Question for non-religious types...(most of us I think)

[-playmaker-]

So what's your verdict your honor?

sigh...

okay...reading now

[-playmaker-]

alright I am a little confused on some parts...

-are you claiming that Nazareth is fictional because there are no records of it's existance?

-are you claiming that "The Teacher" in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the human which became the basis of Jesus?...like St. Nick to Santa?

then there is this:

So I've established that the Original Christians, [COLOR="Red"]including Jesus/Yeshua himself [/COLOR]were called Nazarenes, including the Bible.

that is confusing because how can anyone be Christian BEFORE Jesus?...Jesus was supposedly Jewish...the Biblical Jesus anyway...maybe not the historical one, if there is one...

also, I am not sure I can have a "verdict" so to speak...you are providing good info, all I can really do is read it with interest...I don't deny any of it to be false...no reason to think that...it is interesting stuff...

what is "the Teacher's" real name?

that second link looks interesting...just brwsed real quick though...

THE TEACHER AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES [p. 16]
1. Dating the Teacher [p. 16]
2. The Wicked Priest [p. 18]
3. Was the Wicked Priest Alexander Jannaeus? [p. 21]
4. The Man of Falsehood and the House of Absalom [p. 25]
5. Identifying the Teacher [p. 27]
[COLOR="Red"]III. THE TEACHER AND CHRISTIANITY [p. 28][/COLOR]
1. The Teacher and Jesus [p. 28]
2. Was the Teacher martyred? [p. 31]
3. The Teacher and Messiahship [p. 34]

[DonDadda59]

alright I am a little confused on some parts...

-are you claiming that Nazareth is fictional because there are no records of it's existance?

I'm not personally claiming anything, just saying that Nazareth before 200 CE/AD doesn't exist anywhere historically, including the Old Testament and other religious documents. Also, 'Jesus of Nazareth' is a bit of a mistranslation of the Greek septuagint whose actual translation is 'Jesus the Nazarene'. So Nazareth MAY have been a geographical place before 200 AD, but most likely 'Nazarene' is a religious title as opposed to referring to a place of origin.

-are you claiming that "The Teacher" in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the human which became the basis of Jesus?...like St. Nick to Santa?

I am.

then there is this:



that is confusing because how can anyone be Christian BEFORE Jesus?...Jesus was supposedly Jewish...the Biblical Jesus anyway...maybe not the historical one, if there is one...

'Christian' is the term that later replaced the term Nazarene or Ebionite. The original Christians were Jewish, no debate there.

also, I am not sure I can have a "verdict" so to speak...you are providing good info, all I can really do is read it with interest...I don't deny any of it to be false...no reason to think that...it is interesting stuff...

what is "the Teacher's" real name?

That's the grand mystery behind his story- the Dead Sea Scrolls never give a name beyond 'the teacher of righteousness' which has lead a lot of people to speculate about his true identity. Some have concluded he was Onias III, others James the Just, and many have equated the teacher with Yeshua.

THE TEACHER AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES [p. 16]
1. Dating the Teacher [p. 16]
2. The Wicked Priest [p. 18]
3. Was the Wicked Priest Alexander Jannaeus? [p. 21]
4. The Man of Falsehood and the House of Absalom [p. 25]
5. Identifying the Teacher [p. 27]
[COLOR="Red"]III. THE TEACHER AND CHRISTIANITY [p. 28][/COLOR]
1. The Teacher and Jesus [p. 28]
2. Was the Teacher martyred? [p. 31]
3. The Teacher and Messiahship [p. 34]

Yep, the similarities between the teacher and Yeshua of the Christians/Nazaren and their sect's beliefs and practices is uncanny.

[-playmaker-]

okay, I got you on The Essenes thing...they were the Jewish that later went on to become Christians...including Yeshua

and "The Teacher" in the scrolls is still a mystery...but believed to be the human Christ so to speak...

and theTeacher was crucufied in the same spot the Biblical Jesus was...



it is all very believable to me...

He came into conflict with Alexander Jannaeus and was crucified along with about 800 others in a place that would be called Golgotha (which means 'place of the skull' [COLOR="Red"]and where coincidentally, the Jesus of the Bible was also crucified)[/COLOR].

maybe that is no "coincidence"...

does anyone know what the conflict with Alexander was?

did the Teacher claim to be the "Son of God"?

[DonDadda59]

maybe that is no "coincidence"...

Sarcasm on my part.

does anyone know what the conflict with Alexander was?

did the Teacher claim to be the "Son of God"?

There were basically 3 main schools of Judaism (with many subsets)- Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes. Alexander Jannaeus was aligned with the Sadducee who were aristocrats who allowed more Hellenistic influences to pervade Jewish faith and practices which led to a conflict with the other groups. Alexander routinely persecuted rival religious figures as he was the High Priest (some say the 'Wicked Priest' in the Scrolls). So a rival teacher who claimed to personally have a relationship with God and to solely have understanding/authority on faith issues would've been a problem to someone in Alexander's position. The conflicts between Jannaeus and the Pharisees and other groups led to a civil war and the infamous crucifixions of the 800.

And as far as I know, the teacher is never referred to as the son of God, that's just a Pagan convention that the Pauline Christians introduced a century later.

Edit- Interesting bit I almost forgot, in the scrolls the teacher was apprehended and persecuted on Passover.

[Positive]

This was a really interesting thread, thanks for all the info guys. I'm still kinda formulating my opinion on everything, but a lot of this info backs up what I thought previously.

[DonDadda59]

did the Teacher claim to be the "Son of God"?

Just found this...

From the Dead Sea Scrolls (4Q246): [I]"He shall be called the Son of God; they will call him Son of the Most High ... He will judge the earth in righteousness ... and every nation will bow down to him ... with [God

[-playmaker-]

That is really good stuff Don...seriously...I find it really interesting...

exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for when I created this thread...thank you

[rufuspaul]

^This is an early Christian leader, in the religion's infancy (before the Council of Nicea, Rome usurping the religion, etc), saying that the story of Jesus' birth, life, deeds should be accepted in the same strain as the stories of the birth, life, deeds of the Sons of Jupiter/Zeus, ie, Pagan Gods.

Yet, we're here arguing if a particular pagan myth actually existed?

The early church leaders were trying to spread Christianity to the Gentiles so it doesn't seem unusual that they would try and draw comparisons among deities to help explain the faith.

[rufuspaul]

After his death, his followers continued to spread his message and believed he would be resurrected and fulfill the messianic/rapture prophecies. Then Paul of Tarsus came along and he and his followers took the idea, story, teachings and infused it with Pagan mythology to attract 'Gentiles' of the day to the religion. And we have Christianity as we know it today.

But is it possible that the "teacher" of the dead sea scrolls might have been one of the OT prophets?

[DonDadda59]

The early church leaders were trying to spread Christianity to the Gentiles so it doesn't seem unusual that they would try and draw comparisons among deities to help explain the faith.

I agree 100%, that's why there is so much Pagan influence within the NT. In Acts 9, Jesus says to Ananias "Go!This man [Paul] is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel". So Paul is tasked with spreading the religion to the Gentiles (Pagans), what better way to do that than to tweek the faith to make it more accommodating and familiar to them? As I've posted before, Justin Martyr, an early Church father says:

"And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter".

"And if we assert that the Word of God was born of God in a peculiar manner, different from ordinary generation, let this, as said above, be no extraordinary thing to you, who say that Mercury is the angelic word of God. But if any one objects that He was crucified, in this also He is on a par with those reputed sons of Jupiter of yours, who suffered as we have now enumerated.

And if we even affirm that He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept of Perseus. And in that we say that He made whole the lame, the paralytic, and those born blind, we seem to say what is very similar to the deeds said to have been done by Aesculapius".

So Justin says explicitly that everything Christians believe about Jesus (being born of the word, the virgin birth, healing powers, even the crucifixion/resurrection) is the same exact thing that the Pagans/Gentiles believed about their Gods, more specifically 'The Sons of Jupiter'.

The Universal nature and appeal of Pauline Christianity- a monotheistic religion with Pagan influences- was the perfect tool for an Emperor like Constantine to use to control the diverse population of the Roman Empire through conformity and homogenous worship. It was the same exact thing Ptolemy Soter did in Egypt with Serapis (Christus).

It should be noted that the original Jewish-Christians did not believe that Jesus was a God or the Son of a God, he was human to them. It wasn't until Paul came along and changed the story and spread it to the Gentiles that the original belief was phased out.

But is it possible that the "teacher" of the dead sea scrolls might have been one of the OT prophets?

There is no indication anywhere that the teacher was one of the OT prophets. Nothing in the scrolls or their contemporary/accompanying documents or any scholarly review suggests this.

[DonDadda59]

That is really good stuff Don...seriously...I find it really interesting...

exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for when I created this thread...thank you

Glad I could help

[rufuspaul]

I agree 100%, that's why there is so much Pagan influence within the NT. In Acts 9, Jesus says to Ananias "Go!This man [Paul] is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel". So Paul is tasked with spreading the religion to the Gentiles (Pagans), what better way to do that than to tweek the faith to make it more accommodating and familiar to them? As I've posted before, Justin Martyr, an early Church father says:





So Justin says explicitly that everything Christians believe about Jesus (being born of the word, the virgin birth, healing powers, even the crucifixion/resurrection) is the same exact thing that the Pagans/Gentiles believed about their Gods, more specifically 'The Sons of Jupiter'.

The Universal nature and appeal of Pauline Christianity- a monotheistic religion with Pagan influences- was the perfect tool for an Emperor like Constantine to use to control the diverse population of the Roman Empire through conformity and homogenous worship. It was the same exact thing Ptolemy Soter did in Egypt with Serapis (Christus).

It should be noted that the original Jewish-Christians did not believe that Jesus was a God or the Son of a God, he was human to them. It wasn't until Paul came along and changed the story and spread it to the Gentiles that the original belief was phased out.

Interesting. Similar pagan incorporations were also used later on (Halloween, Christmas).

[boozehound]

Interesting. Similar pagan incorporations were also used later on (Halloween, Christmas).

you can also find similar incorporations during the conquest of the americas. Missionaries would tie local religious beliefs/gods into the Catholic faith. there are still some of these syncretic religions in latin america, as well as others combined with Yoruba belief in african-American cultures.

Even the virgin of Guadalupe has non-Xtian roots.