WAS JESUS A HISTORICAL FIGURE AND WAS HE CRUCIFIED?

There are some skeptics among those who comment on this blog. They keep saying that there is no evidence that Jesus really lived or that there are Roman documents that indicate his crucifixion.

If they had open minds and really cared they might read some or all of the following works. They could read them all the way through, but if they are lazy (or just don't care about whether they are really right), they can just read the pages listed.

In the 1940s and 50s it was fashionable to cast aspersions on the authenticity of Jesus. By the 60s documents were discovered and scholars began to realize that they had been wrong. Those who have an ax to grind about Jesus choose not to study the more recent investigations, preferring to languish in the inaccuracies of the older ones.

In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285

Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus by Michael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200

Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34

Jesus Remembered by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".

Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus by William R. Herzog (4 Jul 2005) ISBN 0664225284 pages 1-6

Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. p. 145. ISBN 0-06-061662-8. "That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus...agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact."

Robert E. Van Voorst Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 page 16 states: "biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"

James D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in Sacrifice and Redemption edited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460X pages 35-36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"

The Gospels and Jesus by Graham Stanton, 1989 ISBN 0192132415 Oxford University Press, page 145 states : "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research by Bruce Chilton, Craig A. Evans 1998 ISBN 9004111425 pages 460-470

The Cambridge companion to Jesus by Markus N. A. Bockmuehl 2001 Cambridge Univ Press ISBN 978-0-521-79678-1 pages 123-124. Page 124 state that the "farfetched theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention are highly implausible."

Van Voorst, Robert E. (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence ISBN 0-8028-4368-9. page 83

Flavius Josephus; Maier, Paul L. (December 1995). Josephus, the essential works: a condensation of Jewish antiquities and The Jewish war ISBN 978-0-8254-3260-6 pages 284-285

CHRISTMAS/NEW YEAR'S RESPITE-More than Wonderful-Sandi Patty & Larnelle Harris

Five Easy Steps to Health Insurance As It Should Be

1.      Repeal ObamaCare. It is a fiasco of the first order and will hurt far more people than it is intended to help. The latest series of atrocities revolve around President BO (the amateur president)’s breaking his own “law of the land.” After insisting that the insurance-purchase mandate was not only constitutional but essential to the law's success, Obama decreed that millions of Americans are magically exempt. They are offered a “hardship exemption” if their policies were cancelled. No sign-up, no penalty tax. 

2.      Allow interstate competition among health insurance companies. 

3.      Cap excessive payouts from lawsuits by category. 

4.      Encourage health insurance companies to establish a fund to pay for pre-existing conditions. Allow them to charge an extra fee to cover those conditions. 

5.      Pass a Constitutional amendment that would limit the federal government’s role in the health insurance industry, requiring the government to revoke at least 20 of its most punitive restrictions on health insurance companies.

So there you go. It's all fixed (in your dreams).

MY COSTS REVEALED!

By arrangement (which shall remain undisclosed) my wife has not had regular health insurance in her life. So now she has to purchase it through the PPACA, brought to us by President BO (the amateur president). She is not exempt.

So I went on line to sign her up. It was impossible to complete the transaction as the site produced an error message and placed me in a “virtual waiting room," from which I have yet to be called, but I did find out what her (my) costs will be. She will pay 345.00 per month. That’s $4,140 per year! Her deductible will be $12,000.00 per year. That’s with the bronze plan.

In those years in which she is not hospitalized with a major illness, that will amount to $16,000.00 for coverage down the drain.

Let me see…$0.00 for complete coverage with no limit and no deductible, versus $16,000.00 per year. Which is the best deal? The complete coverage with no limit deal will continue, but we still have to purchase health insurance! Do you think I am happy?

"Oh, well, Joe. You know that some people will be screwed so that the rest of us can have the health care that the government is forcing us to be a part of." Thank you, you liberal (insert bad word of your choice here).

Did you know that there is a $23.14 tax included in the premium? That adds up to $277.08 per year in taxes. There is also a $2.00 fee per policy that goes into “medical research trust fund.” There is also a 2.3% medical device tax that will inflate the cost of items such as pacemakers, stents and prosthetic limbs.

Insurers will pay a 35% user fee to sell medical plans on HealthCare.gov.

There are subsidies for some low income Americans that will pay the taxes and a part of the premium, but for those of us who are $200.00 over the minimum income to qualify, that means nothing.

Oh, and if you have high medical expenses out of pocket, you will get a smaller income tax deduction. It was 7.5% of Adjusted Gross Income. Now it will jump to 10% AGI before deductions can be claimed.

Since I missed the deadline due to the site’s inability to complete my transaction, and since I have not yet been released from the “virtual waiting room” and have no idea what to do next, I guess we will just pay the first year’s penalty and wait it out. Other continuing web site issues.

Why did you liberals get lulled into thinking that the government was qualified to run this health care scam on Americans? Why? Are you really, really that uninformed? Did you learn nothing from Amtrack, USPS, the Veterans Administration, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? Nothing?

Why not?

CHRISTMAS RESPITE-Joy to the World-Mack Wilberg Arrangement

WHEN WAS CHRISTMAS, ANYWAY?

I am indebted to Glenn E. Chatfield at The Watchman’sBagpipes for much of the following information.

Every year discussions pop up about why we celebrate Christmas in December. Some say the birth of Jesus had to have been in the summer. This is the time the liberals like to choose, because it is so opposite of when most Christians celebrate Christmas and liberals just love to find issues with Christians’ beliefs. They just swallow each other’s lines and spew them out whenever the subject comes up.

Others say the shepherds’ tending their sheep close to the walls of Bethlehem indicates a deep winter time frame.

I would not argue with either position, because, frankly, I don’t care when it was.

That said, there is considerable evidence that Jesus was born some time close to December 25^th.

Alfred Edersheim, in The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, wrote:

There is no adequate reason for questioning the historical accuracy of [December 25^th]. The objections generally made rest on grounds, which seem to me historically untenable. The subject has been fully discussed in an article by Casselin Herzog’s Real. Ency. 17, pp. 588-594. But a curious piece of evidence comes to us from a Jewish source. In the addition to the Megillath Taanith (ed. Warsh. p.20a), the 9^th Tebheth is marked as a fast day, and it is added, that the reason for this is not stated. Now, Jewish chronologists have fixed on that day as that of Christ’s birth, and it is remarkable that, between the years 500 and 816 AD the 25^th of December fell no less than twelve times on the 9^th Tebheth. It the 9^th Tebheth, or 25^th December, was regarded as the birthday of Christ, we can understand the concealment about it.

In the Jews for Jesus Newsletter of December, 2000 we read:

Ancient Jewish tradition … seems to recognize that date…. According to Alfred Edersheim, Jewish leaders established a special fast day on 9^th day of the Jewish month of Tevet. Initially, no specific reason was given for this fast day, but later Jewish writers identified the 9^th of Tevet with the birth date of Jesus. Edersheim further states that the 9^th of Tevet had fallen on the 25^thof December numerous times in the past.

There is also the possibility of a Hanukkah-Christmas connection. Hanukkah is celebrated on the 25^th of Kislev, the Jewish month that corresponds with December. Could it be that early Jewish believers in Yeshiva (jesus) wanted to connect Hanukkah and the birth of the Messiah, and eventually that desire was transposed into the 25^th of December? After all, Hanukah commemorates the rededication of the Temple in Jerusalem, which Jesus applied to Himself when He said, “Destroy this Temple and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19).

A person with a degree in agriculture tells us:

“Certainly, the Lord Jesus was born at Christmas. The only time shepherds spend the night in the fields with their sheep is during the time when the lambs are born. The ewes become ‘attractive’ to the rams in the month after June 21, the longest day of the year. the normal gestation period is five months so the ewes start lambing about mid-December.”

Isn’t it natural that the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world would be born when all the other lambs are born?

A Montana sheep rancher reports:

“Oh, yes! None of the men who have flocks are in church for weeks at Christmas. They have to be in the fields day and night to clean up and care for the lambs as soon as they are born or many would perish in the cold.” Isn’t that neat? God’s Lamb, who was to die for the sins of the world, was born when all the other little lambs are born. Because He came and died the centuries old practice of sacrificing lambs for sin could end.

So which one was it? I can’t say for certain, and I would not bet any money on any of the above scenarios.

If you don’t mind, I will continue to celebrate Christmas on December 25^th.

Hope you had a great one!

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

CHRISTMAS RESPITE-Silent Night-Celtic Woman