did you know???

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
cora
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:57 pm

did you know???

Post by cora »

Did you know:

1. That the name Jesus (Iesous) was made by Justin Martyr (150-165) and that before that it was Isu? (Paul was forged by the church).

2. That the title Christus did not appear in the NT until after 450 AD, I don't know when. And that before it was Chrestos. (Paul was forged again).
That everything you read about Christ, or Christians, maybe oral but is not in the NT. That any connection between "Christ" and "Messiah" comes from after 450, and is made by the catholic church on purpose.

That a messiah is a warrior who has an army and fights against the romans, and when he has succeeded becomes king.
That you only have to read one gospel to see that Jesus was not.
That any other explanation (from the OT) comes from the catholic church.
That a dead messiah-claimant will never be called messiah or Christ again by the jews (like Josephus: James the brother of Jesus called Christ (deceased) is thus impossible and a forgery).

That chrestos not only means "good", but in connection to a god means "saviour". That means that Paul's Isu is a god, who is a saviour. That makes it clear that Paul is not in Turkey and Greece preaching a jewish messiah. They would not know what that is, and as can be seen there has not been a messiah in Judea.

3. That in the whole NT including Paul the word is "stauros" meaning stake, and not cross. That the word cross (and crucify and crucifixion) comes from after 400. When the bible was translated from greek into latin, stauros became crux. Crux means by the way also stake. So the translator did nothing wrong. The catholic church made cross from it with all the consequences until today.
So Paul did not write: Jesus Christ died on a cross, but Isu Chrestos died on a stake.

4. That Paul NEVER used the word church. I guess he even did not know what that was. Paul wrote "ekklesia", what for anybody who would care to look it up, means nothing more than a meeting of people. Maybe a community if they live close to one another. That is all.
When the church of rome tried to take over from Marcion because he had the gnostic god who was for the universe, and they had Jahweh who created only heaven and earth, there were still all the gnostic communities from Paul, whose letters they had taken and forged. A church, which is a building with a hierarchical organisation, is not an ekklesia. Solution from the catholic church (I could not believe it): they changed their name from church in ekklesia. In that way they incorporated all Paul's communities. And because everybody knew they were the church, all ekklesia's from then on were called or translated with church. So the church grew enormously.

So there was no church in Jerusalem, or even a bishop of Jerusalem at all. The eastern church was in the beginning Paul's communities. If you can read greek, you can see that stauros simply gets translated with cross, and ekklesia with church. Also today. We are not allowed to know that in the east were only communities, and that Isu/Jesus died on a stake. That was the roman death penalty, and I found out how it was done. And I can tell you that there was no blood.

So, it is just a few words. Is it? It looks like a different world. The name was changed, saviour was changed in messiah, stake was changed in cross, and ekklesia in church. Rather important forgeries. Paul was the first writer, he started a religion, and he did that roughly between 90 and 120 (the original movement started after 70 in Judea, and was not talking about the son of god. They were NOT starting a religion or a cult).

Before all the shouting starts: most if not all biblical scholars do not even know this. Their bible and their knowledge are recent. They have no idea at all. They are typically not studying ancient history like I do. Nobody does. It is all difficult to find. But it is dug up now. Hopefully it stays up.

The church is still called ekklesia, in Italy, Spain, Portugal and France.
The Germanic languages (church, kerk, kirk, Kirche) come from the original, which was "Oikia Kyriake", greek for "house of the Lord". The Lord being Jahweh, and being a building. It is the same as temple.

greetings, Cora.
User avatar
Geocalyx
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:59 pm

Re: did you know???

Post by Geocalyx »

cora wrote:That in the whole NT including Paul the word is "stauros" meaning stake, and not cross. That the word cross (and crucify and crucifixion) comes from after 400. When the bible was translated from greek into latin, stauros became crux. Crux means by the way also stake. So the translator did nothing wrong. The catholic church made cross from it with all the consequences until today.
The Untitled Text from the Bruce Codex wrote: And the stretching out of his hands is the manifestation of the cross (MS: stauros glyph). The stretching out of the cross is the ennead on the right side and on the left. The sprouting of the cross is the incomprehensible man. This is the Father. This is the source, which wells up from the silence.
but simple stakes do not have things stretching out
User avatar
arnoldo
Posts: 969
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:10 pm
Location: Latin America

Re: did you know???

Post by arnoldo »

Geocalyx wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 4:22 am
cora wrote:That in the whole NT including Paul the word is "stauros" meaning stake, and not cross. That the word cross (and crucify and crucifixion) comes from after 400. When the bible was translated from greek into latin, stauros became crux. Crux means by the way also stake. So the translator did nothing wrong. The catholic church made cross from it with all the consequences until today.
The Untitled Text from the Bruce Codex wrote: And the stretching out of his hands is the manifestation of the cross (MS: stauros glyph). The stretching out of the cross is the ennead on the right side and on the left. The sprouting of the cross is the incomprehensible man. This is the Father. This is the source, which wells up from the silence.
but simple stakes do not have things stretching out
or lifted up.
https://biblehub.com/john/12-32.htm
User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: did you know???

Post by Irish1975 »

O to believe that things can be “known” about past. No burden of ignorance, no bad sources, no accumulation of diminishing probabilities. Just good old knowledge.
hakeem
Posts: 663
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: did you know???

Post by hakeem »

The story that Jesus was nailed to a cross [stauros] appears to have been lifted directly from the writings of Josephus.

Wars of the Jews 2.14.9
....for Florus ventured then to do what no one had done before, that is, to have men of the equestrian order whipped (21) and nailed to the cross before his tribunal; who, although they were by birth Jews, yet were they of Roman dignity notwithstanding.

Wars of the Jews 5.11.1
...So the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses...

This is Josephus in Wars of the Jews 3.7.19 on describing the battering ram engine.

Wars of the Jews 3.7.17
[This battering ram is a vast beam of wood like the mast of a ship, its forepart is armed with a thick piece of iron at the head of it, which is so carved as to be like the head of a ram, whence its name is taken. This ram is slung in the air by ropes passing over its middle, and is hung like the balance in a pair of scales from another beam, and braced by strong beams that pass on both sides of it, in the nature of a cross.

The cross [stauros] in Josephus writings appeared to have been made of wood with a cross beam to allow for nailing victims.
cora
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:57 pm

Re: did you know???

Post by cora »

Geocalyx: there was nothing stretched out on a stauros. The text of the Bruce Codex is obviously a forgery in the name of THEOLOGY, by a very devout Christian.

Arnoldo: maybe John means Jesus' lifting up to heaven? Otherwise there is no special lifting there. Only on a stauros you are also above the ground.

Hakeem: a stauros can only be translated with stake. If a translater or a forger makes cross of it, it is a forgery. Actually, as the books of Josephus were used by the gospel writers to take things out, they were equally used to put things in. It worked two ways. Josephus was dead anyway, so who could say anything about it.

Irish: you don't have to be condescending to me. Actually there can be a lot of things known about the past, especially these kind of practical things of course. Like knowing what a firing squad is, or a guilliotine. This case is difficult because good old Constantine abolished it to spare the tender souls of the Christians. Which made it of course extremely easy to begin about a cross after 400, when nobody knew anymore what the original death penalty was. Don't think they did not think about it. The very first picture of a Jesus on a cross dates from around 500. This has already long time been found out, as you would know when you studied history. Your idea that there can be nothing known about the past, I see as a weird attitude, coming from ignorance.
It was difficult to find because it was abolished around 320. But there is evidence from bones and skeletons found. The stake was not high, maybe 2.50 m, as often made of olive trees. You were naked. Your elbows were bound with a rope backward and upward to a small piece of wood, which was put over the stake, so that you could not move. Your feet were put on the different sides of the stake, and they were nailed to the stake through the heel-bones. Much pain, no or very little blood. You would die from suffocation because your arms were bound up, so you could not breathe. This process would take at least 24 hours, but mostly a few days.

Quite different than what the church is telling, or the gospels, or what is depicted in every catholic church, or on television. In what is supposed to be the passion of the christ. In this case it is quite simple: they are lying. This cross will be invented as propaganda, so we can really see the blood and the terrible suffering. To imprint that he suffered and died for US. This is the theology thought out by Irenaeus, and planted in the letters of Paul, as if HE thought this out. Well, he didn't.
So you see, there is a lot more to learn and to discover, instead of ignorantly saying that there is no knowledge possible. Or trying to put me down simply because I know certain things, for which I studied. Well, I studied history, and you obviously did not. Still no reason for your attitude.
User avatar
Geocalyx
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:59 pm

Re: did you know???

Post by Geocalyx »

Geocalyx: there was nothing stretched out on a stauros. The text of the Bruce Codex is obviously a forgery in the name of THEOLOGY, by a very devout Christian.
Forgery of what?

:popcorn:
cora
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:57 pm

Re: did you know???

Post by cora »

Can't you read? Stakes have nothing stretched out. Is this too difficult for you? Haven't you read how they did it? That's how they did it. Should I care what devout Christians are phantacising? Why do you? Stick to facts.
hakeem
Posts: 663
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: did you know???

Post by hakeem »

cora wrote: Mon Mar 15, 2021 3:55 pm
Hakeem: a stauros can only be translated with stake. If a translater or a forger makes cross of it, it is a forgery. Actually, as the books of Josephus were used by the gospel writers to take things out, they were equally used to put things in. It worked two ways. Josephus was dead anyway, so who could say anything about it.
The Gospel writings are in Greek and the authors copied or used the same Greek word ""σταυροῖς found in the works of Josephus so there was no forgery. Now, what is the Greek word for "Cross"?
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: did you know???

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Cora,

Image

Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexamenos_graffito for explanation and dating.

Regarless on who is represented on the cross, it shows the shape of a cross meant for crucifixion.

Cordially, Bernard
Post Reply