On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 09:23:38 UTC, nightjar wrote:
On 04/02/2020 08:08, harry wrote:
...
I don't remember seeing anything int he New Testament about killing none members or (sex) slavery...

The Old Testament is also part of the Christian Bible and that most
certainly does. Deuteronomy 13 and 17 call for those who worship other
gods or even incite you to do so to be stoned to death. Numbers 31 calls
for the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the
married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females
as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers.


--
Colin Bignell

Drivel. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews.
Jesus refuted the Old Testament.

harry wrote:

On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 09:23:38 UTC, nightjar wrote:
On 04/02/2020 08:08, harry wrote:
... I don't remember seeing anything int he New Testament about
killing none members or (sex) slavery...

The Old Testament is also part of the Christian Bible and that most
certainly does. Deuteronomy 13 and 17 call for those who worship other
gods or even incite you to do so to be stoned to death. Numbers 31 calls
for the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the
married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females
as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers.


--
Colin Bignell

Drivel. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews.
Jesus refuted the Old Testament.

In the same sense that Joe Bloggs refuted 85% of the Koran, yes. Or to
put it another way that is nonsense. He arguably proposed some new
moral rules which clarified parts ot it, but any wholesale rejection is
a figment of your imagination. You are conflating Jesus with a trendy
vicar you may have heard from as a child.



--

Roger Hayter

On 04/02/2020 17:02, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 09:23:38 UTC, nightjar wrote:
On 04/02/2020 08:08, harry wrote:
...
I don't remember seeing anything int he New Testament about killing none members or (sex) slavery...

The Old Testament is also part of the Christian Bible and that most
certainly does. Deuteronomy 13 and 17 call for those who worship other
gods or even incite you to do so to be stoned to death. Numbers 31 calls
for the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the
married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females
as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers.


--
Colin Bignell

Drivel. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews.

Both testaments are part of the Christian biblical canon, although not
all Christian sects use the same books for their old testament.

Jesus refuted the Old Testament.

Not so:

https://www.bethinking.org/bible/q-h...-old-testament



--
Colin Bignell

In message , nightjar
writes
On 04/02/2020 17:02, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 09:23:38 UTC, nightjar wrote:
On 04/02/2020 08:08, harry wrote:
...
I don't remember seeing anything int he New Testament about killing
none members or (sex) slavery...

The Old Testament is also part of the Christian Bible and that most
certainly does. Deuteronomy 13 and 17 call for those who worship other
gods or even incite you to do so to be stoned to death. Numbers 31 calls
for the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the
married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females
as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers.


-- Colin Bignell
Drivel. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews.

Both testaments are part of the Christian biblical canon, although not
all Christian sects use the same books for their old testament.

Jesus refuted the Old Testament.

Not so:

https://www.bethinking.org/bible/q-h...-old-testament

Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

--
Tim Lamb

Tim Lamb wrote:

In message , nightjar
writes
On 04/02/2020 17:02, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 09:23:38 UTC, nightjar wrote:
On 04/02/2020 08:08, harry wrote:
...
I don't remember seeing anything int he New Testament about killing
none members or (sex) slavery...

The Old Testament is also part of the Christian Bible and that most
certainly does. Deuteronomy 13 and 17 call for those who worship other
gods or even incite you to do so to be stoned to death. Numbers 31 calls
for the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the
married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females
as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers.


-- Colin Bignell
Drivel. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews.

Both testaments are part of the Christian biblical canon, although not
all Christian sects use the same books for their old testament.

Jesus refuted the Old Testament.

Not so:

https://www.bethinking.org/bible/q-h...-old-testament

Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

He had plenty of time to study. And omniscience must have come in
handy.

--

Roger Hayter

On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
....
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

Current Jewish practice is for the Torah to be read out three times a
week in the Synagogue. Over the course of a year, the entire set of
scrolls is read out. I imagine this is a long established custom, which
avoids the need for literacy among the population. However, I would
expect that the son of God would automatically know the entire Tanakh.

--
Colin Bignell

"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read and write at
that time?

The same could be said of the majority of the population in
most places certainly up until the invention of printing.
They got all their religious information by word of mouth
from priests, monks etc either by way of teaching or in
sermons.

The teaching and sermons would mainly have been in terms
of simple ideas and principles and rules to follow, which
could be easily explained by word of mouth. And the same
still applies to most people's religious thinking today.

michael adams

....

On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block a
few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all right.
Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible



--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 17:02:52 UTC, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 09:23:38 UTC, nightjar wrote:
On 04/02/2020 08:08, harry wrote:
...
I don't remember seeing anything int he New Testament about killing none members or (sex) slavery...

The Old Testament is also part of the Christian Bible and that most
certainly does. Deuteronomy 13 and 17 call for those who worship other
gods or even incite you to do so to be stoned to death. Numbers 31 calls
for the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the
married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females
as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers.


--
Colin Bignell

Drivel. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews.
Jesus refuted the Old Testament.

How could Jesus refute the word of God ?

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
read and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealously guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block a
few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible

Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)

Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

--
Tim Lamb

On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
readÂ* and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealouslyÂ* guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block
a few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible

Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)

Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

Not for Jews, no. Latin, Greek, (Aramaic) and Hebrew were the written
languages of the middle east. Sanskrit is India. Also Farsi from the
Persians. (Parsees)

"During the thousand years of its composition, almost the entire Old
Testament was written in Hebrew. But a few chapters in the prophecies of
Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language
called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world
and actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the
common language spoken in Israel in Jesus time, and it was likely the
language He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by the
Gospel writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange,
since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However,
Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the
composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that
many Jews could not even read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the
Jewish leaders a lot! So, around 300 BC a translation of the Old
Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed
around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek translation of the Old Testament,
called the Septuagint, was widely accepted and was even used in many
synagogues. It also became a wonderful missionary tool for the early
Christians, for now the Greeks could read Gods Word in their own tongue."

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bi...first-written/




--
"Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They
always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them"

Margaret Thatcher

"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , nightjar
writes
On 04/02/2020 17:02, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 09:23:38 UTC, nightjar wrote:
On 04/02/2020 08:08, harry wrote:
...
I don't remember seeing anything int he New Testament about killing
none members or (sex) slavery...

The Old Testament is also part of the Christian Bible and that most
certainly does. Deuteronomy 13 and 17 call for those who worship other
gods or even incite you to do so to be stoned to death. Numbers 31
calls
for the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the
married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females
as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers.


-- Colin Bignell
Drivel. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews.

Both testaments are part of the Christian biblical canon, although not all
Christian sects use the same books for their old testament.

Jesus refuted the Old Testament.

Not so:

https://www.bethinking.org/bible/q-h...-old-testament

Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

The jews, and that's what they were, were into
quite decent education for their kids and that
involved reading from the 'scrolls'. They were
never jealously guarded by religious authorities.

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 03:19:20 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the abnormal senile cretin's latest troll**** unread again

03:19??? Yet AGAIN, you dumb piece of trolling senile ****? LOL

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
....
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

For Jewish religious works the languages were Hebrew and a little Aramaic.

--
Colin Bignell

In message , nightjar
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
...
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

For Jewish religious works the languages were Hebrew and a little Aramaic.

Yes. Memory glitch:-)

TNP has provided a comprehensive explanation. This isn't the place to
discuss religion anyway. It was just the bit about reading that struck
me as strange.


--
Tim Lamb

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
readÂ* and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealouslyÂ* guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the
block a few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read
Hebrew all right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible
Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

Not for Jews, no. Latin, Greek, (Aramaic) and Hebrew were the written
languages of the middle east. Sanskrit is India. Also Farsi from the
Persians. (Parsees)

"During the thousand years of its composition, almost the entire Old
Testament was written in Hebrew. But a few chapters in the prophecies
of Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language
called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world
and actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the
common language spoken in Israel in Jesus time, and it was likely
the language He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by
the Gospel writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange,
since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However,
Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the
composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that
many Jews could not even read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the
Jewish leaders a lot! So, around 300 BC a translation of the Old
Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed
around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek translation of the Old Testament,
called the Septuagint, was widely accepted and was even used in many
synagogues. It also became a wonderful missionary tool for the early
Christians, for now the Greeks could read Gods Word in their own tongue."

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bi...age-was-the-bi
ble-first-written/

OK. Memory glitch!

We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre
for religious education, but little about his upbringing and teenage
years.

--
Tim Lamb

"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
read and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealously guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block
a few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible
Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

Not for Jews, no. Latin, Greek, (Aramaic) and Hebrew were the written
languages of the middle east. Sanskrit is India. Also Farsi from the
Persians. (Parsees)

"During the thousand years of its composition, almost the entire Old
Testament was written in Hebrew. But a few chapters in the prophecies of
Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language
called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world and
actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the common
language spoken in Israel in Jesus time, and it was likely the language
He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by the Gospel
writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange,
since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However, Greek
was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the
New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that many Jews could not even
read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the Jewish leaders a lot! So,
around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek
was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek
translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely
accepted and was even used in many synagogues. It also became a wonderful
missionary tool for the early Christians, for now the Greeks could read
Gods Word in their own tongue."

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bi...first-written/

OK. Memory glitch!

We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre for
religious education,

The jews had religious education everywhere they were.

but little about his upbringing and teenage years.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know some
detail but presumably he never said much
about that to his crew so it never got recorded.

We dont even know what he got up to ****ing wise.

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 08:33:21 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH senile asshole's troll****

08:33??? I KNEW it! LMAO

--
Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID:

On 05/02/2020 18:19, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , nightjar
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
...
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

For Jewish religious works the languages were Hebrew and a little
Aramaic.

Yes. Memory glitch:-)

TNP has provided a comprehensive explanation. This isn't the place to
discuss religion anyway. It was just the bit about reading that struck
me as strange.

What has struck me in my researches into ancient cultures and in
particular the Dark Ages (so called) is the way in which knowledge was
passed down the generations without being written down at all.

The feats of memory that e.g. the Druidic Bards were capable of, and
their ability to compose memorable works is - epic.

I can't remember the details but most of the Old Testament was in fact
'oral tradition', and was only written down somewhat later...Wiki
suggests about 350BC although a lot of the events are two hundred years
earlier.

Stonehenge, by contrast, is around 3000 BC.

Even Judaism is a relatively recent religion. Let alone Christianity.

--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 05/02/2020 18:19, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , nightjar
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
...
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

For Jewish religious works the languages were Hebrew and a little
Aramaic.

Yes. Memory glitch:-)

TNP has provided a comprehensive explanation. This isn't the place to
discuss religion anyway. It was just the bit about reading that struck me
as strange.

What has struck me in my researches into ancient cultures and in
particular the Dark Ages (so called) is the way in which knowledge was
passed down the generations without being written down at all.

Yep, the old testament was like that, entirely verbal
until the jews decided to write it down much later.

The feats of memory that e.g. the Druidic Bards were capable of, and their
ability to compose memorable works is - epic.

And still seen today with many muslims choosing
to memorise the Koran as their entire education tho
obviously they do have to be able to read to do that.

I can't remember the details but most of the Old Testament was in fact
'oral tradition', and was only written down somewhat later...

Yep.

Wiki suggests about 350BC although a lot of the events are two hundred
years earlier.

Stonehenge, by contrast, is around 3000 BC.

Even Judaism is a relatively recent religion. Let alone Christianity.

Indeed. It was tho the first of the surviving major monotheisms.

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 19:20:18 +1100, jon lopgel, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


Indeed. It was tho the first of the surviving major monotheisms.

Now ALSO an expert in religion, you clinically insane, "all-knowing",
sociopathic asshole? LMAO

--
Marland addressing senile Rodent's tall stories:
"Do you really think people believe your stories you come up with to boost
your self esteem."
Message-ID:

On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 21:33:31 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
read and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealously guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block
a few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible
Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

Not for Jews, no. Latin, Greek, (Aramaic) and Hebrew were the written
languages of the middle east. Sanskrit is India. Also Farsi from the
Persians. (Parsees)

"During the thousand years of its composition, almost the entire Old
Testament was written in Hebrew. But a few chapters in the prophecies of
Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language
called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world and
actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the common
language spoken in Israel in Jesus time, and it was likely the language
He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by the Gospel
writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange,
since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However, Greek
was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the
New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that many Jews could not even
read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the Jewish leaders a lot! So,
around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek
was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek
translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely
accepted and was even used in many synagogues. It also became a wonderful
missionary tool for the early Christians, for now the Greeks could read
Gods Word in their own tongue."

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bi...first-written/

OK. Memory glitch!

We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre for
religious education,

The jews had religious education everywhere they were.

but little about his upbringing and teenage years.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know some
detail but presumably he never said much
about that to his crew so it never got recorded.

We dont even know what he got up to ****ing wise.

We don't even know what he looked like.
And IIRC the new testiments and the bits saying what Jesus
did were written 50+ years after he died.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 21:33:31 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
read and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealously guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the
block
a few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible
Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

Not for Jews, no. Latin, Greek, (Aramaic) and Hebrew were the written
languages of the middle east. Sanskrit is India. Also Farsi from the
Persians. (Parsees)

"During the thousand years of its composition, almost the entire Old
Testament was written in Hebrew. But a few chapters in the prophecies
of
Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language
called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world
and
actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the common
language spoken in Israel in Jesus time, and it was likely the
language
He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by the Gospel
writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange,
since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However,
Greek
was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of
the
New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that many Jews could not
even
read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the Jewish leaders a lot! So,
around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek
was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC. Gradually this
Greek
translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely
accepted and was even used in many synagogues. It also became a
wonderful
missionary tool for the early Christians, for now the Greeks could read
Gods Word in their own tongue."

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bi...first-written/

OK. Memory glitch!

We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre
for
religious education,

The jews had religious education everywhere they were.

but little about his upbringing and teenage years.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know some
detail but presumably he never said much
about that to his crew so it never got recorded.

We dont even know what he got up to ****ing wise.

We don't even know what he looked like.

Except that he likely was rather swarthy.

And IIRC the new testiments and the bits saying what
Jesus did were written 50+ years after he died.

Rather longer than that, well past there being any
present at the time doing the reporting. Likely lots
of faulty memory of what he actually said and did.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre for
religious education,

The jews had religious education everywhere they were.

but little about his upbringing and teenage years.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know some
detail but presumably he never said much
about that to his crew so it never got recorded.

We don‘t even know what he got up to ****ing wise.

We don't even know what he looked like.
And IIRC the new testiments and the bits saying what Jesus
did were written 50+ years after he died.

Always seemed odd to me that God (all powerful and creator of all things)
is portrayed as an old man with grey hair and beard. Surely if in charge
of everything you'd remain in your prime? Since you've already managed to
'live' millions of years?

--
*Why is the word abbreviation so long? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 02:54:08 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the sleepless trolling senile ******'s latest troll****

02:54??? Yet AGAIN? LOL

--
FredXX to Rot Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

On Thursday, 6 February 2020 16:15:04 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre for
religious education,

The jews had religious education everywhere they were.

but little about his upbringing and teenage years.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know some
detail but presumably he never said much
about that to his crew so it never got recorded.

We don€˜t even know what he got up to ****ing wise.

We don't even know what he looked like.
And IIRC the new testiments and the bits saying what Jesus
did were written 50+ years after he died.

Always seemed odd to me that God (all powerful and creator of all things)
is portrayed as an old man with grey hair and beard. Surely if in charge
of everything you'd remain in your prime? Since you've already managed to
'live' millions of years?

I think southpark got it right, but of course I have my own theory.

https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/God


my own theory :- is that God was dyslexic like wot I am,
and it was actually a Dog, which also expalins why all those dinosaur bones are buried, he was a hungry dog.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

Always seemed odd to me that God (all powerful and creator
of all things) is portrayed as an old man with grey hair and
beard. Surely if in charge of everything you'd remain in your
prime? Since you've already managed to 'live' millions of years?

For the audience for whom the Bible was intended old men
with grey hair and beards were supposed to be wise. Same
as in the mafia where all the decisions were often made
by grey haired old guys who turned up in Court in pyjamas
feigning senility. Although admittedly the "wise old men"
thing has taken a bit of a hammering with the advent
of UseNet.

michael adams

....

In article ,
michael adams wrote:
For the audience for whom the Bible was intended old men
with grey hair and beards were supposed to be wise. Same
as in the mafia where all the decisions were often made
by grey haired old guys who turned up in Court in pyjamas
feigning senility.

Likely older tend to have more money and therefore power. ;-) And may be
more concerned about the afterlife, so commission such things.


Although admittedly the "wise old men"
thing has taken a bit of a hammering with the advent
of UseNet.

True. And Brexit.

--
*60-year-old, one owner - needs parts, make offer

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 13:14:48 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block a
few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all right.
Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible

Jesus spoke Aramaic, a precursor of Arabic.
All the ordinary people did in that area at that time.

He allegedly wrote his own account, suppressed by the RC church in the Synods of Antioch.

On Thursday, 6 February 2020 12:58:47 UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 21:33:31 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
read and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealously guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block
a few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible
Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

Not for Jews, no. Latin, Greek, (Aramaic) and Hebrew were the written
languages of the middle east. Sanskrit is India. Also Farsi from the
Persians. (Parsees)

"During the thousand years of its composition, almost the entire Old
Testament was written in Hebrew. But a few chapters in the prophecies of
Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language
called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world and
actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the common
language spoken in Israel in Jesus time, and it was likely the language
He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by the Gospel
writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange,
since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However, Greek
was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the
New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that many Jews could not even
read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the Jewish leaders a lot! So,
around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek
was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek
translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely
accepted and was even used in many synagogues. It also became a wonderful
missionary tool for the early Christians, for now the Greeks could read
Gods Word in their own tongue."

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bi...first-written/

OK. Memory glitch!

We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre for
religious education,

The jews had religious education everywhere they were.

but little about his upbringing and teenage years.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know some
detail but presumably he never said much
about that to his crew so it never got recorded.

We dont even know what he got up to ****ing wise.

We don't even know what he looked like.
And IIRC the new testiments and the bits saying what Jesus
did were written 50+ years after he died.

The bible was edited and amended by the RC church to suit the politics of the time. So we don't actually know anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synods_of_Antioch

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostic_texts

On 07/02/2020 16:43, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 13:14:48 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block a
few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all right.
Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible

Jesus spoke Aramaic, a precursor of Arabic.
All the ordinary people did in that area at that time.

The Jewish holy scrolls are mainly written in Hebrew, with only a
smattering of Aramaic.


He allegedly wrote his own account, suppressed by the RC church in the Synods of Antioch.



--
Colin Bignell

"nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 07/02/2020 16:43, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 13:14:48 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block a
few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all right.
Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible

Jesus spoke Aramaic, a precursor of Arabic.
All the ordinary people did in that area at that time.

The Jewish holy scrolls are mainly written in Hebrew, with only a smattering of
Aramaic.

Those are the ones of which only fragments have survived. The problem with
assessing all written material from antiquity is that in order to be written and
survive at all it a) needed an investment in time and materials by somebody
with sufficient resources to create such a record, b) it needed to be written on
a durable medium given the right conditions and c) unless it was written on clay
tablets or stone it needed to be preserved by someone rather than destroyed
either deliberately or accidentally during times when preserving other cultures
wasn't necessarily a priority.

As a broad generalisation all written material in antiquity was relatively expensive
to produce and so it was closely guarded by whoever commissioned it but
given the inevitable ravages of time on parchment, papyrus and wood the
amount still extant is probably a tiny percentage of what existed in
antiquity.


michael adams

....

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

What has struck me in my researches into ancient cultures and in
particular the Dark Ages (so called) is the way in which knowledge
was passed down the generations without being written down at all.

Er, "The "Dark Ages" as normally understood, in England at least,
covered the period during which the various Celtic and Anglo-Saxon tribes
decided to "take back control" after the Romans left, and before the
Normans arrived. Before this the Roman governing classes who intermarried
with the Celtic ands Saxon nobility would have left written records
which were subsequently destroyed decayed or simply abandoned unlike
the Vindolanda Tablets, Roman Soldiers' letters which were fortunately
written on wood which were found near Hadrian's Wall. They're called
the "Dark Ages" because there was no one single central authority
king etc. who thought to maintain consistent written records which
would otherwise have survived aside from the various sources that
make up the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. In fact they probably
could and did write plenty of material at the time but it was
on parchment etc. that nobody, and certainly not the Normans
thought it worthwhile to preserve.


michael adams

....

"michael adams" mjadams25@ukonline wrote in message
o.uk...

"nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 07/02/2020 16:43, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 13:14:48 UTC, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
read
and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealously
guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block a
few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right.
Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible

Jesus spoke Aramaic, a precursor of Arabic.
All the ordinary people did in that area at that time.

The Jewish holy scrolls are mainly written in Hebrew, with only a
smattering of
Aramaic.

Those are the ones of which only fragments have survived. The problem with
assessing all written material from antiquity is that in order to be
written and
survive at all it a) needed an investment in time and materials by
somebody
with sufficient resources to create such a record, b) it needed to be
written on
a durable medium given the right conditions and c) unless it was written
on clay
tablets or stone it needed to be preserved by someone rather than
destroyed
either deliberately or accidentally during times when preserving other
cultures
wasn't necessarily a priority.

As a broad generalisation all written material in antiquity was relatively
expensive
to produce and so it was closely guarded by whoever commissioned it but
given the inevitable ravages of time on parchment, papyrus and wood the
amount still extant is probably a tiny percentage of what existed in
antiquity.

But its different with the scrolls used in synagogues. Yes, they
arent cheap to produce, but all active synagogues have them
and so its easy to see what language is used in those.

On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 06:13:27 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


But its different with the scrolls used in synagogues. Yes, they
arent cheap to produce, but all active synagogues have them
and so its easy to see what language is used in those.

What are you now smartassing about again, senile Rodent, you idiotic senile
wisenheimer? BG

--
Marland addressing senile Rodent's tall stories:
"Do you really think people believe your stories you come up with to boost
your self esteem."
Message-ID:

On Friday, 7 February 2020 16:49:42 UTC, harry wrote:
On Thursday, 6 February 2020 12:58:47 UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 21:33:31 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 14:34, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 05/02/2020 10:01, Tim Lamb wrote:
Point of curiosity.
Would the son of a carpenter and his fishermen disciples be able to
read and write at that time?
Also, what access would there have been to scrolls presumably
jealously guarded by religious authorities?

Jesus spent a lot of time in te temples and had been around the block
a few times before the Teacxhings. I'd say he could read Hebrew all
right. Or like todays Muslims, had *memorised* the bible
Hmm. I was picking up on the reference to *read* up post and it just
tickled an active brain cell:-)
Wasn't Sanscrit the language of the time?

Not for Jews, no. Latin, Greek, (Aramaic) and Hebrew were the written
languages of the middle east. Sanskrit is India. Also Farsi from the
Persians. (Parsees)

"During the thousand years of its composition, almost the entire Old
Testament was written in Hebrew. But a few chapters in the prophecies of
Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language
called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world and
actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the common
language spoken in Israel in Jesus time, and it was likely the language
He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by the Gospel
writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange,
since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However, Greek
was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the
New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that many Jews could not even
read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the Jewish leaders a lot! So,
around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek
was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek
translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely
accepted and was even used in many synagogues. It also became a wonderful
missionary tool for the early Christians, for now the Greeks could read
Gods Word in their own tongue."

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bi...first-written/

OK. Memory glitch!

We know they started off in Bethlehem, which seems an unlikely centre for
religious education,

The jews had religious education everywhere they were.

but little about his upbringing and teenage years.

Yeah, it would be interesting to know some
detail but presumably he never said much
about that to his crew so it never got recorded.

We dont even know what he got up to ****ing wise.

We don't even know what he looked like.
And IIRC the new testiments and the bits saying what Jesus
did were written 50+ years after he died.

The bible was edited and amended by the RC church to suit the politics of the time. So we don't actually know anything.

Well w ekn ow what you've just said and what oithers have said about the accounts contained in the Bible.

Out of the 4 , Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John IIRC it was only mathew that stated that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was concived.
Now you;'d think that would be big news so if it was true how comes
Mark, Luke, and John all missed this 'minor' point.

Why didn't any of them decribe what Jesus looked like ?.

There's also no evidence that king herod ordered any babies to be killed at
or around the time Jesus was born.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synods_of_Antioch

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostic_texts

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Out of the 4 , Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John IIRC it was only mathew
that stated that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was concived. Now you;'d
think that would be big news so if it was true how comes Mark, Luke, and
John all missed this 'minor' point.

And just how did Matthew know she was a virgin anyway?

Pretty standard for those who become pregnant outside of marriage (or
whatever) to claim.

Even more so given absolutely nothing was written about the birth of
Christ contemporaneously.

--
*Aim Low, Reach Your Goals, Avoid Disappointment *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.