craig B---"I am absolutely certain that Jesus is the "Lord" referred to by Paul".

2. Craig B---"And as wiki says: ... "it is not known precisely when and how the nomina sacra first arose". But sure as hell Paul didn't use them."

Craig B has confirmed the HJ argument is a FARCE--the very worst kind of argument.

He knew all along that Galatians 1.19 was a forgery or falsely attributed to Paul.

Galatians 1.19 does not state anywhere that James was the brother of Jesus.

Galatians 1.19 is completely useless to argue for an HJ.

In Galatians Jesus was the Son of God.

In 1 Corinthians Jesus was FROM heaven.

PAUL's Jesus was a Myth/fiction Son of God FROM heaven.

1 Corinthians ---47 The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man, from heaven.
 
Last edited:
The HJ argument is a FARCE.

Galatians 1.19 does not mention Jesus but the Lord God.

Galatians 1.19 used the NOMINA SACRA for the LORD GOD of the Jews.


Galatians 1.19---the brother of the Lord [κυ].

The earliest Greek Bible, the Codex Sinaiticus, shows that the very same NOMINA SACRA in Galatians 1.19 is used hundreds of times for the LORD GOD of the Jews in books of the Greek OT.

The Psalms are hymns to the LORD GOD of the Jews.

1. Psalms 1.2--- the law of the Lord [ κυ]

2. Psalms 2.7-- the Lord’s ordinance [ κυ]

3. Psalms 3.9-- Deliverance is the Lord’s [κυ]

4. Psalms 11.7--- The sayings of the Lord [κυ]

5. Psalms 18.8 ---The law of the Lord [κυ]

6. Psalms 18.8 --the testimony of the Lord [κυ]

7. Psalms 18.9 --the statutes of the Lord [κυ]

8. Psalms 18.9 --- the commandment of the Lord [κυ]

9. Psalms 18.10--- the fear of the Lord [κυ]

10. Psalms 18.10--- the judgments of the Lord [κυ]

11. Psalms 20.29. ---kingship is the Lord’s [κυ]

12. Psalms 24.10---the ways of the Lord [κυ]

13. Psalms 26.4 --- I requested of the Lord [κυ]

14.Psalms 26.4--- to reside in the Lord’s [κυ]

15. Psalms 26.4---the pleasantness of the Lord [κυ]

16. Psalms 27.5--- the works of the Lord [κυ]

17. Psalms 28.3 ---The Lord's [κυ]

18. Psalms 28.4---the Lord's [κυ]

19. Psalms 28.4---the Lord's [κυ]

20. Psalms 28.5---the Lord's [κυ]

The NOMINA SACRA [κυ] refers DIRECTLY to the GOD of the Jews in Greek Christian Bibles.

Jeremiah 1:4----Then the word of the Lord [κυ] came unto me...

Isaiah 38:4-----Then came the word of the Lord [κυ] to Isaiah, saying,

Joel 1:1----The word of the Lord [κυ] that came to Joel

Haggai 1:3---Then came the word of the Lord [κυ] by Haggai the prophet.

There are HUNDREDS of passages with the NOMINA SACRA [κυ] which refers directly to the LORD GOD of the Jews.

There is NO mention of Jesus in Galatians 1.19.

Galatians 1.19 refers to the myth/fiction Lord God of the Jews.
 
dejudge said:
The HJ argument is a FARCE.

Galatians 1.19 does not mention Jesus but the Lord God.

Galatians 1.19 used the NOMINA SACRA for the LORD GOD of the Jews.

Galatians 1.19---the brother of the Lord [κυ].

The earliest Greek Bible, the Codex Sinaiticus, shows that the very same NOMINA SACRA in Galatians 1.19 is used hundreds of times for the LORD GOD of the Jews in books of the Greek OT.

The Psalms are hymns to the LORD GOD of the Jews.
Click to expand...
You are citing the Tanakh, written before the time of Jesus? And you are using Greek Christian versions. This is crazy. The original in most or all cases you cite was YHWH. Look up Bible Hub.

No more of this rubbish, dejudge. Discuss this balderdash with your supporters, of whom I see you have a few in this thread.
 
Mcreal said:
The proposition in your primary post - that people propose "the Bible ... was written in the 15th century ..." - is a Strawman fallacy
Click to expand...

I wouldn't dignify such a position as a Strawman as it is so silly that only the guy hiding in his basement deathly afraid of the Black helicopters piloted by Grey Aliens who answer to Elvis in Area 51 are coming to take him way is a more off the wall bonkers position. Well that or nearly anything by Jack Chick.

Heck, even the idea that the NT canon was set in the 4th century is on weak legs as we have evidence of on sect having a "definitive canon" in the late 2nd.
 
Craig B said:
You are citing the Tanakh, written before the time of Jesus? And you are using Greek Christian versions. This is crazy. The original in most or all cases you cite was YHWH. Look up Bible Hub.
Click to expand...


What chicanery!!!

Have you heard of the Septuagint?

The Greek Septuagint is the OLDEST Buybull in existence... written in the 3rd century BCE... and now you are saying it is a Christian version?

Nevertheless, the point being made (which I already made for you before in this post) is that
  1. The NT is written in Greek.
    _
  2. To compare the Greek NT with the OT we must use the Greek Septuagint which is by the way what the fabricators of the NT used for their "scriptures" whenever they referred to the "scriptures".
    _
  3. We find that in the NT the same word is used to refer to "Jesus" as we find being used to refer to GOD in the Septuagint.
    _
  4. Conclusion... "Jesus" is being referred to as a god in the NT.
    _
  5. And that is on top of the THEOLOGY of Christianity and Paul where it is nothing but shenanigans to pretend that the fabricators of Paul's supposed epistles did not regard Jesus as a god.
You trying to obfuscate by verbally bullying people and disingenuously pretending that the Hebrew Tanakh says YHWH and that the Greek Septuagint is a Christian versions is UTTER SKULLDUGGERY!


  • Romans 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God Θεὸς blessed for ever. Amen.
    _
  • Philippians 2:11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord κύριος , to the glory of God the Father.
    _
  • Galatians 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's κυρίου brother.
    _
  • Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord κυρίῳ Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
    _
  • Galatians 1:3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord κυρίου Jesus Christ,


Deuteronomy 4:39
  • 4:39 Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD κυριος he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.

Deuteronomy 6:4-18
  • 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD κυριος our God is one LORD κυριος:
  • 6:12 Then beware lest thou forget the LORD κυριου, which brought thee forth out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
  • 6:18 And thou shalt do that which is right and good in the sight of the LORD κυριου: that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest go in and possess the good land which the LORD κυριος sware unto thy fathers.
 
Last edited:
maximara said:
... we have evidence of [one] sect having a "definitive canon" in the late 2nd.
Click to expand...
Yes, Vinzent M (2014) 'Marcion and the Dating of the Synoptic Gospels' (Leuven: Peeters) is described as
"the first systematic study of all available early evidence that we have about the first witness to our Gospel narratives, Marcion of Sinope"
Click to expand...
and
"It evaluates our commonly known arguments for dating the Synoptic Gospels, elaborates on Marcion's crucial role in the Gospel making, and argues for a re-dating of the Gospels to the years between 138 and 144 AD"
http://www.peeters-leuven.be/boekoverz.asp?nr=9383
Click to expand...

Furthermore
"One of the most important insights of my 'Marcion and the Dating of the Synoptic Gospels' (2014) was the discovery that Marcion’s Gospel existed in two different versions, first as a pre-published, presumably stand-alone draft, and secondly as a published edition with the framing of the Antitheses and the 10 Pauline Letters ...

"The key text in this respect is Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem IV 4,2 which, in a second step, I’d like to put into the broader frame of Tertullian’s discussion of Marcion’s Antitheses and his Gospel in Adversus Marcionem IV 1-5, so that we can follow Tertullian’s arguments."
http://markusvinzent.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/marcions-two-recensions-of-his-gospel.html
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom