rosends
Well-Known Member
No it doesn't. It makes the same errors that Muslim and Mormon texts do. You just don't want to see it.No, I look at Muslim and Mormon claims via logic, the hypothesis method, and whether their claims and doctrines perfectly align with Tanakh. The NT aligns with Tanakh magnificently, pervasively, thoroughly.
OK, yeah, sure. Sadly, there have been many false messianic figures and their followers have risked a whole lot to follow them. Why aren't you worshipping Shabtai Tzvi? Of course, your answer hinges on your buying into the historicity and authenticity of the gospels as early and accurate writings. Since I don't I see the authorship as less daunting than you portray it.12 teams of NT authors and scribes did so? They risked expulsion from synagogues and Jewish life, and Rome's persecution, to "explain" a false Messiah by independently citing hundreds of Tanakh passages? They made up stories that whether written early or very late, weren't confronted by Jewish contemporaries with counter claims? And then many thousands of Jews believed the stories and converted, risking expulsion from Jewish life and Roman martyrdom?
No doubt this is subject to significantly more debate than you would like to admit to. Other threads have and will continue to address this.Put differently, the many facts cited by the writers prove 1st century authorship and even hardened atheist academics agree to 1st century dating of the NT.
You ask for documents to counter something that never was nor was it a blip at the time by asserting that somehow everyone who was anyone saw it as a huge thing. But this simply isn't so no matter how much you assert it.Where are the counter documents written by Jews, "Yeshua of Galilee never did miracles, preached to thousands during Pesach and other festivals, I lived in Jerusalem and these things weren't done", etc? And most of the early converts were Jews.
Not true. I could quote the passages you think you are referring to (Sanhedrin 43a) if you would like and wait for you to learn some Hebrew and Aramaic so you can realize your mistake. Let me know.And of course Jesus is described in Talmud as an enticer who was hanged on Pesach and all else.
That isn't a main line of defense. It is the main impediment to your understanding all the other points I have made. And you ask why you know "Lubavitchers, Rabbis, Orthodox" who "adore Yeshua" and I say that the answer is simple -- you don't.It seems your main line of defense is I don't know how to read or understand Tanakh. So I ask again why I know Lubavitchers, Rabbis, Orthodox and Conservatives, Ph. D Hebrew scholars, who adore Yeshua?