1500-Year-Old Bible Discovered In Turkey Indicates Jesus Christ Was Not Crucified

I wonder how many Catholic popes in the mid ages burned the ones they found

 

That is a very odd article. Since the biblical canon was already very nearly complete by the time of the first ecumenical council in 325 AD (the First Council of Nicaea), nothing could be added to or taken from the Bible. So finding something several hundred years later, is by definition, not part of the Bible.

Likewise, there is no dispute between Christians and Muslims of what should be in the bible or that Jesus was the son of god.

The Muslim Religion began with Mohammad during the 7th century, long after the Bible had been established. So any dispute by the Muslims is a one sided dispute. This newly found book is no doubt from the later side. Calling this part of the "Bible" is an addition without authority by people that have manufactured a dispute for reasons known only to them.

 

I know. The Romans didn't either. The Buddhist don't even weigh in.

 

Why would they bother?

 

This subject here with this thread and article is most interesting.
In one way I am more like the Muslim than the Christian because in basic belief, I think Jesus was a Prophet and not likely the son of god, anymore than you or me. But then on the other hand, I completely agree with the Christians in that the teachings of Jesus are good, more than that, the best thing that has happen to men in their history.

I can't find the good the Muslims have brought to men, but that is not my job. I do find it odd they need to dispute that Jesus was the son of God! I find no need to do so, I simply lack the ability to do so.
Conjuring up books to support the dispute is strange even.

 

Hey Mags!

Is the Pope Catholic?

 

Well I would like to see further evidence on this book. The article is pretty vague with how they determined the authenticity of who wrote it. The apostle wasn't even alive when it was written.

 

Lol "God".

 

I don't know bro. You would assume he is! LOL

 

It's true. I saw him down at the 7/11 yesterday, talking to Elvis.

 

Maybe not. I tried to steer him onto something better than this forum gig. But he didn't recognize the bait.

 

I am reading this book right now - a history of Jesus as a person, not as a religious figure per se

Zealot - The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth.

It is really quite fascinating. The historical accounts of Jesus vary widely, as do the Gospels, as do the Gnostic gospels.

As a Jew, I realized I really have very little knowledge about the life of Jesus, and this book is a great primer. For instance, one thing I did not realize is that in the first century in Palestine, there was a messianic fervor, with many people claiming to be the messiah, and many who garnered huge followings.

 

I have not read the book, but just from what you wrote, I sense a political bent in this story.

At the time of Jesus, Pontius Pilate was the Roman Governor of Judea. Judea and Israel were the lands of the Hebrews, the Jews, Jesus' people. Palestine, the place did not enter the language until more than a century later when Roman Emperor Hadrian terminated the use of the name Judea which then became Provincia Syria Palaestina or Palestine in English.

I suppose this was intended as a tort and insult for the Jews, renaming the providence, the ancient home land of the Jews, after the Philistines, a tribe known to be long standing of enemies of the Jews.

So any book referencing Palestine in the first century is historically inaccurate, perhaps for a reason. I will leave the reason for another day.

 

Ha! A Phd, full of shit