NT Times

[rewriter]

All human events occur within a culture and amid historic events and this includes the life and death of Jesus. Humans interpret things based on their perceptions of what is going on. Now, what is known about the times and beliefs of 1st century CE people, both Jews and Gentiles? What events would fill the hearts and minds of Jews with hope? What events would scare the Romans and fill them with dread? How many people were accepted as having been born of a virgin and how many people were accepted as having been resurrected? How did the Romans treat the noncitizens and what was did they do if they found something they thought was special but possessed by a noncitizen? What was the typical Roman reaction to a temple to a divine figure being desecrated or destroyed

It is widely accepted that the Jews were monotheistic but is that consistent with the available records or were they henotheistic, that is there are multiple gods, but only one is worthy of worship, the others are all lesser entities. Was it truly believed that a mere human could be elevated to divine status or was there an unbridgeable gap between humans and the divine. How did the Jews view baptism?

Most importantly, are the answers to these questions correctly presented in tradition or do the ancient records from the times tell a different story, perhaps one that needs to be covered up for some reason. Can we truly understand what the NT is saying without being able to answer these questions?

 

[GWH]

All human events occur within a culture and amid historic events and this includes the life and death of Jesus. Humans interpret things based on their perceptions of what is going on. Now, what is known about the times and beliefs of 1st century CE people, both Jews and Gentiles? What events would fill the hearts and minds of Jews with hope? What events would scare the Romans and fill them with dread? How many people were accepted as having been born of a virgin and how many people were accepted as having been resurrected? How did the Romans treat the noncitizens and what was did they do if they found something they thought was special but possessed by a noncitizen? What was the typical Roman reaction to a temple to a divine figure being desecrated or destroyed

It is widely accepted that the Jews were monotheistic but is that consistent with the available records or were they henotheistic, that is there are multiple gods, but only one is worthy of worship, the others are all lesser entities. Was it truly believed that a mere human could be elevated to divine status or was there an unbridgeable gap between humans and the divine. How did the Jews view baptism?

Most importantly, are the answers to these questions correctly presented in tradition or do the ancient records from the times tell a different story, perhaps one that needs to be covered up for some reason. Can we truly understand what the NT is saying without being able to answer these questions?

Thanks for sharing these questions, which I will answer or comment on:

1. What is known about the times and beliefs of 1st century CE people, both Jews and Gentiles?
GWH - Could you be more specific?

2. What events would fill the hearts and minds of Jews with hope?
GWH - The advent of a messiah who would save them from subjugation.

3. What events would scare the Romans and fill them with dread?
GWH - The invasion of Germanic tribes.

4. How many people were accepted as having been born of a virgin and how many people were accepted as having been resurrected?
GWH - Hippolytus and a few others, by Aesculapius in Roman mythology

5. How did the Romans treat the noncitizens and what was did they do if they found something they thought was special but possessed by a noncitizen?
GWH - Not well; they took it.

6. What was the typical Roman reaction to a temple to a divine figure being desecrated or destroyed?
GWH - apathy.

7. Is Jew being monotheistic consistent with the available records or were they henotheistic?
GWH - Jews believed in one God almighty.

8. Was it truly believed that a mere human could be elevated to divine status or was there an unbridgeable gap between humans and the divine?
GWH - Humans could be like God but not become God.

9. How did the Jews view baptism?
GWH - In the first century Jews viewed baptism as washing with water to portray cleansing from sins.

10. Are the answers to these questions correctly presented in tradition or do the ancient records from the times tell a different story?
GWH - Which questions in which tradition or in which ancient records per what story?

11. Can we truly understand what the NT is saying without being able to answer these questions?
GWH - What NT saying? What do these questions have to do with what the NT says?

Over...

 

[rewriter]

Thanks for sharing these questions, which I will answer or comment on:

1. What is known about the times and beliefs of 1st century CE people, both Jews and Gentiles?
GWH - Could you be more specific?

2. What events would fill the hearts and minds of Jews with hope?
GWH - The advent of a messiah who would save them from subjugation.

3. What events would scare the Romans and fill them with dread?
GWH - The invasion of Germanic tribes.

4. How many people were accepted as having been born of a virgin and how many people were accepted as having been resurrected?
GWH - Hippolytus and a few others, by Aesculapius in Roman mythology

5. How did the Romans treat the noncitizens and what was did they do if they found something they thought was special but possessed by a noncitizen?
GWH - Not well; they took it.

6. What was the typical Roman reaction to a temple to a divine figure being desecrated or destroyed?
GWH - apathy.

7. Is Jew being monotheistic consistent with the available records or were they henotheistic?
GWH - Jews believed in one God almighty.

8. Was it truly believed that a mere human could be elevated to divine status or was there an unbridgeable gap between humans and the divine?
GWH - Humans could be like God but not become God.

9. How did the Jews view baptism?
GWH - In the first century Jews viewed baptism as washing with water to portray cleansing from sins.

10. Are the answers to these questions correctly presented in tradition or do the ancient records from the times tell a different story?
GWH - Which questions in which tradition or in which ancient records per what story?

11. Can we truly understand what the NT is saying without being able to answer these questions?
GWH - What NT saying? What do these questions have to do with what the NT says?

Over...

Question 1 was a lead in to the rest of the questions, so not much need for more specifics.

Question 3, not the Germanic tribes, they could be east with, but trouble from the east was terrifying. Most people in the empire knew that the Jewish "star prophesy" referenced an eastern power coming to conquer the world.

Question 6, they usually restored it and compensated the appropriate deity rather than risk divine wrath.

Question 7, there is evidence that Jews were henothestic safely into the 1st century C E.

Question 8, ever hear of apotheosis? It was the process by which a human became divine, not just divine like.

Question 9, Jews viewed baptism as an external cleansing AFTER their sins were recognized as forgiven.

Questions 10 and 11, you clearly flubbed several questions, how then can you be certain that you know the context for the NT?

When Armenia, a minor Eastern power with connections to Parthia, got aggressive in 54, Claudius's lack of response likely was a major contributor to his demise. One of Nero's first actions was to appoint Corbulo as governor over at least two different provinces, in Anatolia, perhaps more, with greater powers than any other Roman governor had, including permission to take one legion from the Germanic frontier, one from Syria and raise two brand new legions. Without this major power shift, the 1st Jewish war might have gone far differently. There was likewise a problem on the eastern front in the mid-30's, the same general time frame as Antipas being taken to the Euphrates frontier and Paul's troubles in Damascus. Pure coincidence, I think not, rather these points support claims made by Moses of Chorene, an often ignored historian.

As for henotheism, a careful reading of the Temple Scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls answers that question and is confirmed by by the Babylonian Talmud.

 

[rewriter]

Question 1 was a lead in to the rest of the questions, so not much need for more specifics.

Question 3, not the Germanic tribes, they could be east with, but trouble from the east was terrifying. Most people in the empire knew that the Jewish "star prophesy" referenced an eastern power coming to conquer the world.

Question 6, they usually restored it and compensated the appropriate deity rather than risk divine wrath.

Question 7, there is evidence that Jews were henothestic safely into the 1st century C E.

Question 8, ever hear of apotheosis? It was the process by which a human became divine, not just divine like.

Question 9, Jews viewed baptism as an external cleansing AFTER their sins were recognized as forgiven.

Questions 10 and 11, you clearly flubbed several questions, how then can you be certain that you know the context for the NT?

When Armenia, a minor Eastern power with connections to Parthia, got aggressive in 54, Claudius's lack of response likely was a major contributor to his demise. One of Nero's first actions was to appoint Corbulo as governor over at least two different provinces, in Anatolia, perhaps more, with greater powers than any other Roman governor had, including permission to take one legion from the Germanic frontier, one from Syria and raise two brand new legions. Without this major power shift, the 1st Jewish war might have gone far differently. There was likewise a problem on the eastern front in the mid-30's, the same general time frame as Antipas being taken to the Euphrates frontier and Paul's troubles in Damascus. Pure coincidence, I think not, rather these points support claims made by Moses of Chorene, an often ignored historian.

As for henotheism, a careful reading of the Temple Scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls answers that question and is confirmed by by the Babylonian Talmud.

GWH, if you want to try some more questions, what were the differences in how Boudicca's rebellion under Nero and the 1st Jewish war, also under Nero? Who controlled Damascus in the 1st century CE and with what other local leaders did they have conflicts in 15 BCE, 1 CE and the mid-30's CE? And how about Tiberius, was his official reputati0n the same in August of 32 CE and in December of 32, and if it changed, what caused the change (hint, it would make no sense to ask the question if his reputation remained the same)?

And if you are wondering about the significance of these questions, try to explain why "TACO" can be seen as a political statement without referencing Trump and his official statements. An explanation can be made without reference to Trump, perhaps elections in the USA are held on Tuesdays and Taco Tuesday is often heard, so Tacos are encouraged to be eaten when voting. Not correct, but it does not involve referencing Trump if one wishes to avoid connecting him to it.

 

[GWH]

GWH, if you want to try some more questions, what were the differences in how Boudicca's rebellion under Nero and the 1st Jewish war, also under Nero? Who controlled Damascus in the 1st century CE and with what other local leaders did they have conflicts in 15 BCE, 1 CE and the mid-30's CE? And how about Tiberius, was his official reputati0n the same in August of 32 CE and in December of 32, and if it changed, what caused the change (hint, it would make no sense to ask the question if his reputation remained the same)?

And if you are wondering about the significance of these questions, try to explain why "TACO" can be seen as a political statement without referencing Trump and his official statements. An explanation can be made without reference to Trump, perhaps elections in the USA are held on Tuesdays and Taco Tuesday is often heard, so Tacos are encouraged to be eaten when voting. Not correct, but it does not involve referencing Trump if one wishes to avoid connecting him to it.

Question 1 was a lead in to the rest of the questions, so not much need for more specifics.
GWH - Got it.

Question 2. What events would fill the hearts and minds of Jews with hope?
GWH - The advent of a messiah who would save them from subjugation.

Question 3, not the Germanic tribes, they could be east with, but trouble from the east was terrifying. Most people in the empire knew that the Jewish "star prophesy" referenced an eastern power coming to conquer the world.
GWH - The Mongols from the east came close to conquering Asia and may have pushed the Germanic tribes west into the Roman Empire.

Question 6, they usually restored it and compensated the appropriate deity rather than risk divine wrath.
GWH - So, the Jewish temple was a exception to that rule?

Question 7, there is evidence that Jews were henothestic safely into the 1st century C E.
GWH - So they were Jewish heretics?

Question 8, ever hear of apotheosis? It was the process by which a human became divine, not just divine like.
GWH - Yes, something impossible, like transgendering.

Question 9, Jews viewed baptism as an external cleansing AFTER their sins were recognized as forgiven.
GWH - Timing is everything?

Questions 10 and 11, you clearly flubbed several questions, how then can you be certain that you know the context for the NT?
Like you, I am confident of knowing sufficiently, not certain of knowing perfectly.

[[[When Armenia, a minor Eastern power with connections to Parthia, got aggressive in 54, Claudius's lack of response likely was a major contributor to his demise. One of Nero's first actions was to appoint Corbulo as governor over at least two different provinces, in Anatolia, perhaps more, with greater powers than any other Roman governor had, including permission to take one legion from the Germanic frontier, one from Syria and raise two brand new legions. Without this major power shift, the 1st Jewish war might have gone far differently. There was likewise a problem on the eastern front in the mid-30's, the same general time frame as Antipas being taken to the Euphrates frontier and Paul's troubles in Damascus. ]]]
Pure coincidence, I think not, rather these points support claims made by Moses of Chorene, an often ignored historian.
GWH - Which were what?

As for henotheism, a careful reading of the Temple Scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls answers that question and is confirmed by by the Babylonian Talmud.
GWH - I am not surprised that heretics existed then.

GWH, if you want to try some more questions, what were the differences in how Boudicca's rebellion under Nero and the 1st Jewish war, also under Nero? Who controlled Damascus in the 1st century CE and with what other local leaders did they have conflicts in 15 BCE, 1 CE and the mid-30's CE? And how about Tiberius, was his official reputati0n the same in August of 32 CE and in December of 32, and if it changed, what caused the change (hint, it would make no sense to ask the question if his reputation remained the same)?
GWH - I wonder about the significance of these questions.

And if you are wondering about the significance of these questions, try to explain why "TACO" can be seen as a political statement without referencing Trump and his official statements. An explanation can be made without reference to Trump, perhaps elections in the USA are held on Tuesdays and Taco Tuesday is often heard, so Tacos are encouraged to be eaten when voting. Not correct, but it does not involve referencing Trump if one wishes to avoid connecting him to it.
GWH - I love tacos on any day of the week, but I preferred 7-layer burritos from Taco Bell and am mad that they discontinued it.

 

[rewriter]

Question 1 was a lead in to the rest of the questions, so not much need for more specifics.
GWH - Got it.

Question 2. What events would fill the hearts and minds of Jews with hope?
GWH - The advent of a messiah who would save them from subjugation.

Question 3, not the Germanic tribes, they could be east with, but trouble from the east was terrifying. Most people in the empire knew that the Jewish "star prophesy" referenced an eastern power coming to conquer the world.
GWH - The Mongols from the east came close to conquering Asia and may have pushed the Germanic tribes west into the Roman Empire.

Question 6, they usually restored it and compensated the appropriate deity rather than risk divine wrath.
GWH - So, the Jewish temple was a exception to that rule?

Question 7, there is evidence that Jews were henothestic safely into the 1st century C E.
GWH - So they were Jewish heretics?

Question 8, ever hear of apotheosis? It was the process by which a human became divine, not just divine like.
GWH - Yes, something impossible, like transgendering.

Question 9, Jews viewed baptism as an external cleansing AFTER their sins were recognized as forgiven.
GWH - Timing is everything?

Questions 10 and 11, you clearly flubbed several questions, how then can you be certain that you know the context for the NT?
Like you, I am confident of knowing sufficiently, not certain of knowing perfectly.

[[[When Armenia, a minor Eastern power with connections to Parthia, got aggressive in 54, Claudius's lack of response likely was a major contributor to his demise. One of Nero's first actions was to appoint Corbulo as governor over at least two different provinces, in Anatolia, perhaps more, with greater powers than any other Roman governor had, including permission to take one legion from the Germanic frontier, one from Syria and raise two brand new legions. Without this major power shift, the 1st Jewish war might have gone far differently. There was likewise a problem on the eastern front in the mid-30's, the same general time frame as Antipas being taken to the Euphrates frontier and Paul's troubles in Damascus. ]]]
Pure coincidence, I think not, rather these points support claims made by Moses of Chorene, an often ignored historian.
GWH - Which were what?

As for henotheism, a careful reading of the Temple Scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls answers that question and is confirmed by by the Babylonian Talmud.
GWH - I am not surprised that heretics existed then.

GWH, if you want to try some more questions, what were the differences in how Boudicca's rebellion under Nero and the 1st Jewish war, also under Nero? Who controlled Damascus in the 1st century CE and with what other local leaders did they have conflicts in 15 BCE, 1 CE and the mid-30's CE? And how about Tiberius, was his official reputati0n the same in August of 32 CE and in December of 32, and if it changed, what caused the change (hint, it would make no sense to ask the question if his reputation remained the same)?
GWH - I wonder about the significance of these questions.

And if you are wondering about the significance of these questions, try to explain why "TACO" can be seen as a political statement without referencing Trump and his official statements. An explanation can be made without reference to Trump, perhaps elections in the USA are held on Tuesdays and Taco Tuesday is often heard, so Tacos are encouraged to be eaten when voting. Not correct, but it does not involve referencing Trump if one wishes to avoid connecting him to it.
GWH - I love tacos on any day of the week, but I preferred 7-layer burritos from Taco Bell and am mad that they discontinued it.

Question 3, the Mongols were not a problem in the 1st century, they would not be an issue for the Germanic tribes for a couple hundred years, but the Parthians in the east were a major issue. In 53 BCE roughly 11,000 Parthians took on roughly 40-45,000 Romans, the allied kings who were accompanying the Romans saw the Parthians coming and remembered important business back at home and departed. After three days of combat, the surviving Romans made it back to Roman territory. in 52 BCE the Parthians invaded Syria and into Judea, where they remained until 37 BCE. The Romans recovered the lost legion eagles in 28 BCE via negotiations. The Parthians were again a serious issue in the mid-30's CE as was their connection to Armenia during the 54-64 CE era, being officially settled about 3 weeks befoe Christians officially comitted arson in Rome.

The henotheistic Jews might have been heretics, but some of those "heretics" were recognized as respected priests and their temple was recognized as a suitable substitute for sacrifices that could not be made in Jerusalem. Mighty tolerable heretics, don't you think? And other known evidence that would fit exists in ruins in what was Judah and Galilee ranging in dates up into the 3rd or 4th centuries CE.

During Boudicca's revolution, despite the massive number of killed Roman citizens, there was no extensive use of crucifixion or other unusual actions (including fighting animals in the arena) to kill either combatants or noncombatants, and the leaders were brought to Rome and kept under restrictions but with relatively free rein to wander the city. In the 1st Jewish war, just a few years later and also under Nero, crucifixion and other unusual actions to kill both combatants and noncombatants, including most captured leaders. Why the differences in these two engagements that were just a couple years apart? And why were the executions of Jews the EXACT same as attributed to those inflicted on Christians?

I know many people can find explanations for these issues, but are you truly comfortable with them, especially when considering my explanation of TACO being political but not connected to Trump. Explanations can be constructed, but they are not always accurate, sometimes they are just cover to avoid admitting something else.

 

[GWH]

Question 3, the Mongols were not a problem in the 1st century, they would not be an issue for the Germanic tribes for a couple hundred years, but the Parthians in the east were a major issue. In 53 BCE roughly 11,000 Parthians took on roughly 40-45,000 Romans, the allied kings who were accompanying the Romans saw the Parthians coming and remembered important business back at home and departed. After three days of combat, the surviving Romans made it back to Roman territory. in 52 BCE the Parthians invaded Syria and into Judea, where they remained until 37 BCE. The Romans recovered the lost legion eagles in 28 BCE via negotiations. The Parthians were again a serious issue in the mid-30's CE as was their connection to Armenia during the 54-64 CE era, being officially settled about 3 weeks befoe Christians officially comitted arson in Rome.

The henotheistic Jews might have been heretics, but some of those "heretics" were recognized as respected priests and their temple was recognized as a suitable substitute for sacrifices that could not be made in Jerusalem. Mighty tolerable heretics, don't you think? And other known evidence that would fit exists in ruins in what was Judah and Galilee ranging in dates up into the 3rd or 4th centuries CE.

During Boudicca's revolution, despite the massive number of killed Roman citizens, there was no extensive use of crucifixion or other unusual actions (including fighting animals in the arena) to kill either combatants or noncombatants, and the leaders were brought to Rome and kept under restrictions but with relatively free rein to wander the city. In the 1st Jewish war, just a few years later and also under Nero, crucifixion and other unusual actions to kill both combatants and noncombatants, including most captured leaders. Why the differences in these two engagements that were just a couple years apart? And why were the executions of Jews the EXACT same as attributed to those inflicted on Christians?

I know many people can find explanations for these issues, but are you truly comfortable with them, especially when considering my explanation of TACO being political but not connected to Trump. Explanations can be constructed, but they are not always accurate, sometimes they are just cover to avoid admitting something else.

Re Q 3: GWH got it.
Re heretics: Yes, and today Marxists are respected by Dems in the USA and want to ruin it.

Why the differences in these two engagements that were just a couple years apart? GWH - I do not know.

And why were the executions of Jews the EXACT same as attributed to those inflicted on Christians?
GWH - Because both groups were viewed as equal threats?

Are you truly comfortable with them, especially when considering my explanation of TACO being political but not connected to Trump?
GWH - I saw no explanation of TACO.

Explanations can be constructed, but they are not always accurate, sometimes they are just cover to avoid admitting something else.
GWH - True.

 

[rewriter]

Re Q 3: GWH got it.
Re heretics: Yes, and today Marxists are respected by Dems in the USA and want to ruin it.

Why the differences in these two engagements that were just a couple years apart? GWH - I do not know.

And why were the executions of Jews the EXACT same as attributed to those inflicted on Christians?
GWH - Because both groups were viewed as equal threats?

Are you truly comfortable with them, especially when considering my explanation of TACO being political but not connected to Trump?
GWH - I saw no explanation of TACO.

Explanations can be constructed, but they are not always accurate, sometimes they are just cover to avoid admitting something else.
GWH - True.

How much Democrats respect Marxists is debatable. It is a frequent claim but equally common is the claim that the GOP respects and wants to duplicate the Nazis. There might be some in either group for whom the claim is accurate, but most would reject the connections.

Maybe, just maybe, because the Jewish War was in the East where there was a great fear that Rome's ultimate destroyer would arise. The rebels in England were a nuisance, but the Jews were an existential threat.

Or because the two groups were indistinguishable to the Romans and both groups were linked to the Parthians. Such would also fit with Herod's and Antipas's coinage.

TACO=Trump Always Chickens Out.


And I noticed that I did ask about Tiberius's reputation in August of 32 and December of 32. In August of 32, Tiberius was officially regarded as totally incompetent and in need of being replaced for the good of Rome. In December he was recognized as supremely competent and being the type of leader that Rome needed. Between these two dates, Tiberius came out of semi-retirement to crush a coup attempt. If a leader was deemed incompetent, then past successes were meaningless and ignored, but any possible past failure or misconduct, even is not certain to have happened, must be factual and a clear sign of their incompetence. Now was Herod as bad as officially portrayed or was he degraded because he got caught in a bad move and thus must have done many other terrible things. Antipas falls into the same category, as well as Agrippa 1

 

[GWH]

How much Democrats respect Marxists is debatable. It is a frequent claim but equally common is the claim that the GOP respects and wants to duplicate the Nazis. There might be some in either group for whom the claim is accurate, but most would reject the connections.

Maybe, just maybe, because the Jewish War was in the East where there was a great fear that Rome's ultimate destroyer would arise. The rebels in England were a nuisance, but the Jews were an existential threat.

Or because the two groups were indistinguishable to the Romans and both groups were linked to the Parthians. Such would also fit with Herod's and Antipas's coinage.

TACO=Trump Always Chickens Out.


And I noticed that I did ask about Tiberius's reputation in August of 32 and December of 32. In August of 32, Tiberius was officially regarded as totally incompetent and in need of being replaced for the good of Rome. In December he was recognized as supremely competent and being the type of leader that Rome needed. Between these two dates, Tiberius came out of semi-retirement to crush a coup attempt. If a leader was deemed incompetent, then past successes were meaningless and ignored, but any possible past failure or misconduct, even is not certain to have happened, must be factual and a clear sign of their incompetence. Now was Herod as bad as officially portrayed or was he degraded because he got caught in a bad move and thus must have done many other terrible things. Antipas falls into the same category, as well as Agrippa 1

No claim. It is a well-known fact that Marxist professors dominate USA colleges and have perverted the minds of children in education down to kindergarten. Just look at their actions, which speak louder than Dem denials. Also consider Marxist gains in recent elections.

TACO is disproved by Trump's tremendous courage, despite enemies on every side including assassins and having only MAGA to watch his back.

 

[rewriter]

No claim. It is a well-known fact that Marxist professors dominate USA colleges and have perverted the minds of children in education down to kindergarten. Just look at their actions, which speak louder than Dem denials. Also consider Marxist gains in recent elections.

TACO is disproved by Trump's tremendous courage, despite enemies on every side including assassins and having only MAGA to watch his back.

Whether the Marxist claim is valid, or if the TACO claim is, are both matters of opinion, not clear fact. College professors, as a whole, tend to be more liberal, but liberal is a far cry from Marxist. However, it should also be noted that very few people, officially and legally recognized as children, attend college. I know some do, but they are not the majority of college students.

But that TACO has been linked to Trump, rightly or wrongly, is clearly correct.

 

[GWH]

Whether the Marxist claim is valid, or if the TACO claim is, are both matters of opinion, not clear fact. College professors, as a whole, tend to be more liberal, but liberal is a far cry from Marxist. However, it should also be noted that very few people, officially and legally recognized as children, attend college. I know some do, but they are not the majority of college students.

But that TACO has been linked to Trump, rightly or wrongly, is clearly correct.

The Marxist advance in the Dem party is a clear fact.
What bugs me is that even folks who perceive professors to be part of the problem do not go the second mile and note that the solution must include firing their butts!
By children I meant the younger generation.

Please explain why you think Trump lacks courage, because IMO you deny the obvious.

 

[rewriter]

The Marxist advance in the Dem party is a clear fact.
What bugs me is that even folks who perceive professors to be part of the problem do not go the second mile and note that the solution must include firing their butts!
By children I meant the younger generation.

Please explain why you think Trump lacks courage, because IMO you deny the obvious.

I made no comments about Trump. I merely noted what TACO has come to mean in political circles. '

As for Marxist professors, the few I consulted all deny knowing any true Marxist professors, but one observed that anyone making such a generalized claim might very well be a Fascist, but he also admitted that both claims are pushing the boundaries of definition to the extreme. One person I know claimed that a Socialist was anyone more liberal than they were, another example of pushing the boundaries of a defition.

Now may6 we abandon politics?

 

[GWH]

I made no comments about Trump. I merely noted what TACO has come to mean in political circles. '

As for Marxist professors, the few I consulted all deny knowing any true Marxist professors, but one observed that anyone making such a generalized claim might very well be a Fascist, but he also admitted that both claims are pushing the boundaries of definition to the extreme. One person I know claimed that a Socialist was anyone more liberal than they were, another example of pushing the boundaries of a defition.

Now may6 we abandon politics?

TACO means Trump is bad only in Marxist/Dem circles.

Marxist socialist professors in American colleges and universities are found mainly within the humanities and social sciences—such as sociology, history, literature, philosophy, and cultural studies. They teach critical theory, which points out social flaws but offers no real solutions, and Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals", which influenced Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and others in their generation of college students to accept weaponization of the legal system against political opponents. They also tend to undermine family values, advocate murder of viable fetuses, mutilate children with so-called transgender operations, open the borders and rig elections.

We ignore such politics at our own risk! Once atheists gain power, we will never regain our freedoms.

 

[timf]

1st century CE people

If you do not trust in Christ, it is understandable that you would advocate a reinterpretation of the bible according to interpretive tools that allow you to manipulate whatever doubts you want to introduce or changes you want to make.

However, if you do not like the calendar that was created around Christ, come up with your own calendar. To change AD to CE is insulting.

 

[rewriter]

TACO means Trump is bad only in Marxist/Dem circles.

Marxist socialist professors in American colleges and universities are found mainly within the humanities and social sciences—such as sociology, history, literature, philosophy, and cultural studies. They teach critical theory, which points out social flaws but offers no real solutions, and Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals", which influenced Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and others in their generation of college students to accept weaponization of the legal system against political opponents. They also tend to undermine family values, advocate murder of viable fetuses, mutilate children with so-called transgender operations, open the borders and rig elections.

We ignore such politics at our own risk! Once atheists gain power, we will never regain our freedoms.

The only politics I worry about in my theology is the ignored politics of the 1st and immediately surrounding centuries. As for the term "TACO". it arose from the investment community. And I am surprised that you know so much about the professors I connect with and what fields they are involved in. Some teach at conservative evangelical schools and abide with their institutional statements of faith.

But again, may we abandon current politics? Current political views are OPINIONS based on assumptions, not facts.

 

[rewriter]

1st century CE people

If you do not trust in Christ, it is understandable that you would advocate a reinterpretation of the bible according to interpretive tools that allow you to manipulate whatever doubts you want to introduce or changes you want to make.

However, if you do not like the calendar that was created around Christ, come up with your own calendar. To change AD to CE is insulting.

The use of AD or CE is not something based on one's faith but rather a common usage accepted among academics and many apologists for the Christian faith and if fully accepted at many, if not most conservative evangelical colleges and universities in not outright encouraged.
.

 

[GWH]

The only politics I worry about in my theology is the ignored politics of the 1st and immediately surrounding centuries. As for the term "TACO". it arose from the investment community. And I am surprised that you know so much about the professors I connect with and what fields they are involved in. Some teach at conservative evangelical schools and abide with their institutional statements of faith.

But again, may we abandon current politics? Current political views are OPINIONS based on assumptions, not facts.

Your political views may be based on assumptions, but mine are fact based, and I am surprised you seem not to know them.
Of course the Marxist atheist professors are not at conservative evangelical schools! At least, not yet, hopefully.
Current politics are just as important as those of the 1st century that we can do nothing about at this point in time.
However, I am willing to discuss what you want to share.

 

[rewriter]

Your political views may be based on assumptions, but mine are fact based, and I am surprised you seem not to know them.
Of course the Marxist atheist professors are not at conservative evangelical schools! At least, not yet, hopefully.
Current politics are just as important as those of the 1st century that we can do nothing about at this point in time.
However, I am willing to discuss what you want to share.

All facts are subject to interpretation. For instance, Trump proclaimed "who could have known" when Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, numerous military and political leaders all proclaimed that it was fully expected under all existing projected responses to an attack on Iran by the USA. So, it would appear that the answer to Trump's question might well be, "everybody except you".

And conservative evangelical academics do talk to other academics. In fact, it was a conservative evangelical professor who assigned the class I was in to read Kerl Marx's "Communist Manifesto" among other works, in order to ensure exposure to a wide variety of viewpoints. He also decreed that he did not care how conservative or liberal one's viewpoint was, if it could be intellectually defended. That included supporting abortion by citing freedom of religion in the USA.

Now may we finally return to how politics might have influenced the NT?

Also, are you aware that according to your claims of supporters of the Heliopolis temple were heretics means that many NT writers quoted heretics? The writers of Isaiah in the Septuagint made clear, supportive, references to this temple.

 

[rewriter]

All facts are subject to interpretation. For instance, Trump proclaimed "who could have known" when Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, numerous military and political leaders all proclaimed that it was fully expected under all existing projected responses to an attack on Iran by the USA. So, it would appear that the answer to Trump's question might well be, "everybody except you".

And conservative evangelical academics do talk to other academics. In fact, it was a conservative evangelical professor who assigned the class I was in to read Kerl Marx's "Communist Manifesto" among other works, in order to ensure exposure to a wide variety of viewpoints. He also decreed that he did not care how conservative or liberal one's viewpoint was, if it could be intellectually defended. That included supporting abortion by citing freedom of religion in the USA.

Now may we finally return to how politics might have influenced the NT?

Also, are you aware that according to your claims of supporters of the Heliopolis temple were heretics means that many NT writers quoted heretics? The writers of Isaiah in the Septuagint made clear, supportive, references to this temple.

Now in hopes of returning to politics in the NT era, I asked you if you could identify two quarrelling kingdoms who fought each other in 15 BCE, 1 CE and the mid-30's CE. You have not answered yet, so I will. Properly there were four political entities involved, but two were just a part of a division of one of the kingdoms, and the two original kingdoms cooperated in a joint mission with Rome in 25 BCE. They provided both troops and guides for a Roman expedition that took 6 months to reach its desired destination, losing its naval support and a fair portion of its supplies, where it suffered a defeat. The return journey, using the same guides, took less than 6 weeks.

But in 15 BCE, the kingdom under a man called Herod attacked the kingdom under a man called Obodas III, after Obodas failed to control brigands. Augustus found Obodas at fault. Then in 1 CE, after the death of Herod, Aretas IV, the son of Obodas, joined Rome in defeating a rebellion in Judah, which was under the rule of Archelaus one of Herod's sons. Then in the mid-30's, Aretas fought with Antipas, another of Herod's sons. Josephus claims Aretas started the problem, other sources blame Antipas. Given that Aretas was never punished and Antipas appears to have been arrested then pardoned in 37 before another arrest in 39 after many pardons were revoked, it appears most likely that Antipas was the aggressor This would have been about the time that Paul had trouble in Damascus, which was under the nominal control of Nabataea, the kingdom ruled by Aretas. But I am sure that his ethnarch, being fully aware of the political situation, would have cooperated with the Jews if they were unhappy with Paul (pure sarcasm). Especially since Paul was a Jew and Roman citizen by birth, something highly unusual except for direct descendants of Herod. But such would contradict the "proper" account given in Acts, were the Jews were to blame and no mention of a conflict with Nabataea occurs.

 

[GWH]

All facts are subject to interpretation. For instance, Trump proclaimed "who could have known" when Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, numerous military and political leaders all proclaimed that it was fully expected under all existing projected responses to an attack on Iran by the USA. So, it would appear that the answer to Trump's question might well be, "everybody except you".

And conservative evangelical academics do talk to other academics. In fact, it was a conservative evangelical professor who assigned the class I was in to read Kerl Marx's "Communist Manifesto" among other works, in order to ensure exposure to a wide variety of viewpoints. He also decreed that he did not care how conservative or liberal one's viewpoint was, if it could be intellectually defended. That included supporting abortion by citing freedom of religion in the USA.

Now may we finally return to how politics might have influenced the NT?

Also, are you aware that according to your claims of supporters of the Heliopolis temple were heretics means that many NT writers quoted heretics? The writers of Isaiah in the Septuagint made clear, supportive, references to this temple.

Yes, all facts are matters of opinion, and an inerrant Scripture is subject to fallible interpretation,
so truthseekers want to utilize a valid hermeneutic, including harmonizing as much as possible.

P.S. Trump plays chess while everyone else is playing checkers. Thank God Trump was wise enough to stop Iran before it developed the capability of exploding nuclear weapons in the USA/great Satan!