RE: Why do atheists even bother about debating Jesus?
February 4, 2013 at 12:05 pm
(This post was last modified: February 4, 2013 at 12:36 pm by catfish.)
(February 4, 2013 at 8:09 am)Confused Ape Wrote:(February 3, 2013 at 6:51 pm)Zone Wrote: Given the resources of the church (from the 4th century onwards) you would expect such evidence to be around, the church would have used it's resources to preserve such evidence. However it is not there, which is in my view quite fishy.
The Roman Christian faction was promoting the belief that Jesus was some kind of divine being etc. Once they took control of Christianity they called other Christian sects heretics and did everything they could to eradicate them. Any evidence that Jesus was just an ordinary human would have ended up on a bonfire because it would have made nonsense of the belief that was being promoted.
^^^^^
I believe this is what happened, but I hold hope that original scrolls are still being held captive by the perpertrators of the "LIE"...
.
(February 4, 2013 at 1:32 am)missluckie26 Wrote:(February 3, 2013 at 11:52 pm)catfish Wrote: My question is simple.
If it was entirely made up bullshit, why didn't they change "Jesus's" name? Yĕhōšûă (Yeshua) has a litteral meaning which contradicts Jesus being a savior.
.
Please explain this to me, mister catfish. And the meaning behind YHWH
There are sources out there that can go into greater detail, but I'll give you the condensed version.
YHWH is the most common name for God throughout Jewish text.
However, the name as first revealed to Moses is recorded slightly different.
אֶהְיֶה = I AM THAT I AM (OR) I SHALL BECOME WHO I AM BECOMING (what? a God who changes?)
And as is usually found for the name of God.
יהוה = YHWH = God, the Lord, Jehovah, Yahweh
Yeshua simply means YHWH is salvation...
(read the NT, note how many times the reader is instructed to "believe on his name...")
.
