Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you find something wrong with my posting? It is backed by NT scripture. It also states in the NT scriptures, that Jesus [Lord of Hosts] could have called on the Hosts of heaven [angels] at any time.
Do you find something wrong with my posting? It is backed by NT scripture. It also states in the NT scriptures, that Jesus [Lord of Hosts] could have called on the Hosts of heaven [angels] at any time.
I think he is pointing out that this is a serious historical question is all.
James was not the blood sibling of Jesus, and the ossuary is a fraud.
it is important to stress that the government returned the James ossuary to Oded Golan but continues to officially maintain that the second part of the inscription, “akhui d’Yeshua”, “brother of Jesus” is a forgery, exactly as I wrote in my article that was published before the IAA report came out. When the police raided Golan’s apartment they found dental drills and it is known that he was in contact with a Coptic Christian antiquarian in Egypt, who did not appear at the trial. Now that is not to say that Golan himself forged the second part of the inscription, it is still not known who did the job. “Akhui” can mean “brother”, “half brother”, “step brother”, “cousin”, “relative”, even “partner”, in Aramaic, just as “adelphos” “plural “adelphoi”, in Greek, can also be understood as “relative” or “kinsman”, as anyone who reads the Gospel according to Mark will understand. Above all, Jesus, nailed to the cross and sensing that death was approaching, was worried about who would look after his mother. What was “brother” James doing and why was he not around? Why did Jesus have to ask a disciple to look after his mother? (comments section)
According to Hegesippus, a Jewish convert to the faith who wrote early church chronicles,
James the Righteous (also known as The Just), Bishop of Jerusalem, was over eighty years old
when he was martyred in the year 62. This makes him older or at least the same age as the Virgin Mary.
The only reason why Judeans could not execute others during the time of the Crucifixion is
that they were Roman subjects without any official authority. Both James the Righteous and
Simeon, his appointed successor, were killed. One only has to read about first-century history
to understand the gross tensions and antipathies between Romans and the controversy within
the Israelite/Judean religious hierarchy that was caused by the life of Jesus Christ.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,871,431 times
Reputation: 4559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowball7
James was not the blood sibling of Jesus, and the ossuary is a fraud.
it is important to stress that the government returned the James ossuary to Oded Golan but continues to officially maintain that the second part of the inscription, “akhui d’Yeshuaâ€, “brother of Jesus†is a forgery, exactly as I wrote in my article that was published before the IAA report came out. When the police raided Golan’s apartment they found dental drills and it is known that he was in contact with a Coptic Christian antiquarian in Egypt, who did not appear at the trial. Now that is not to say that Golan himself forged the second part of the inscription, it is still not known who did the job. “Akhui†can mean “brotherâ€, “half brotherâ€, “step brotherâ€, “cousinâ€, “relativeâ€, even “partnerâ€, in Aramaic, just as “adelphos†“plural “adelphoiâ€, in Greek, can also be understood as “relative†or “kinsmanâ€, as anyone who reads the Gospel according to Mark will understand. Above all, Jesus, nailed to the cross and sensing that death was approaching, was worried about who would look after his mother. What was “brother†James doing and why was he not around? Why did Jesus have to ask a disciple to look after his mother? (comments section)
According to Hegesippus, a Jewish convert to the faith who wrote early church chronicles,
James the Righteous (also known as The Just), Bishop of Jerusalem, was over eighty years old
when he was martyred in the year 62. This makes him older or at least the same age as the Virgin Mary.
The only reason why Judeans could not execute others during the time of the Crucifixion is
that they were Roman subjects without any official authority. Both James the Righteous and
Simeon, his appointed successor, were killed. One only has to read about first-century history
to understand the gross tensions and antipathies between Romans and the controversy within
the Israelite/Judean religious hierarchy that was caused by the life of Jesus Christ.
No, not that I'm aware of, would Josephus be wrong. Why ? Josephus used no language
other than the Gospel's same concerning the brethren of Jesus. James the Righteous as
son of Joseph, or son of Mary's older sister, or both, would have been referred to as a
brother. This misunderstanding is a Protestant one, and it's recent. It wasn't until the
Bible was widely distributed among the uneducated English-speaking world that it was
claimed by ignoramuses that James the Righteous was an actual blood sibling of Jesus.
Because Jesus escaped in time as mentioned in the Bible. He's well protected before the coming of His time that people won't be able to kill Him out of a burst anger as they do to Stephen or James.
The reason Jesus was killed by the Romans had been given that the Jews could not legally put a man to death.
"John 18:31 - Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death:"
So, why were the Jews legally able to put Jesus's brother James to death in 62 CE?
Nothing new under the sun, it's not biblical for us to do it so we will force the government to do our will.
Because Jesus escaped in time as mentioned in the Bible. He's well protected before the coming of His time that people won't be able to kill Him out of a burst anger as they do to Stephen or James.
It wasn't out of anger that Stephen was killed, Stephen had broken the law as an evil sinner because he was going around as a false prophet teaching people not to keep the laws of Moses and he was speaking against Jerusalem and the Temple which went against the whole culture of God.
If a Jew comes speaking against keeping the laws of Moses, then he is a false prophet who deserves death by the law for trying to turn people away from keeping the commandments of God.
So he deserved to die as anyone who would try and abolish the laws of Moses.
WHOA, wait a minute, I got that wrong, It seems that liars were paid to tell lies against Stephen saying that Stephen was teaching people to not keep the laws of Moses.
So I guess he didn't deserve to die.
Remember that time in acts when all those people were telling lies about Paul saying that Paul was teaching people not to keep the laws of Moses?
The Jews did not kill Jesus and neither did the Romans.
Jesus could have prevented his own death. He chose not to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
