most scholars today agree on the fact that those 15 verses do in fact refer to God's relationship with Israel during the Babylonian exile, and Isaiah was not predicting the birth and death of Yeshua (and by the way Deut. 24:16 easily blows up the Yeshua-as-Isaiah'sSuffering-Servant theory).
Using Tanakh to make sense of the many New Testament's logical holes is as old as, ahem, the New Testament itself. Because of course Yeshua was a Jew and the early Christians were mostly Jews or goyim somehow close to Judaism (Paul's "God-fearers"). hence it's easy to see why they relied on Tanakh to augment and make sense of their new-found faith -- a lot of reverse engineering going on, after Yeshua's sudden execution, by his followers: why did it happen?
(the flip side is, of course, the Gospel writers' efforts to exorcise Yeshua's Judaism)
Given the highly charged atmosphere surrounding all Jesus-era artifacts and writings, both in the general public and in the fractured and fiercely competitive scholarly community, as well as the concern over forgery and charlatanism, it will probably be some time before the tablet’s contribution is fully assessed. It has been around 60 years since the Dead Sea Scrolls were uncovered, and they continue to generate enormous controversy regarding their authors and meaning.
Literally? Jesus could come back to Earth, flip everyone off, tell everyone to go to fucking hell, and then show his ass to all while driving a blazing chariot down the Pacific Coast Highway with a big joint in his mouth.
You know what would happen? People would start twisting it around in their heads and make it fit their own beliefs. "Well, what Jesus REALLY meant was that he loved us all, and that we should all just get along, and that he would see us again soon in his father's mansion."
The difference being that most Christians have no living memory of such a thing.
a) in this day and age of computer graphics for everyone, producing a totally convincing and consistent ink text is not difficult. An inscribed one (i.e. Joash) is easily discovered to be bogus by those who know how to see. Until we see a complete scientific analysis, extreme skepticism over a totally new typology of document is warranted.
b) the argument about Gesenius grammar NOT being violated has to be ascribed to content as well. In other words, the fact that the text is overloaded with reference to "three days" SCREAMS forgery. An innocuous text would not.
I first read his WHITE GODDESS about 15 years ago, and I must say, it completely blew me away. I had to reread it 3 times to figure it out. It is a book of incredible complexity, a book that many people have heard about, very few have read, and of those, fewer still managed to get to the bottom of it. The Gnosis of Graves is expressed very well in this book. If anything about the extremely varied Gnostic movement could be found to bind all these free-thinkers together, it is perhaps the respect for Sophia, the Goddess of Wisdom. I really think that the White Goddess of Graves is really Sophia.
« Older MeFite scrumtralescent thought it would be fun to ... | Wordchamp lets you view foreig... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt