The Bible Is Evidence

[Newtonian]

H

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Please study the history of the NT, even the church elect admit none of the Books were written by the men who's names are used on them. In fact Matthew has so many mistakes in them that the writer proves not to be Jewish, who'd know Hebrew Gender and meaning of words, but the Gentile who wrote Matthew did not know and the outcome is therefore misleading and comical.
If Matthew was written by A Jew then he would have known the gender used in Micah 5 is not that of a place/town. A Jew would also know Micah is talking about a lineage "Bethlehem Ephratah" not a town of Bethlehem.
Read the context of Micah 5 it's about a lineage. Bethlehem was the son or grandson of Ephratah.
Sources:
Dr. I. Hooykaas, Nineteenth--Century Reverend:
Not one of these five books (four Gospels and Acts) [was] really written by the person whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the heading would lead us to suppose.
9. Drs. H. Oort, I. Hooykaas, and A. Kuneh, The Bible for Learners, trans. Philip A. Wieksteed (Boston, 1878), vol. 3, p. 24.

St. Faustus, Fifth--Century French Bishop:
Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since-as already it has been often proved-these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them.10
It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.11

To strengthen belief in the resurrection of Jesus, St. Irenaeus invented many stories of others being raised from the dead.12
As Jeremiah Jones, an eighteenth--century reverend, comments:
Such pious frauds were very common among Christians even in the first three centuries; and a forgery of this nature, with the view above mentioned, seems natural and probable.13
10. Taylor, Diegesis, p. 66. 11. Ibid., p. 114. 12. Doane, p. 231. 13. Ibid.

"Should one continue to base one's life on a system of belief that--for all its occasional wisdom and frequent beauty--is demonstrably untrue?"-- Charles Templeton, former right-hand man to Billy Graham in Farewell to God

Religion writer and former Anglican priest Tom Harpur admits he's sticking his neck out for proffering that someone named Jesus never walked this Earth.

Hi HaShev - How are you? A few questions:

1. What "church elect" are you referring to? Faustus? Have you considered witnesses from earlier - such as Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the 2nd century CE? Or Origen of the late 2nd century CE. Please note our literature contains much evidence of the writership of the books of both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures.

2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

3. I assume you meant Micah 5:2. The context of the verse shows this is referring to Bethlehem Ephratha.

Micah 5:2
JPS Tanakh 1917
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

(NW) “And you, O Bethʹle·hem* Ephʹra·thah,+ the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah,+ from you*+ there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel,+ whose origin* is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.+

NW ref. footnote on "from you" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“You,” masc. sing.

NW footnote on "thousands"

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “clans.”

From our Bible dictionary under "Bethlehem":

Bethlehem — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Introduction:

"(Bethʹle·hem) [House of Bread].

1. A town in the Judean highlands overlooking the principal highway leading from Jerusalem down to Beer-sheba. It is today called Beit Lahm (Bet Lehem), located about 9 km (5.5 mi) SSW of the Temple Mount. Its altitude of some 777 m (2,550 ft) above sea level is about the same elevation as Jerusalem itself. The countryside, though rocky, produces olives, grapes, and various cereals.—Ru 1:22.

The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7) Among the early descendants of Jacob’s son Judah are mentioned “Salma the father of Bethlehem” (1Ch 2:51, 54) and “Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah the father of Bethlehem.” (1Ch 4:4) This expression may point to these men as forefathers of the Israelites who later occupied Bethlehem. (See EPHRATHAH No. 2.) When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18."

See the rest of the article. And under "Ephratha":

Ephrathah — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachel’s death relates that she was buried “on the way to Ephrath [Ephrathah], that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7) Members of Elimelech’s family are called “Ephrathites from Bethlehem,” and it was to Bethlehem that his widow Naomi returned out of Moab. (Ru 1:2, 19) The blessing pronounced on Boaz at the time of his marriage to Ruth was that he might prove his “worth in Ephrathah and make a notable name in Bethlehem.” (Ru 4:11) And finally, in the prophecy concerning the Messiah’s birth, the names are combined as “Bethlehem Ephrathah.” (Mic 5:2) In view of this it appears that the reference to Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6, which deals with David’s concern for the ark of the covenant, also applies to this hometown of David."

EPHRATH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"EPHRATH or EPHRATHAH (

,

):

By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn

1. Wife of Caleb (son of Hezron) and mother of Hur (I Chron. ii. 19, 50; iv. 4). 2. Another name for Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19, xlviii. 7; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 6; Micah v. 1)...."

BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH (I Sam. xvii. 12; Judges xvii. 7, xix. 1):

By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., Frants Buhl

The modern Bait Laḥm, situated about 5 miles south of Jerusalem, some 15 minutes' walk east of the road to Hebron, on a range of hills surrounded by fertile and beautiful valleys. The city was also called "Ephratah" (Josh. xv. 60, LXX.; Micah v. 1 [A. V. 2]; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; but hardly Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). In I Chron. ii. 50 et seq., iv. 4, Ephratah is the wife of Caleb from whom Beth-lehem descended. Beth-lehem is mentioned among the cities of Judah in Josh. xv. 60, in a passage which is missing in the Hebrew text, but which has been preserved in the Septuagint....."

Edit/Note: Christendom denies that the Messiah/Christ/anointed one had an origin (Micah 5:2) because of their false doctrine of the trinity alleging the Messiah had no beginning/origin. The Hebrew word - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H4163
מוֹצָאָה
môtsâ'âh
mo-tsaw-aw'
Feminine of H4161; a family descent;...

H4163
מוצאה
môtsâ'âh
BDB Definition:
1) origin, place of going out from
1a) origin

The Bible refers to the Messiah as the Son of God - compare Psalms 82:6. Clearly, a son is born from his father and did not always exist. Compare Hebrew chiyl in Proverbs 8:24,25 which means "pains of parturition" or childbirth. Interestingly, Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 at John 10:34-36 and applies this to himself as son of God.

 

[HaShev]

H

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Please study the history of the NT, even the church elect admit none of the Books were written by the men who's names are used on them. In fact Matthew has so many mistakes in them that the writer proves not to be Jewish, who'd know Hebrew Gender and meaning of words, but the Gentile who wrote Matthew did not know and the outcome is therefore misleading and comical.
If Matthew was written by A Jew then he would have known the gender used in Micah 5 is not that of a place/town. A Jew would also know Micah is talking about a lineage "Bethlehem Ephratah" not a town of Bethlehem.
Read the context of Micah 5 it's about a lineage. Bethlehem was the son or grandson of Ephratah.
Sources:
Dr. I. Hooykaas, Nineteenth--Century Reverend:
Not one of these five books (four Gospels and Acts) [was] really written by the person whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the heading would lead us to suppose.
9. Drs. H. Oort, I. Hooykaas, and A. Kuneh, The Bible for Learners, trans. Philip A. Wieksteed (Boston, 1878), vol. 3, p. 24.

St. Faustus, Fifth--Century French Bishop:
Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since-as already it has been often proved-these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them.10
It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.11

To strengthen belief in the resurrection of Jesus, St. Irenaeus invented many stories of others being raised from the dead.12
As Jeremiah Jones, an eighteenth--century reverend, comments:
Such pious frauds were very common among Christians even in the first three centuries; and a forgery of this nature, with the view above mentioned, seems natural and probable.13
10. Taylor, Diegesis, p. 66. 11. Ibid., p. 114. 12. Doane, p. 231. 13. Ibid.

"Should one continue to base one's life on a system of belief that--for all its occasional wisdom and frequent beauty--is demonstrably untrue?"-- Charles Templeton, former right-hand man to Billy Graham in Farewell to God

Religion writer and former Anglican priest Tom Harpur admits he's sticking his neck out for proffering that someone named Jesus never walked this Earth.

Hi HaShev - How are you? A few questions:

1. What "church elect" are you referring to? Faustus? Have you considered witnesses from earlier - such as Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the 2nd century CE? Or Origen of the late 2nd century CE. Please note our literature contains much evidence of the writership of the books of both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures.

2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

3. I assume you meant Micah 5:2. The context of the verse shows this is referring to Bethlehem Ephratha.

Micah 5:2
JPS Tanakh 1917
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

(NW) “And you, O Bethʹle·hem* Ephʹra·thah,+ the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah,+ from you*+ there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel,+ whose origin* is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.+

NW ref. footnote on "from you" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“You,” masc. sing.

NW footnote on "thousands"

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “clans.”

From our Bible dictionary under "Bethlehem":

Bethlehem — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Introduction:

"(Bethʹle·hem) [House of Bread].

1. A town in the Judean highlands overlooking the principal highway leading from Jerusalem down to Beer-sheba. It is today called Beit Lahm (Bet Lehem), located about 9 km (5.5 mi) SSW of the Temple Mount. Its altitude of some 777 m (2,550 ft) above sea level is about the same elevation as Jerusalem itself. The countryside, though rocky, produces olives, grapes, and various cereals.—Ru 1:22.

The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7) Among the early descendants of Jacob’s son Judah are mentioned “Salma the father of Bethlehem” (1Ch 2:51, 54) and “Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah the father of Bethlehem.” (1Ch 4:4) This expression may point to these men as forefathers of the Israelites who later occupied Bethlehem. (See EPHRATHAH No. 2.) When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18."

See the rest of the article. And under "Ephratha":

Ephrathah — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachel’s death relates that she was buried “on the way to Ephrath [Ephrathah], that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7) Members of Elimelech’s family are called “Ephrathites from Bethlehem,” and it was to Bethlehem that his widow Naomi returned out of Moab. (Ru 1:2, 19) The blessing pronounced on Boaz at the time of his marriage to Ruth was that he might prove his “worth in Ephrathah and make a notable name in Bethlehem.” (Ru 4:11) And finally, in the prophecy concerning the Messiah’s birth, the names are combined as “Bethlehem Ephrathah.” (Mic 5:2) In view of this it appears that the reference to Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6, which deals with David’s concern for the ark of the covenant, also applies to this hometown of David."

EPHRATH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"EPHRATH or EPHRATHAH (

,

):

By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn

1. Wife of Caleb (son of Hezron) and mother of Hur (I Chron. ii. 19, 50; iv. 4). 2. Another name for Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19, xlviii. 7; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 6; Micah v. 1)...."

BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH (I Sam. xvii. 12; Judges xvii. 7, xix. 1):

By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., Frants Buhl

The modern Bait Laḥm, situated about 5 miles south of Jerusalem, some 15 minutes' walk east of the road to Hebron, on a range of hills surrounded by fertile and beautiful valleys. The city was also called "Ephratah" (Josh. xv. 60, LXX.; Micah v. 1 [A. V. 2]; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; but hardly Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). In I Chron. ii. 50 et seq., iv. 4, Ephratah is the wife of Caleb from whom Beth-lehem descended. Beth-lehem is mentioned among the cities of Judah in Josh. xv. 60, in a passage which is missing in the Hebrew text, but which has been preserved in the Septuagint....."

Edit/Note: Christendom denies that the Messiah/Christ/anointed one had an origin (Micah 5:2) because of their false doctrine of the trinity alleging the Messiah had no beginning/origin. The Hebrew word - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H4163
מוֹצָאָה
môtsâ'âh
mo-tsaw-aw'
Feminine of H4161; a family descent;...

H4163
מוצאה
môtsâ'âh
BDB Definition:
1) origin, place of going out from
1a) origin

The Bible refers to the Messiah as the Son of God - compare Psalms 82:6. Clearly, a son is born from his father and did not always exist. Compare Hebrew chiyl in Proverbs 8:24,25 which means "pains of parturition" or childbirth. Interestingly, Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 at John 10:34-36 and applies this to himself as son of God.

>>>>1. What "church elect" are you referring to?
The various reverends, Cardinals like Newman, Bishops and even Popes.

>>>2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

I was specific. The Clan was small- a lineage (as you noted the gender for) he came out of and is not a messianic verse. But if you want more errors:
Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?



(a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22).



(b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42)



This most likely means Matts Christ is Yehuda the Galilean tax revolter who lived in the Herod Lysanias era and died in 6bc. While John's might be The AD era Theudas by the Jordan.



Although the verse after still can be the Galilean he refers to



As this character Jesus



decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) after.



How do we determine which one? Well John elsewhere Says Jesus is closer to 50 and since Theudas lasted to 45 ad the AD era christ is the one John is talking about which is Theudas.

Which brings me to refuting your ending comments, because Historically speaking there actually is no Jesus, just many christ figures confused and compiled by stories passed down and Romes deception to compile all cults and cultures and their mythologies to one world religion/ worship they could be benefactors of.
I can discuss all the failed historical Christs used to make up his image, if you'd like reference and sources and proof of such, but I believe I have already posted them here and in other post topics.

 

[harmonica]

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

no it's not

Read Article VI here:

Federal Rules of Evidence

www.law.cornell.edu

doesn't look like the bible to me

It's the Federal Rules of Evidence, which supports my claim at least in part.

'''evidence''' for what?

 

[Newtonian]

H

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Please study the history of the NT, even the church elect admit none of the Books were written by the men who's names are used on them. In fact Matthew has so many mistakes in them that the writer proves not to be Jewish, who'd know Hebrew Gender and meaning of words, but the Gentile who wrote Matthew did not know and the outcome is therefore misleading and comical.
If Matthew was written by A Jew then he would have known the gender used in Micah 5 is not that of a place/town. A Jew would also know Micah is talking about a lineage "Bethlehem Ephratah" not a town of Bethlehem.
Read the context of Micah 5 it's about a lineage. Bethlehem was the son or grandson of Ephratah.
Sources:
Dr. I. Hooykaas, Nineteenth--Century Reverend:
Not one of these five books (four Gospels and Acts) [was] really written by the person whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the heading would lead us to suppose.
9. Drs. H. Oort, I. Hooykaas, and A. Kuneh, The Bible for Learners, trans. Philip A. Wieksteed (Boston, 1878), vol. 3, p. 24.

St. Faustus, Fifth--Century French Bishop:
Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since-as already it has been often proved-these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them.10
It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.11

To strengthen belief in the resurrection of Jesus, St. Irenaeus invented many stories of others being raised from the dead.12
As Jeremiah Jones, an eighteenth--century reverend, comments:
Such pious frauds were very common among Christians even in the first three centuries; and a forgery of this nature, with the view above mentioned, seems natural and probable.13
10. Taylor, Diegesis, p. 66. 11. Ibid., p. 114. 12. Doane, p. 231. 13. Ibid.

"Should one continue to base one's life on a system of belief that--for all its occasional wisdom and frequent beauty--is demonstrably untrue?"-- Charles Templeton, former right-hand man to Billy Graham in Farewell to God

Religion writer and former Anglican priest Tom Harpur admits he's sticking his neck out for proffering that someone named Jesus never walked this Earth.

Hi HaShev - How are you? A few questions:

1. What "church elect" are you referring to? Faustus? Have you considered witnesses from earlier - such as Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the 2nd century CE? Or Origen of the late 2nd century CE. Please note our literature contains much evidence of the writership of the books of both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures.

2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

3. I assume you meant Micah 5:2. The context of the verse shows this is referring to Bethlehem Ephratha.

Micah 5:2
JPS Tanakh 1917
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

(NW) “And you, O Bethʹle·hem* Ephʹra·thah,+ the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah,+ from you*+ there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel,+ whose origin* is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.+

NW ref. footnote on "from you" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“You,” masc. sing.

NW footnote on "thousands"

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “clans.”

From our Bible dictionary under "Bethlehem":

Bethlehem — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Introduction:

"(Bethʹle·hem) [House of Bread].

1. A town in the Judean highlands overlooking the principal highway leading from Jerusalem down to Beer-sheba. It is today called Beit Lahm (Bet Lehem), located about 9 km (5.5 mi) SSW of the Temple Mount. Its altitude of some 777 m (2,550 ft) above sea level is about the same elevation as Jerusalem itself. The countryside, though rocky, produces olives, grapes, and various cereals.—Ru 1:22.

The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7) Among the early descendants of Jacob’s son Judah are mentioned “Salma the father of Bethlehem” (1Ch 2:51, 54) and “Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah the father of Bethlehem.” (1Ch 4:4) This expression may point to these men as forefathers of the Israelites who later occupied Bethlehem. (See EPHRATHAH No. 2.) When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18."

See the rest of the article. And under "Ephratha":

Ephrathah — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachel’s death relates that she was buried “on the way to Ephrath [Ephrathah], that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7) Members of Elimelech’s family are called “Ephrathites from Bethlehem,” and it was to Bethlehem that his widow Naomi returned out of Moab. (Ru 1:2, 19) The blessing pronounced on Boaz at the time of his marriage to Ruth was that he might prove his “worth in Ephrathah and make a notable name in Bethlehem.” (Ru 4:11) And finally, in the prophecy concerning the Messiah’s birth, the names are combined as “Bethlehem Ephrathah.” (Mic 5:2) In view of this it appears that the reference to Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6, which deals with David’s concern for the ark of the covenant, also applies to this hometown of David."

EPHRATH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"EPHRATH or EPHRATHAH (

,

):

By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn

1. Wife of Caleb (son of Hezron) and mother of Hur (I Chron. ii. 19, 50; iv. 4). 2. Another name for Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19, xlviii. 7; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 6; Micah v. 1)...."

BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH (I Sam. xvii. 12; Judges xvii. 7, xix. 1):

By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., Frants Buhl

The modern Bait Laḥm, situated about 5 miles south of Jerusalem, some 15 minutes' walk east of the road to Hebron, on a range of hills surrounded by fertile and beautiful valleys. The city was also called "Ephratah" (Josh. xv. 60, LXX.; Micah v. 1 [A. V. 2]; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; but hardly Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). In I Chron. ii. 50 et seq., iv. 4, Ephratah is the wife of Caleb from whom Beth-lehem descended. Beth-lehem is mentioned among the cities of Judah in Josh. xv. 60, in a passage which is missing in the Hebrew text, but which has been preserved in the Septuagint....."

Edit/Note: Christendom denies that the Messiah/Christ/anointed one had an origin (Micah 5:2) because of their false doctrine of the trinity alleging the Messiah had no beginning/origin. The Hebrew word - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H4163
מוֹצָאָה
môtsâ'âh
mo-tsaw-aw'
Feminine of H4161; a family descent;...

H4163
מוצאה
môtsâ'âh
BDB Definition:
1) origin, place of going out from
1a) origin

The Bible refers to the Messiah as the Son of God - compare Psalms 82:6. Clearly, a son is born from his father and did not always exist. Compare Hebrew chiyl in Proverbs 8:24,25 which means "pains of parturition" or childbirth. Interestingly, Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 at John 10:34-36 and applies this to himself as son of God.

>>>>1. What "church elect" are you referring to?
The various reverends, Cardinals like Newman, Bishops and even Popes.

>>>2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

I was specific. The Clan was small- a lineage (as you noted the gender for) he came out of and is not a messianic verse. But if you want more errors:
Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?



(a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22).



(b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42)



This most likely means Matts Christ is Yehuda the Galilean tax revolter who lived in the Herod Lysanias era and died in 6bc. While John's might be The AD era Theudas by the Jordan.



Although the verse after still can be the Galilean he refers to



As this character Jesus



decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) after.



How do we determine which one? Well John elsewhere Says Jesus is closer to 50 and since Theudas lasted to 45 ad the AD era christ is the one John is talking about which is Theudas.

Which brings me to refuting your ending comments, because Historically speaking there actually is no Jesus, just many christ figures confused and compiled by stories passed down and Romes deception to compile all cults and cultures and their mythologies to one world religion/ worship they could be benefactors of.
I can discuss all the failed historical Christs used to make up his image, if you'd like reference and sources and proof of such, but I believe I have already posted them here and in other post topics.

Good morning HaShev - how are you?

Popes? You mean like those who supported the Crusades and inquisitions? Or adopted the pagan Saturnalia as if December 25th was the birthdate of Jesus? I can assure you we do not trust the religious leaders of Christendom.

Again I ask you to examine the testimony of witnesses like Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the second century.

I gave you evidence that the Bethlehem of MIcah 5:2 was Bethlehem Ephratha of Judah - the Jewish Encyclopedia confirms this - do you agree with that Encyclopedia?

Yes, there are many false Christs as Jesus foretold. Testimony about Jesus Christ is abundant. I'll start with one example:

Jesus Christ — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived during the latter part of the first century C.E., wrote: “Christus [Latin for “Christ”], from whom the name [Christian] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.”—The Complete Works of Tacitus (New York, 1942), “The Annals,” Book 15, par. 44."

I'll stop there for now since you have not addressed points I gave you in my above post.

And my wife needs me now so I'm going offline. Have a good morning! I will post more later.

 

[HaShev]

A historical figure is a person in history.
Yeshu son of Mary, Yehuda ben Tabbai, Yehuda the Galionite, Yehuda of Galilee, Benjamin the Egyptian, Theudas of the River Jordan are all Historical figures.

Jesus however is not a singular figure, he's an image of a man created by converging many, including borrowed mythology of many myths that aren't of historical figures.
Plagiarism of Bible characters, mythical ones like Baal, Mithra, Krishna, Esus, Dagon, Horus, Osiris etc...
That is why people including University professor theologians, Priests, evangelists, etc can't answer simple questions about their icon.
1)Which of the many christs are you calling Jesus, as in what is his HISTORIC Hebrew name?
2)what era did he live in?
3)what was his profession?
4)who was his father and mother?
5) what was his type of death sentence. And who was to blame?
6)when did this happen? On a Holliday?
7) where was his home town?
8)what age did he live to? Into what era -aprox date?
9)did he come to unite or divide?
10) build or destroy?
11) did he build the Mikdash in his name in the city in his name?
12)is his name remembered on the Sheva(7th) day Shevot?
13) is his nane in "the Bible" (Mikra)?
14)is his name in the Torah portions?
15)does he come first as Lucifer or later overturning the first as Shiloh to remove the fallen one?
16)does he claim to be son of man?
17)Can Christians explain why they translate the words anointed to Christ, guardian to Nazarene, and perfect to sinless throughout the NT until they get to Ezekiel 28 about Lucifer when they leave the translation as anointed cherub seen as perfect to avoid detection of Jesus being Lucifer?
-Ezekiel 28:14-15
18) at the end of the Roman joke the punchline reveals who this Jesus they created is: what does Jesus tell you that he is in the end of revelation?

 

[Hawkins]

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Atheism is a deceptive art on leveraging the human incapability to prove a past. Atheistic arguments are thus about "you can't prove that you ever ate eggs before the age of 10, thus whatever your mom said about you eating eggs can't be true". The reality is, we humans don't have the ability to possibly evidence every egg ever eaten by us in the long past. The only way which remains for others to reach the fact whether you ever had an egg is possibly from the testimony of your mom.

Atheists don't even have the capacity to identify what a testimony is, which is pathetic . They think that Zeus is equivalent to Jesus. Zeus represents the lack of testimonies from eyewitnesses accounts, that is, from those who encountered him. No wonder it is said that they wind up in hell, as they are willing to stay far away from what truth could be, by lying to themselves in the end.

 

[BreezeWood]

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Atheism is a deceptive art on leveraging the human incapability to prove a past. Atheistic arguments are thus about "you can't prove that you ever ate eggs before the age of 10, thus whatever your mom said about you eating eggs can't be true". The reality is, we humans don't have the ability to possibly evidence every egg ever eaten by us in the long past. The only way which remains for others to reach the fact whether you ever had an egg is possibly from the testimony of your mom.

Atheists don't even have the capacity to identify what a testimony is, which is pathetic . They think that Zeus is equivalent to Jesus. Zeus represents the lack of testimonies from eyewitnesses accounts, that is, from those who encountered him. No wonder it is said that they wind up in hell, as they are willing to stay far away from what truth could be, by lying to themselves in the end.

Zeus represents the lack of testimonies from eyewitnesses accounts, that is, from which who encountered them.

.
no less than yours ...

Mythic Birthplace of Zeus Said Found

The Greek god of thunder and lightning had Earthly beginnings, and scientists think they know where.

www.livescience.com

The Greek god of thunder and lightning had Earthly beginnings, and scientists think they finally know where. Ancient Greeks first worshipped the omnipotent Zeus at a remote altar on Mount Lykaion, a team of Greek and American archaeologists now think.

even a carved statue of their image ...

where is yours, christian - any of the three of them ...

 

[Hollie]

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Atheism is a deceptive art on leveraging the human incapability to prove a past. Atheistic arguments are thus about "you can't prove that you ever ate eggs before the age of 10, thus whatever your mom said about you eating eggs can't be true". The reality is, we humans don't have the ability to possibly evidence every egg ever eaten by us in the long past. The only way which remains for others to reach the fact whether you ever had an egg is possibly from the testimony of your mom.

Atheists don't even have the capacity to identify what a testimony is, which is pathetic . They think that Zeus is equivalent to Jesus. Zeus represents the lack of testimonies from eyewitnesses accounts, that is, from those who encountered him. No wonder it is said that they wind up in hell, as they are willing to stay far away from what truth could be, by lying to themselves in the end.

I don't think that Zeus is equivalent to Jesus. Jesus is subordinate to Zeus.

 

[irosie91]

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Atheism is a deceptive art on leveraging the human incapability to prove a past. Atheistic arguments are thus about "you can't prove that you ever ate eggs before the age of 10, thus whatever your mom said about you eating eggs can't be true". The reality is, we humans don't have the ability to possibly evidence every egg ever eaten by us in the long past. The only way which remains for others to reach the fact whether you ever had an egg is possibly from the testimony of your mom.

Atheists don't even have the capacity to identify what a testimony is, which is pathetic . They think that Zeus is equivalent to Jesus. Zeus represents the lack of testimonies from eyewitnesses accounts, that is, from those who encountered him. No wonder it is said that they wind up in hell, as they are willing to stay far away from what truth could be, by lying to themselves in the end.

today ZEUS is not equivalent to Jesus----nor is, for that matter, KRISHNAH-----however, way back in the day---they were

 

[Newtonian]

H

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Please study the history of the NT, even the church elect admit none of the Books were written by the men who's names are used on them. In fact Matthew has so many mistakes in them that the writer proves not to be Jewish, who'd know Hebrew Gender and meaning of words, but the Gentile who wrote Matthew did not know and the outcome is therefore misleading and comical.
If Matthew was written by A Jew then he would have known the gender used in Micah 5 is not that of a place/town. A Jew would also know Micah is talking about a lineage "Bethlehem Ephratah" not a town of Bethlehem.
Read the context of Micah 5 it's about a lineage. Bethlehem was the son or grandson of Ephratah.
Sources:
Dr. I. Hooykaas, Nineteenth--Century Reverend:
Not one of these five books (four Gospels and Acts) [was] really written by the person whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the heading would lead us to suppose.
9. Drs. H. Oort, I. Hooykaas, and A. Kuneh, The Bible for Learners, trans. Philip A. Wieksteed (Boston, 1878), vol. 3, p. 24.

St. Faustus, Fifth--Century French Bishop:
Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since-as already it has been often proved-these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them.10
It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.11

To strengthen belief in the resurrection of Jesus, St. Irenaeus invented many stories of others being raised from the dead.12
As Jeremiah Jones, an eighteenth--century reverend, comments:
Such pious frauds were very common among Christians even in the first three centuries; and a forgery of this nature, with the view above mentioned, seems natural and probable.13
10. Taylor, Diegesis, p. 66. 11. Ibid., p. 114. 12. Doane, p. 231. 13. Ibid.

"Should one continue to base one's life on a system of belief that--for all its occasional wisdom and frequent beauty--is demonstrably untrue?"-- Charles Templeton, former right-hand man to Billy Graham in Farewell to God

Religion writer and former Anglican priest Tom Harpur admits he's sticking his neck out for proffering that someone named Jesus never walked this Earth.

Hi HaShev - How are you? A few questions:

1. What "church elect" are you referring to? Faustus? Have you considered witnesses from earlier - such as Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the 2nd century CE? Or Origen of the late 2nd century CE. Please note our literature contains much evidence of the writership of the books of both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures.

2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

3. I assume you meant Micah 5:2. The context of the verse shows this is referring to Bethlehem Ephratha.

Micah 5:2
JPS Tanakh 1917
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

(NW) “And you, O Bethʹle·hem* Ephʹra·thah,+ the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah,+ from you*+ there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel,+ whose origin* is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.+

NW ref. footnote on "from you" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“You,” masc. sing.

NW footnote on "thousands"

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “clans.”

From our Bible dictionary under "Bethlehem":

Bethlehem — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Introduction:

"(Bethʹle·hem) [House of Bread].

1. A town in the Judean highlands overlooking the principal highway leading from Jerusalem down to Beer-sheba. It is today called Beit Lahm (Bet Lehem), located about 9 km (5.5 mi) SSW of the Temple Mount. Its altitude of some 777 m (2,550 ft) above sea level is about the same elevation as Jerusalem itself. The countryside, though rocky, produces olives, grapes, and various cereals.—Ru 1:22.

The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7) Among the early descendants of Jacob’s son Judah are mentioned “Salma the father of Bethlehem” (1Ch 2:51, 54) and “Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah the father of Bethlehem.” (1Ch 4:4) This expression may point to these men as forefathers of the Israelites who later occupied Bethlehem. (See EPHRATHAH No. 2.) When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18."

See the rest of the article. And under "Ephratha":

Ephrathah — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachel’s death relates that she was buried “on the way to Ephrath [Ephrathah], that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7) Members of Elimelech’s family are called “Ephrathites from Bethlehem,” and it was to Bethlehem that his widow Naomi returned out of Moab. (Ru 1:2, 19) The blessing pronounced on Boaz at the time of his marriage to Ruth was that he might prove his “worth in Ephrathah and make a notable name in Bethlehem.” (Ru 4:11) And finally, in the prophecy concerning the Messiah’s birth, the names are combined as “Bethlehem Ephrathah.” (Mic 5:2) In view of this it appears that the reference to Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6, which deals with David’s concern for the ark of the covenant, also applies to this hometown of David."

EPHRATH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"EPHRATH or EPHRATHAH (

,

):

By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn

1. Wife of Caleb (son of Hezron) and mother of Hur (I Chron. ii. 19, 50; iv. 4). 2. Another name for Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19, xlviii. 7; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 6; Micah v. 1)...."

BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH (I Sam. xvii. 12; Judges xvii. 7, xix. 1):

By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., Frants Buhl

The modern Bait Laḥm, situated about 5 miles south of Jerusalem, some 15 minutes' walk east of the road to Hebron, on a range of hills surrounded by fertile and beautiful valleys. The city was also called "Ephratah" (Josh. xv. 60, LXX.; Micah v. 1 [A. V. 2]; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; but hardly Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). In I Chron. ii. 50 et seq., iv. 4, Ephratah is the wife of Caleb from whom Beth-lehem descended. Beth-lehem is mentioned among the cities of Judah in Josh. xv. 60, in a passage which is missing in the Hebrew text, but which has been preserved in the Septuagint....."

Edit/Note: Christendom denies that the Messiah/Christ/anointed one had an origin (Micah 5:2) because of their false doctrine of the trinity alleging the Messiah had no beginning/origin. The Hebrew word - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H4163
מוֹצָאָה
môtsâ'âh
mo-tsaw-aw'
Feminine of H4161; a family descent;...

H4163
מוצאה
môtsâ'âh
BDB Definition:
1) origin, place of going out from
1a) origin

The Bible refers to the Messiah as the Son of God - compare Psalms 82:6. Clearly, a son is born from his father and did not always exist. Compare Hebrew chiyl in Proverbs 8:24,25 which means "pains of parturition" or childbirth. Interestingly, Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 at John 10:34-36 and applies this to himself as son of God.

>>>>1. What "church elect" are you referring to?
The various reverends, Cardinals like Newman, Bishops and even Popes.

>>>2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

I was specific. The Clan was small- a lineage (as you noted the gender for) he came out of and is not a messianic verse. But if you want more errors:
Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?



(a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22).



(b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42)



This most likely means Matts Christ is Yehuda the Galilean tax revolter who lived in the Herod Lysanias era and died in 6bc. While John's might be The AD era Theudas by the Jordan.



Although the verse after still can be the Galilean he refers to



As this character Jesus



decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) after.



How do we determine which one? Well John elsewhere Says Jesus is closer to 50 and since Theudas lasted to 45 ad the AD era christ is the one John is talking about which is Theudas.

Which brings me to refuting your ending comments, because Historically speaking there actually is no Jesus, just many christ figures confused and compiled by stories passed down and Romes deception to compile all cults and cultures and their mythologies to one world religion/ worship they could be benefactors of.
I can discuss all the failed historical Christs used to make up his image, if you'd like reference and sources and proof of such, but I believe I have already posted them here and in other post topics.

Why are you ignoring the evidence I posted from Roman historian Tacitus and from the Jewish Encyclopedia?

 

[Newtonian]

You all - since I am into science I have seen evidence that Jehovah is the author of the Bible by its scientific accuracy.

One of the many examples (normally ignored btw) is the Bible's description of earth's wind cycles:

Ecclesiastes 1:6
The wind* is going to the south, and it is circling around to the north.+ Round and round it* is continually circling,+ and right back to its circlings+ the wind* is returning.

That is right before the description of earth's water cycle in verse 7.

I am a student of meteorology so I know the answer to this question - but before revealing the answer I will simply ask you all:

Why was Solomon inspired to write that the winds circle south and north but not east and west?

 

[HaShev]

H

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Please study the history of the NT, even the church elect admit none of the Books were written by the men who's names are used on them. In fact Matthew has so many mistakes in them that the writer proves not to be Jewish, who'd know Hebrew Gender and meaning of words, but the Gentile who wrote Matthew did not know and the outcome is therefore misleading and comical.
If Matthew was written by A Jew then he would have known the gender used in Micah 5 is not that of a place/town. A Jew would also know Micah is talking about a lineage "Bethlehem Ephratah" not a town of Bethlehem.
Read the context of Micah 5 it's about a lineage. Bethlehem was the son or grandson of Ephratah.
Sources:
Dr. I. Hooykaas, Nineteenth--Century Reverend:
Not one of these five books (four Gospels and Acts) [was] really written by the person whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the heading would lead us to suppose.
9. Drs. H. Oort, I. Hooykaas, and A. Kuneh, The Bible for Learners, trans. Philip A. Wieksteed (Boston, 1878), vol. 3, p. 24.

St. Faustus, Fifth--Century French Bishop:
Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since-as already it has been often proved-these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them.10
It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.11

To strengthen belief in the resurrection of Jesus, St. Irenaeus invented many stories of others being raised from the dead.12
As Jeremiah Jones, an eighteenth--century reverend, comments:
Such pious frauds were very common among Christians even in the first three centuries; and a forgery of this nature, with the view above mentioned, seems natural and probable.13
10. Taylor, Diegesis, p. 66. 11. Ibid., p. 114. 12. Doane, p. 231. 13. Ibid.

"Should one continue to base one's life on a system of belief that--for all its occasional wisdom and frequent beauty--is demonstrably untrue?"-- Charles Templeton, former right-hand man to Billy Graham in Farewell to God

Religion writer and former Anglican priest Tom Harpur admits he's sticking his neck out for proffering that someone named Jesus never walked this Earth.

Hi HaShev - How are you? A few questions:

1. What "church elect" are you referring to? Faustus? Have you considered witnesses from earlier - such as Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the 2nd century CE? Or Origen of the late 2nd century CE. Please note our literature contains much evidence of the writership of the books of both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures.

2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

3. I assume you meant Micah 5:2. The context of the verse shows this is referring to Bethlehem Ephratha.

Micah 5:2
JPS Tanakh 1917
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

(NW) “And you, O Bethʹle·hem* Ephʹra·thah,+ the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah,+ from you*+ there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel,+ whose origin* is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.+

NW ref. footnote on "from you" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“You,” masc. sing.

NW footnote on "thousands"

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “clans.”

From our Bible dictionary under "Bethlehem":

Bethlehem — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Introduction:

"(Bethʹle·hem) [House of Bread].

1. A town in the Judean highlands overlooking the principal highway leading from Jerusalem down to Beer-sheba. It is today called Beit Lahm (Bet Lehem), located about 9 km (5.5 mi) SSW of the Temple Mount. Its altitude of some 777 m (2,550 ft) above sea level is about the same elevation as Jerusalem itself. The countryside, though rocky, produces olives, grapes, and various cereals.—Ru 1:22.

The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7) Among the early descendants of Jacob’s son Judah are mentioned “Salma the father of Bethlehem” (1Ch 2:51, 54) and “Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah the father of Bethlehem.” (1Ch 4:4) This expression may point to these men as forefathers of the Israelites who later occupied Bethlehem. (See EPHRATHAH No. 2.) When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18."

See the rest of the article. And under "Ephratha":

Ephrathah — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachel’s death relates that she was buried “on the way to Ephrath [Ephrathah], that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7) Members of Elimelech’s family are called “Ephrathites from Bethlehem,” and it was to Bethlehem that his widow Naomi returned out of Moab. (Ru 1:2, 19) The blessing pronounced on Boaz at the time of his marriage to Ruth was that he might prove his “worth in Ephrathah and make a notable name in Bethlehem.” (Ru 4:11) And finally, in the prophecy concerning the Messiah’s birth, the names are combined as “Bethlehem Ephrathah.” (Mic 5:2) In view of this it appears that the reference to Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6, which deals with David’s concern for the ark of the covenant, also applies to this hometown of David."

EPHRATH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"EPHRATH or EPHRATHAH (

,

):

By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn

1. Wife of Caleb (son of Hezron) and mother of Hur (I Chron. ii. 19, 50; iv. 4). 2. Another name for Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19, xlviii. 7; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 6; Micah v. 1)...."

BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH (I Sam. xvii. 12; Judges xvii. 7, xix. 1):

By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., Frants Buhl

The modern Bait Laḥm, situated about 5 miles south of Jerusalem, some 15 minutes' walk east of the road to Hebron, on a range of hills surrounded by fertile and beautiful valleys. The city was also called "Ephratah" (Josh. xv. 60, LXX.; Micah v. 1 [A. V. 2]; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; but hardly Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). In I Chron. ii. 50 et seq., iv. 4, Ephratah is the wife of Caleb from whom Beth-lehem descended. Beth-lehem is mentioned among the cities of Judah in Josh. xv. 60, in a passage which is missing in the Hebrew text, but which has been preserved in the Septuagint....."

Edit/Note: Christendom denies that the Messiah/Christ/anointed one had an origin (Micah 5:2) because of their false doctrine of the trinity alleging the Messiah had no beginning/origin. The Hebrew word - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H4163
מוֹצָאָה
môtsâ'âh
mo-tsaw-aw'
Feminine of H4161; a family descent;...

H4163
מוצאה
môtsâ'âh
BDB Definition:
1) origin, place of going out from
1a) origin

The Bible refers to the Messiah as the Son of God - compare Psalms 82:6. Clearly, a son is born from his father and did not always exist. Compare Hebrew chiyl in Proverbs 8:24,25 which means "pains of parturition" or childbirth. Interestingly, Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 at John 10:34-36 and applies this to himself as son of God.

>>>>1. What "church elect" are you referring to?
The various reverends, Cardinals like Newman, Bishops and even Popes.

>>>2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

I was specific. The Clan was small- a lineage (as you noted the gender for) he came out of and is not a messianic verse. But if you want more errors:
Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?



(a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22).



(b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42)



This most likely means Matts Christ is Yehuda the Galilean tax revolter who lived in the Herod Lysanias era and died in 6bc. While John's might be The AD era Theudas by the Jordan.



Although the verse after still can be the Galilean he refers to



As this character Jesus



decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) after.



How do we determine which one? Well John elsewhere Says Jesus is closer to 50 and since Theudas lasted to 45 ad the AD era christ is the one John is talking about which is Theudas.

Which brings me to refuting your ending comments, because Historically speaking there actually is no Jesus, just many christ figures confused and compiled by stories passed down and Romes deception to compile all cults and cultures and their mythologies to one world religion/ worship they could be benefactors of.
I can discuss all the failed historical Christs used to make up his image, if you'd like reference and sources and proof of such, but I believe I have already posted them here and in other post topics.

Why are you ignoring the evidence I posted from Roman historian Tacitus and from the Jewish Encyclopedia?

Because your post proved my point when you admited the Gender was wrong for a town and you admitted knowing context shows a clan (lineage).
Bethlehem Ephrathah= the tense in the Hebrew is MASCULINE GENDER and birthplaces are feminine gender therefore it’s not a birth place it’s a birth lineage one comes out of.
You also mentioned Origen which proved my second point about use of Historical figures outside the claimed Pilate era to combine and create 'his image' given a new name, which is why you refuse to answer my questions.
My questions open up evidence for multi characters used to create the icon.
Source:
Christian apologist Origen (c.185-254 CE) Talks about 100bc era Yeshu son of Mary a far cry from Pilate era Theudas by the Jordan who died in 45ad by Roman crucifixion for his revolt against Rome.

 

[justinacolmena]

..I went to a catholic pre-seminary and they even said it is a book of stories--not facts/etc

"Stories" are "histories" by definition. It's just a short form of the word. And if Jesus told "parables" what's a "parable" if not a story?

The word "fact" is Latin for something that is done or has taken place.

To believe the stories in the Bible are factual is to believe they are true.

Stories that are not factual are called "fables" - Latin for something made up. Aesop's Fables were also intended to teach important lessons to children.

What if the Greeks told "made up" fables or fabricated stories to children and the Jews only told the literal truth in the deadness of the letter?

If Jesus (as a Jew) told a parable that was not the literal factual truth at the time and place, where does that fit it?

 

[Newtonian]

..I went to a catholic pre-seminary and they even said it is a book of stories--not facts/etc

"Stories" are "histories" by definition. It's just a short form of the word. And if Jesus told "parables" what's a "parable" if not a story?

The word "fact" is Latin for something that is done or has taken place.

To believe the stories in the Bible are factual is to believe they are true.

Stories that are not factual are called "fables" - Latin for something made up. Aesop's Fables were also intended to teach important lessons to children.

What if the Greeks told "made up" fables or fabricated stories to children and the Jews only told the literal truth in the deadness of the letter?

If Jesus (as a Jew) told a parable that was not the literal factual truth at the time and place, where does that fit it?

True Justina: Jesus was a Jew and he often taught in illustrations/parables.

In some cases, like sheep knowing the voice of their master, a parable can also be literally true, In other cases, like the Rich Man and Lazarus parable in Luke chapter 16 (after the first parable about the rich man) - the parable cannot also be true literally.

For example in that parable Abraham is pictured as being in heaven and Lazarus going to heaven. However, John 3:13 clearly states that at the time the parable was given - no man had ascended to heaven.

 

[Newtonian]

H

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Please study the history of the NT, even the church elect admit none of the Books were written by the men who's names are used on them. In fact Matthew has so many mistakes in them that the writer proves not to be Jewish, who'd know Hebrew Gender and meaning of words, but the Gentile who wrote Matthew did not know and the outcome is therefore misleading and comical.
If Matthew was written by A Jew then he would have known the gender used in Micah 5 is not that of a place/town. A Jew would also know Micah is talking about a lineage "Bethlehem Ephratah" not a town of Bethlehem.
Read the context of Micah 5 it's about a lineage. Bethlehem was the son or grandson of Ephratah.
Sources:
Dr. I. Hooykaas, Nineteenth--Century Reverend:
Not one of these five books (four Gospels and Acts) [was] really written by the person whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the heading would lead us to suppose.
9. Drs. H. Oort, I. Hooykaas, and A. Kuneh, The Bible for Learners, trans. Philip A. Wieksteed (Boston, 1878), vol. 3, p. 24.

St. Faustus, Fifth--Century French Bishop:
Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since-as already it has been often proved-these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them.10
It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.11

To strengthen belief in the resurrection of Jesus, St. Irenaeus invented many stories of others being raised from the dead.12
As Jeremiah Jones, an eighteenth--century reverend, comments:
Such pious frauds were very common among Christians even in the first three centuries; and a forgery of this nature, with the view above mentioned, seems natural and probable.13
10. Taylor, Diegesis, p. 66. 11. Ibid., p. 114. 12. Doane, p. 231. 13. Ibid.

"Should one continue to base one's life on a system of belief that--for all its occasional wisdom and frequent beauty--is demonstrably untrue?"-- Charles Templeton, former right-hand man to Billy Graham in Farewell to God

Religion writer and former Anglican priest Tom Harpur admits he's sticking his neck out for proffering that someone named Jesus never walked this Earth.

Hi HaShev - How are you? A few questions:

1. What "church elect" are you referring to? Faustus? Have you considered witnesses from earlier - such as Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the 2nd century CE? Or Origen of the late 2nd century CE. Please note our literature contains much evidence of the writership of the books of both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures.

2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

3. I assume you meant Micah 5:2. The context of the verse shows this is referring to Bethlehem Ephratha.

Micah 5:2
JPS Tanakh 1917
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

(NW) “And you, O Bethʹle·hem* Ephʹra·thah,+ the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah,+ from you*+ there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel,+ whose origin* is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.+

NW ref. footnote on "from you" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“You,” masc. sing.

NW footnote on "thousands"

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “clans.”

From our Bible dictionary under "Bethlehem":

Bethlehem — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Introduction:

"(Bethʹle·hem) [House of Bread].

1. A town in the Judean highlands overlooking the principal highway leading from Jerusalem down to Beer-sheba. It is today called Beit Lahm (Bet Lehem), located about 9 km (5.5 mi) SSW of the Temple Mount. Its altitude of some 777 m (2,550 ft) above sea level is about the same elevation as Jerusalem itself. The countryside, though rocky, produces olives, grapes, and various cereals.—Ru 1:22.

The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7) Among the early descendants of Jacob’s son Judah are mentioned “Salma the father of Bethlehem” (1Ch 2:51, 54) and “Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah the father of Bethlehem.” (1Ch 4:4) This expression may point to these men as forefathers of the Israelites who later occupied Bethlehem. (See EPHRATHAH No. 2.) When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18."

See the rest of the article. And under "Ephratha":

Ephrathah — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachel’s death relates that she was buried “on the way to Ephrath [Ephrathah], that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7) Members of Elimelech’s family are called “Ephrathites from Bethlehem,” and it was to Bethlehem that his widow Naomi returned out of Moab. (Ru 1:2, 19) The blessing pronounced on Boaz at the time of his marriage to Ruth was that he might prove his “worth in Ephrathah and make a notable name in Bethlehem.” (Ru 4:11) And finally, in the prophecy concerning the Messiah’s birth, the names are combined as “Bethlehem Ephrathah.” (Mic 5:2) In view of this it appears that the reference to Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6, which deals with David’s concern for the ark of the covenant, also applies to this hometown of David."

EPHRATH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"EPHRATH or EPHRATHAH (

,

):

By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn

1. Wife of Caleb (son of Hezron) and mother of Hur (I Chron. ii. 19, 50; iv. 4). 2. Another name for Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19, xlviii. 7; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 6; Micah v. 1)...."

BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH (I Sam. xvii. 12; Judges xvii. 7, xix. 1):

By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., Frants Buhl

The modern Bait Laḥm, situated about 5 miles south of Jerusalem, some 15 minutes' walk east of the road to Hebron, on a range of hills surrounded by fertile and beautiful valleys. The city was also called "Ephratah" (Josh. xv. 60, LXX.; Micah v. 1 [A. V. 2]; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; but hardly Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). In I Chron. ii. 50 et seq., iv. 4, Ephratah is the wife of Caleb from whom Beth-lehem descended. Beth-lehem is mentioned among the cities of Judah in Josh. xv. 60, in a passage which is missing in the Hebrew text, but which has been preserved in the Septuagint....."

Edit/Note: Christendom denies that the Messiah/Christ/anointed one had an origin (Micah 5:2) because of their false doctrine of the trinity alleging the Messiah had no beginning/origin. The Hebrew word - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H4163
מוֹצָאָה
môtsâ'âh
mo-tsaw-aw'
Feminine of H4161; a family descent;...

H4163
מוצאה
môtsâ'âh
BDB Definition:
1) origin, place of going out from
1a) origin

The Bible refers to the Messiah as the Son of God - compare Psalms 82:6. Clearly, a son is born from his father and did not always exist. Compare Hebrew chiyl in Proverbs 8:24,25 which means "pains of parturition" or childbirth. Interestingly, Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 at John 10:34-36 and applies this to himself as son of God.

>>>>1. What "church elect" are you referring to?
The various reverends, Cardinals like Newman, Bishops and even Popes.

>>>2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

I was specific. The Clan was small- a lineage (as you noted the gender for) he came out of and is not a messianic verse. But if you want more errors:
Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?



(a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22).



(b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42)



This most likely means Matts Christ is Yehuda the Galilean tax revolter who lived in the Herod Lysanias era and died in 6bc. While John's might be The AD era Theudas by the Jordan.



Although the verse after still can be the Galilean he refers to



As this character Jesus



decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) after.



How do we determine which one? Well John elsewhere Says Jesus is closer to 50 and since Theudas lasted to 45 ad the AD era christ is the one John is talking about which is Theudas.

Which brings me to refuting your ending comments, because Historically speaking there actually is no Jesus, just many christ figures confused and compiled by stories passed down and Romes deception to compile all cults and cultures and their mythologies to one world religion/ worship they could be benefactors of.
I can discuss all the failed historical Christs used to make up his image, if you'd like reference and sources and proof of such, but I believe I have already posted them here and in other post topics.

Why are you ignoring the evidence I posted from Roman historian Tacitus and from the Jewish Encyclopedia?

Because your post proved my point when you admited the Gender was wrong for a town and you admitted knowing context shows a clan (lineage).
Bethlehem Ephrathah= the tense in the Hebrew is MASCULINE GENDER and birthplaces are feminine gender therefore it’s not a birth place it’s a birth lineage one comes out of.
You also mentioned Origen which proved my second point about use of Historical figures outside the claimed Pilate era to combine and create 'his image' given a new name, which is why you refuse to answer my questions.
My questions open up evidence for multi characters used to create the icon.
Source:
Christian apologist Origen (c.185-254 CE) Talks about 100bc era Yeshu son of Mary a far cry from Pilate era Theudas by the Jordan who died in 45ad by Roman crucifixion for his revolt against Rome.

Sounds like you disagree with the Jewish Encyclopedia concerning Bethlehem Ephratha in Micah 5:2 - or am I misunderstanding your post?

And you totally missed my point about Origen's Hexapla - the evidence of when the Divine Name was removed from the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Try again!

 

[HaShev]

H

​	View attachment 338951 May 20 (6 hours ago)​

The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?

The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.

We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?

Please study the history of the NT, even the church elect admit none of the Books were written by the men who's names are used on them. In fact Matthew has so many mistakes in them that the writer proves not to be Jewish, who'd know Hebrew Gender and meaning of words, but the Gentile who wrote Matthew did not know and the outcome is therefore misleading and comical.
If Matthew was written by A Jew then he would have known the gender used in Micah 5 is not that of a place/town. A Jew would also know Micah is talking about a lineage "Bethlehem Ephratah" not a town of Bethlehem.
Read the context of Micah 5 it's about a lineage. Bethlehem was the son or grandson of Ephratah.
Sources:
Dr. I. Hooykaas, Nineteenth--Century Reverend:
Not one of these five books (four Gospels and Acts) [was] really written by the person whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the heading would lead us to suppose.
9. Drs. H. Oort, I. Hooykaas, and A. Kuneh, The Bible for Learners, trans. Philip A. Wieksteed (Boston, 1878), vol. 3, p. 24.

St. Faustus, Fifth--Century French Bishop:
Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since-as already it has been often proved-these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them.10
It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.11

To strengthen belief in the resurrection of Jesus, St. Irenaeus invented many stories of others being raised from the dead.12
As Jeremiah Jones, an eighteenth--century reverend, comments:
Such pious frauds were very common among Christians even in the first three centuries; and a forgery of this nature, with the view above mentioned, seems natural and probable.13
10. Taylor, Diegesis, p. 66. 11. Ibid., p. 114. 12. Doane, p. 231. 13. Ibid.

"Should one continue to base one's life on a system of belief that--for all its occasional wisdom and frequent beauty--is demonstrably untrue?"-- Charles Templeton, former right-hand man to Billy Graham in Farewell to God

Religion writer and former Anglican priest Tom Harpur admits he's sticking his neck out for proffering that someone named Jesus never walked this Earth.

Hi HaShev - How are you? A few questions:

1. What "church elect" are you referring to? Faustus? Have you considered witnesses from earlier - such as Polycarp and the Quartodecimans of the 2nd century CE? Or Origen of the late 2nd century CE. Please note our literature contains much evidence of the writership of the books of both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures.

2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

3. I assume you meant Micah 5:2. The context of the verse shows this is referring to Bethlehem Ephratha.

Micah 5:2
JPS Tanakh 1917
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

(NW) “And you, O Bethʹle·hem* Ephʹra·thah,+ the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah,+ from you*+ there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel,+ whose origin* is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.+

NW ref. footnote on "from you" -

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

“You,” masc. sing.

NW footnote on "thousands"

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Or “clans.”

From our Bible dictionary under "Bethlehem":

Bethlehem — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Introduction:

"(Bethʹle·hem) [House of Bread].

1. A town in the Judean highlands overlooking the principal highway leading from Jerusalem down to Beer-sheba. It is today called Beit Lahm (Bet Lehem), located about 9 km (5.5 mi) SSW of the Temple Mount. Its altitude of some 777 m (2,550 ft) above sea level is about the same elevation as Jerusalem itself. The countryside, though rocky, produces olives, grapes, and various cereals.—Ru 1:22.

The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7) Among the early descendants of Jacob’s son Judah are mentioned “Salma the father of Bethlehem” (1Ch 2:51, 54) and “Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah the father of Bethlehem.” (1Ch 4:4) This expression may point to these men as forefathers of the Israelites who later occupied Bethlehem. (See EPHRATHAH No. 2.) When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18."

See the rest of the article. And under "Ephratha":

Ephrathah — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"2. Evidently the earlier name of Bethlehem or a name applied to the area around it. The names of Bethlehem and Ephrathah are used jointly in several texts. The account of Rachel’s death relates that she was buried “on the way to Ephrath [Ephrathah], that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7) Members of Elimelech’s family are called “Ephrathites from Bethlehem,” and it was to Bethlehem that his widow Naomi returned out of Moab. (Ru 1:2, 19) The blessing pronounced on Boaz at the time of his marriage to Ruth was that he might prove his “worth in Ephrathah and make a notable name in Bethlehem.” (Ru 4:11) And finally, in the prophecy concerning the Messiah’s birth, the names are combined as “Bethlehem Ephrathah.” (Mic 5:2) In view of this it appears that the reference to Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6, which deals with David’s concern for the ark of the covenant, also applies to this hometown of David."

EPHRATH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"EPHRATH or EPHRATHAH (

,

):

By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn

1. Wife of Caleb (son of Hezron) and mother of Hur (I Chron. ii. 19, 50; iv. 4). 2. Another name for Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19, xlviii. 7; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; Ps. cxxxii. 6; Micah v. 1)...."

BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

"BETH-LEHEM-JUDAH (I Sam. xvii. 12; Judges xvii. 7, xix. 1):

By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., Frants Buhl

The modern Bait Laḥm, situated about 5 miles south of Jerusalem, some 15 minutes' walk east of the road to Hebron, on a range of hills surrounded by fertile and beautiful valleys. The city was also called "Ephratah" (Josh. xv. 60, LXX.; Micah v. 1 [A. V. 2]; Ruth i. 2, iv. 11; but hardly Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). In I Chron. ii. 50 et seq., iv. 4, Ephratah is the wife of Caleb from whom Beth-lehem descended. Beth-lehem is mentioned among the cities of Judah in Josh. xv. 60, in a passage which is missing in the Hebrew text, but which has been preserved in the Septuagint....."

Edit/Note: Christendom denies that the Messiah/Christ/anointed one had an origin (Micah 5:2) because of their false doctrine of the trinity alleging the Messiah had no beginning/origin. The Hebrew word - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H4163
מוֹצָאָה
môtsâ'âh
mo-tsaw-aw'
Feminine of H4161; a family descent;...

H4163
מוצאה
môtsâ'âh
BDB Definition:
1) origin, place of going out from
1a) origin

The Bible refers to the Messiah as the Son of God - compare Psalms 82:6. Clearly, a son is born from his father and did not always exist. Compare Hebrew chiyl in Proverbs 8:24,25 which means "pains of parturition" or childbirth. Interestingly, Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 at John 10:34-36 and applies this to himself as son of God.

>>>>1. What "church elect" are you referring to?
The various reverends, Cardinals like Newman, Bishops and even Popes.

>>>2. Can you be more specific as to alleged mistakes in the book of Matthew?

I was specific. The Clan was small- a lineage (as you noted the gender for) he came out of and is not a messianic verse. But if you want more errors:
Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?



(a) By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22).



(b) On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42)



This most likely means Matts Christ is Yehuda the Galilean tax revolter who lived in the Herod Lysanias era and died in 6bc. While John's might be The AD era Theudas by the Jordan.



Although the verse after still can be the Galilean he refers to



As this character Jesus



decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43) after.



How do we determine which one? Well John elsewhere Says Jesus is closer to 50 and since Theudas lasted to 45 ad the AD era christ is the one John is talking about which is Theudas.

Which brings me to refuting your ending comments, because Historically speaking there actually is no Jesus, just many christ figures confused and compiled by stories passed down and Romes deception to compile all cults and cultures and their mythologies to one world religion/ worship they could be benefactors of.
I can discuss all the failed historical Christs used to make up his image, if you'd like reference and sources and proof of such, but I believe I have already posted them here and in other post topics.

Why are you ignoring the evidence I posted from Roman historian Tacitus and from the Jewish Encyclopedia?

Because your post proved my point when you admited the Gender was wrong for a town and you admitted knowing context shows a clan (lineage).
Bethlehem Ephrathah= the tense in the Hebrew is MASCULINE GENDER and birthplaces are feminine gender therefore it’s not a birth place it’s a birth lineage one comes out of.
You also mentioned Origen which proved my second point about use of Historical figures outside the claimed Pilate era to combine and create 'his image' given a new name, which is why you refuse to answer my questions.
My questions open up evidence for multi characters used to create the icon.
Source:
Christian apologist Origen (c.185-254 CE) Talks about 100bc era Yeshu son of Mary a far cry from Pilate era Theudas by the Jordan who died in 45ad by Roman crucifixion for his revolt against Rome.

Sounds like you disagree with the Jewish Encyclopedia concerning Bethlehem Ephratha in Micah 5:2 - or am I misunderstanding your post?

And you totally missed my point about Origen's Hexapla - the evidence of when the Divine Name was removed from the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Try again!

Reflect back what you said to me and remember your standard has to be kept when asked:
"Sounds like you disagree with Websters Dictionary and collegiate encyclopedias and Jesus and John of Patmos reference in Revelation, am I correct?"
[See here etymology of "Lucifer":
"[ the morning star, a 'fallen rebel' archangel,
THE Devil, fr. OE. fr. Latin, the morning star, fr. Lucifer light-
bearing, fr. luc light + -fer -ferous--more at
LIGHT]" (Webster's, p.677)

I Jesus am the bright morning star (Lucifer)
- Rev 22:16

Now you claim to know the Divine name but refuse to answer the simplest of questions:
The name of "your" historical christ.
But let me add another question:
What does Torah and Mikra say is the name of the HaSheva (redeemer)?

 

[Newtonian]

HaShev - see my posts 41, 44. After you respond to what I posted, I respond further to you.

 

[HaShev]

HaShev - see my posts 41, 44. After you respond to what I posted, I respond further to you.

So your ad hominem reply is all you have to defend your luciferous character?
You lied about having a name when you can't even answer the most simplistic question
Third time: what is that Hebrew name?
Why is that so hard and why are you embarrassed to say it?

 

[HaShev]

 

[harmonica]

..I went to a catholic pre-seminary and they even said it is a book of stories--not facts/etc

"Stories" are "histories" by definition. It's just a short form of the word. And if Jesus told "parables" what's a "parable" if not a story?

The word "fact" is Latin for something that is done or has taken place.

To believe the stories in the Bible are factual is to believe they are true.

Stories that are not factual are called "fables" - Latin for something made up. Aesop's Fables were also intended to teach important lessons to children.

What if the Greeks told "made up" fables or fabricated stories to children and the Jews only told the literal truth in the deadness of the letter?

If Jesus (as a Jew) told a parable that was not the literal factual truth at the time and place, where does that fit it?

..we have controversy with truth and lies in the year 2020--with videos!!! so surely and logically we can't believe what was written thousands of years ago