| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"M Dunne" |
| Date: |
01 Feb 2006 05:46:15 PM |
| Object: |
any scholars wanna comment...? |
I've seen the following quote in an old thread.
-------
there's a lovely bit in the film
'The God Who Wasn't There' which deals with the *utter* disconnect between
the fiction of the 'Gospels' and the nasty droolings of 'Saint Paul':
"And here's the interesting thing: if Jesus was a human who had recently
lived, nobody told Paul. Paul never heard of Mary, Joseph, Bethlehem,
Herod,
John the Baptist. He never heard of any of [the] miracles. He never quotes
anything Jesus is supposed to have said. He never mentions Jesus having a
Ministry of any kind at all. He doesn't know about any 'entrance into
Jerusalem'; he never mentions Pontius Pilate, or a Jewish mob, or any
trials
at all. Paul doesn't know any of what we would call the story of Jesus,
except for these last three events ['Christ put on the cross';
Resurrection'; Ascension'] -- and even these, *Paul never places on
Earth*: > just like the other 'saviour gods' of the time, Paul's 'Christ
Jesus' died,
rose and ascended *all in a mythical realm*. Paul doesn't believe that
Jesus
was ever a human being. He's not even *aware of the idea*...".
-------
Can I ask any scholars hereabouts if they'd care to comment on the above in
the light of the following Biblical quotations...? It would be interesting
to hear knowledgeable reactions. Thanks!
-------
'There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the *man* Christ
Jesus'
1 Timothy 2
'God appeared in a *body*...was believed on in the world, was taken up in
glory'
1 Timothy 3
'Christ Jesus, who while testifying before *Pontius Pilate* made the good
confession'
1 Timothy 6
'Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from *David*.'
2 Timothy 2
'For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord
Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had
given thanks, he broke it and said, *"This is my body, which is for you;
do this in remembrance of me."* In the same way, after supper he took
the cup, saying, *"This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this,
whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."*'
1 Corinthians 11
'He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he
*appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared
to more than five hundred of the brothers* at the same time, most of whom
are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to
James, then to all the apostles'
1 Corinthians 15
------
Marcus.
.
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: any scholars wanna comment...? |
02 Feb 2006 01:57:52 AM |
|
|
M Dunne wrote:
I've seen the following quote in an old thread.
-------
there's a lovely bit in the film
'The God Who Wasn't There' which deals with the *utter* disconnect
between the fiction of the 'Gospels' and the nasty droolings of 'Saint
Paul':
"And here's the interesting thing: if Jesus was a human who had
recently lived, nobody told Paul. Paul never heard of Mary, Joseph,
Bethlehem, Herod,
John the Baptist. He never heard of any of [the] miracles. He never
quotes anything Jesus is supposed to have said. He never mentions
Jesus having a Ministry of any kind at all. He doesn't know about any
'entrance into Jerusalem'; he never mentions Pontius Pilate, or a
Jewish mob, or any trials
at all. Paul doesn't know any of what we would call the story of
Jesus,
except for these last three events ['Christ put on the cross';
Resurrection'; Ascension'] -- and even these, *Paul never places on
Earth*: > just like the other 'saviour gods' of the time, Paul's
'Christ Jesus' died,
rose and ascended *all in a mythical realm*. Paul doesn't believe that
Jesus
was ever a human being. He's not even *aware of the idea*...".
-------
Can I ask any scholars hereabouts if they'd care to comment on the
above in the light of the following Biblical quotations...? It would be
interesting to hear knowledgeable reactions. Thanks!
-------
Google is your friend. A number of epistles are not
from Paul, Timothy and Titus are three disputed
examples.
The letters thought to be pseudepigrapha by the majority of modern
scholars, according to recent standards of analysis and theoretical
trends, are:
First Timothy
Second Timothy
Titus
'There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the *man*
Christ Jesus'
1 Timothy 2
'God appeared in a *body*...was believed on in the world, was taken up
in glory'
1 Timothy 3
'Christ Jesus, who while testifying before *Pontius Pilate* made the
good confession'
1 Timothy 6
'Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from *David*.'
2 Timothy 2
'For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord
Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had
given thanks, he broke it and said, *"This is my body, which is for
you;
do this in remembrance of me."* In the same way, after supper he took
the cup, saying, *"This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this,
whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."*'
1 Corinthians 11
'He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that
he *appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared
to more than five hundred of the brothers* at the same time, most of
whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared
to James, then to all the apostles'
1 Corinthians 15
------
Marcus.
--
The first law of the false prophet has
always and ever been "Don't laugh!"
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "M Dunne" |
|
| Title: Re: any scholars wanna comment...? |
02 Feb 2006 02:37:26 AM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:11u3eq0tk6l5dcc@corp.
Google is your friend. A number of epistles are not
from Paul, Timothy and Titus are three disputed
examples.
The letters thought to be pseudepigrapha by the majority of modern
scholars, according to recent standards of analysis and theoretical
trends, are:
First Timothy
Second Timothy
Titus
Thanks! That's v. interesting!
What about the Corinthians quotes, though? Anything wrong with them, or
their origin, or their translation...? IANAE, you see...!
Marcus.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: any scholars wanna comment...? |
02 Feb 2006 11:18:45 AM |
|
|
M Dunne wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:11u3eq0tk6l5dcc@corp.
Google is your friend. A number of epistles are not
from Paul, Timothy and Titus are three disputed
examples.
The letters thought to be pseudepigrapha by the majority of modern
scholars, according to recent standards of analysis and theoretical
trends, are:
First Timothy
Second Timothy
Titus
Thanks! That's v. interesting!
What about the Corinthians quotes, though? Anything wrong with them, or
their origin, or their translation...? IANAE, you see...!
The Corinthians quote is one of several claims.
Mark says that Jesus appeared to the 11 apostles
hiding in Jerusalem. He berated them for disbelief
and ascended then and there to Heaven.
Matthew says that Jesus appeared to the two women at his tomb
and told them to tell his apostles to meet him in Galilee,
which they do. No ascension to heaven.
Luke says that Jesus appeared to his apostles in Jeruslem,
lead them out to a village called Bethany just outside
Jerusalem and ascended there to heaven.
John says Jesus appeared to the 11 apostles in Jeruslaem.
From there he left. The apostles later met him in Galilee,
no ascension to heaven.
Acts 1 claims that Jesus stayed in Jerusalem, told
his apostles not to leave Jerusalem, and there after
40 days ascended to heaven.
6 stories, all utterly contradictory.
Take your pick. Obviously, all writers here were
dressing out bare bone rumors with invented details.
None were eyewitnesses or knew any eyewitnesses.
The original gospels used Mark as a template
(See Mark 13, Luke 21, Matthew 24).
Bu the resurrection narrative, Mark 16:91-6 are not in
early manuscripts, that was added later.
Each gospel writer was left to create his own story,
with no facts to go on which is why all stories differ.
Acts and 1 Corinthians are no more trustworthy.
We see here a methodology at work.
a made up narrative is needed to fill gaps in knowledge
and the writers do not tell us how they know anything,
where they got facts, when they are making up stuff,
or even who they are.
And to make manners worse, we get mainly manuscripts
that have been editted, tampered with and we have
no idea how, who or when exactly either.
Even if 1 Corintiuans was real, from Paul, we have
no idea what the original manuscript was and if it
was ever tampered with.
Or where the claim of 500 came from.
--
The first law of the false prophet has
always and ever been "Don't laugh!"
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: any scholars wanna comment...? |
02 Feb 2006 01:50:23 PM |
|
|
Just more evidence that the Bibles are nothing more than myths, fables and
impossible stories.
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:11u4flj5soo0889@corp.supernews.com...
M Dunne wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:11u3eq0tk6l5dcc@corp.
Google is your friend. A number of epistles are not
from Paul, Timothy and Titus are three disputed
examples.
The letters thought to be pseudepigrapha by the majority of modern
scholars, according to recent standards of analysis and theoretical
trends, are:
First Timothy
Second Timothy
Titus
Thanks! That's v. interesting!
What about the Corinthians quotes, though? Anything wrong with them, or
their origin, or their translation...? IANAE, you see...!
The Corinthians quote is one of several claims.
Mark says that Jesus appeared to the 11 apostles
hiding in Jerusalem. He berated them for disbelief
and ascended then and there to Heaven.
Matthew says that Jesus appeared to the two women at his tomb
and told them to tell his apostles to meet him in Galilee,
which they do. No ascension to heaven.
Luke says that Jesus appeared to his apostles in Jeruslem,
lead them out to a village called Bethany just outside
Jerusalem and ascended there to heaven.
John says Jesus appeared to the 11 apostles in Jeruslaem.
From there he left. The apostles later met him in Galilee,
no ascension to heaven.
Acts 1 claims that Jesus stayed in Jerusalem, told
his apostles not to leave Jerusalem, and there after
40 days ascended to heaven.
6 stories, all utterly contradictory.
Take your pick. Obviously, all writers here were
dressing out bare bone rumors with invented details.
None were eyewitnesses or knew any eyewitnesses.
The original gospels used Mark as a template
(See Mark 13, Luke 21, Matthew 24).
Bu the resurrection narrative, Mark 16:91-6 are not in
early manuscripts, that was added later.
Each gospel writer was left to create his own story,
with no facts to go on which is why all stories differ.
Acts and 1 Corinthians are no more trustworthy.
We see here a methodology at work.
a made up narrative is needed to fill gaps in knowledge
and the writers do not tell us how they know anything,
where they got facts, when they are making up stuff,
or even who they are.
And to make manners worse, we get mainly manuscripts
that have been editted, tampered with and we have
no idea how, who or when exactly either.
Even if 1 Corintiuans was real, from Paul, we have
no idea what the original manuscript was and if it
was ever tampered with.
Or where the claim of 500 came from.
--
The first law of the false prophet has
always and ever been "Don't laugh!"
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: any scholars wanna comment...? |
03 Feb 2006 03:09:26 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:46:15 GMT, "M Dunne" <MaDu@home.com> wrote in
alt.atheism
I've seen the following quote in an old thread.
-------
there's a lovely bit in the film
'The God Who Wasn't There' which deals with the *utter* disconnect between
the fiction of the 'Gospels' and the nasty droolings of 'Saint Paul':
"And here's the interesting thing: if Jesus was a human who had recently
lived, nobody told Paul. Paul never heard of Mary, Joseph, Bethlehem,
Herod,
John the Baptist. He never heard of any of [the] miracles. He never quotes
anything Jesus is supposed to have said. He never mentions Jesus having a
Ministry of any kind at all. He doesn't know about any 'entrance into
Jerusalem'; he never mentions Pontius Pilate, or a Jewish mob, or any
trials
at all. Paul doesn't know any of what we would call the story of Jesus,
except for these last three events ['Christ put on the cross';
Resurrection'; Ascension'] -- and even these, *Paul never places on
Earth*: > just like the other 'saviour gods' of the time, Paul's 'Christ
Jesus' died,
rose and ascended *all in a mythical realm*. Paul doesn't believe that
Jesus
was ever a human being. He's not even *aware of the idea*...".
-------
Can I ask any scholars hereabouts if they'd care to comment on the above in
the light of the following Biblical quotations...? It would be interesting
to hear knowledgeable reactions. Thanks!
http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20060201000220916
Dan Barker takes a look at the trial in Italy regarding the existence of
Christ, and at the "evidence" being presented.
Welcome to BBSNews
Friday, February 03 2006 @ 02:39 PM EST
Literal Believers must grasp at Straws to Prop up Their Myth
Wednesday, February 01 2006 @ 12:02 AM EST
The Historical Jesus: Myth or Agenda?
FFRF via BBSNews 2006-01-31 -- By Dan Barker - The question of the
historical existence of Jesus has hit the news with the recent,
intriguing lawsuit in Italy by Luigi Cascioli, who is suing a priest,
Rev. Enrico Righi, over his published assertion that "Jesus did indeed
exist." Such a claim, Cascioli says, is a deception, an "abuse of
popular belief," which is against Italian law. The lawsuit refreshingly
demands that Righi prove that Jesus existed.
In his defense, Righi and an obliging media have trotted out many
alleged evidences for Jesus long ago discounted, yet which continue to
pepper the credulous writings of conservative religious authors and
scholars.
According to the Associated Press, Righi "cited many known observers,
including nonChristian ones, who have written about the existence of
Jesus, such as the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, considered by
scholars to be the most important non-Christian source on Christ's
existence."
Written around C.E. 95, this paragraph appears in The Antiquities of the
Jews:
"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful
to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works--a teacher of
such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both
many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and
when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had
condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not
forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the
divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful
things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him
are not extinct at this day."
If this is the strongest and earliest extrabiblical evidence for the
historical Jesus, then the scholarship is on the shakiest grounds. That
passage from Josephus has been shown conclusively to be a forgery, and
even conservative scholars admit that it has been tampered with. But
even were it historical, it dates from more than six decades after the
supposed death of Jesus.
The Associated Press chose to omit the fact that scholars have largely
discounted the Josephus paragaph as a later interpolation. The passage,
although widely quoted by believers today, did not show up in the
writings of Josephus until centuries after his death, at the beginning
of the fourth century. Thoroughly dishonest church historian Eusebius is
credited as the real author. The passage is grossly out of context, a
clear hint that it was inserted at a later time.
All scholars agree that Josephus, a Jew who never converted to
Christianity, would not have called Jesus "the Christ" or "the truth,"
so the passage must have been doctored by a later Christian--evidence,
by the way, that some early believers were in the habit of altering
texts to the advantage of their theological agenda. The phrase "to this
day" that appears in the interpolation, reveals it was written at a
later time. Everyone agrees there was no "tribe of Christians" during
the time of Josephus--Christianity did not get off the ground until the
second century.
If Jesus were truly important to history, then Josephus should have told
us something about him. Yet he is completely silent about the supposed
miracles and deeds of Jesus. He does not quote Jesus. He adds nothing to
the Gospel narratives and tells us nothing that would not have been
known by Christians in either the first or fourth centuries. In all of
Josephus' voluminous writings, there is nothing about Jesus or
Christianity anywhere outside of the tiny paragraph cited so blithely by
Associated Press.
The Josephus paragraph mentions that Jesus was foretold by the divine
prophets, but he does not tell us who those prophets were or what they
said. This is religious propaganda, not history. If Jesus had truly been
the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy, then Josephus would have been the
exact person to confirm it.
And this is the best "historical evidence" for Jesus!
The other phrase from Josephus that Righi and AP cite concerns James,
the so-called brother of Jesus, and is likewise flimsy. It says that a
man named James was stoned to death, which is not mentioned in the
bible. Many scholars believe the "brother of Jesus" phrase is a later
interpolation, and that Josephus was referring to a different James,
possibly the same James that Paul mentions in Acts, who led a sect in
Jerusalem. Contradicting Josephus, Hegesippus wrote a history of
Christianity in C.E. 170 saying that James, the brother of Jesus, was
killed in a riot, not by sentence of a court.
Righi also cited Pliny the Younger, who, in the early second century
(112), reported that "Christians were singing a hymn to Christ as to a
god." Notice how late this reference is. And notice the absence of the
name "Jesus." The passage, if accurate, could have referred to any of
the other self-proclaimed "Christs" (messiahs) followed by Jews who
thought they had found their anointed one. Pliny's account is not
history, since he is only relaying what other people believed. No one
doubts that Christianity was in existence by this time. Offering this as
proof would be the eqivalent of quoting modern Mormons about their
beliefs in the historical existence of the Angel Moroni or the miracles
of Joseph Smith--doubtless useful for documenting the religious beliefs,
but not the actual facts.
Tacitus, another second-century Roman writer who alleged that Christ had
been executed by sentence of Pontius Pilate, is likewise cited by Righi.
Written some time after C.E. 117, Tacitus' claim is more of the same
late, second-hand "history." There is no mention of the name "Jesus,"
only "the sect known as Christians" living in Rome being persecuted, and
"their founder, one Christus." Tacitus claims no first-hand knowledge of
Christianity. No historical evidence exists that Nero persecuted
Christians--Nero did persecute Jews, so perhaps Tacitus was confused.
There was certainly not a "great crowd" of Christians in Rome around
C.E. 60, as Tacitus put it, and most damning, the term "Christian" was
not even in use in the first century. No one in the second century ever
quoted this passage of Tacitus. In fact, it appears almost word-for-word
in the fourth-century writings of Sulpicius Severus, where it is mixed
with other obvious myths. Citing Tacitus, therefore, is highly suspect
and adds virtually nothing to the evidence for a historical Jesus.
Such are the straws believers must grasp in order to prop up their myth.
Historians have no evidence of a historic Jesus dating from the time
Jesus supposedly lived, even though many contemporary writers documented
the era in great detail. Philo of Alexandria, for example, wrote in
depth about early first-century Palestine, naming other self-proclaimed
messiahs, yet never once mentioning a man named Jesus. Many other
contemporary writers covered that era, yet there is not a single mention
of any existence, deeds, or words of a man named Jesus.
Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, in their book The Jesus Mysteries,
explain how the myth and legend of Jesus could easily have arisen
without a historical founder. The Jesus story was pressed from the same
template as other mythical savior-gods who were killed and resurrected,
such as Osiris, Dionysus, Mithra, and Attis.
Early Christians agreed that Christianity offered "nothing different"
from paganism. Arguing with pagans around C.E. 150, Justin Martyr said:
"When we say that the Word, who is the first born 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 (Zeus)." Fourth-century Christian scholar
Fermicus, in attempting to establish the uniqueness of Christianity, met
at every turn by pagan precedents to the story of Jesus, and in
exasperation concluded: "The Devil has his Christs!"
The Gospels are not history; they are religious propaganda,
contradictory, exaggerated, and mythical. The earliest Christian
writings, the letters of Paul, are silent about the man Jesus: Paul, who
never met Jesus, fails to mention a single deed or saying of Jesus
(except for the ritualistic Last Supper formula), and sometimes
contradicts what Jesus supposedly said. To Paul, Jesus was a heavenly
disembodied Christ figure, not a man of flesh and blood.
There is serious doubt that Jesus ever existed. It is impossible to
prove he was a historical figure. It is much more plausible to consider
the Jesus character to be the result of myth-making, a human process
that is indeed historically documented.
In covering Luigi Cascioli's fascinating lawsuit, the media need to stop
acting like a megaphone for religion, and start doing some balanced
reporting.
Here are a few references relating to the historical Jesus:
* The Jesus Mysteries: Was the "original Jesus" a Pagan God? by
Timothy Freke & Peter Gandy (1999, Three Rivers Press)
* Did Jesus Exist? by G. A. Wells (1975, Pemberton)
* The Jesus Puzzle: Challenging the existence of an historical Jesus
by Earl Doherty (1999,Canadian Humanist Association)
* Deconstructing Jesus by Robert Price (2000, Prometheus Books)
* The Jesus Legend by G. A. Wells (1996, Open Court)
* The Historical Evidence for Jesus by G. A. Wells (1982, Prometheus
Books)
* Jesus in History and Myth by Joseph R. Hoffman and G. A. Larue
(1986, Prometheus Books)
* Jesus: Myth or History? by A. Robertson (1949, Watts)
* Pagan Christs by J. M. Robertson (1911, London)
* The Quest of the Historical Jesus by Albert Schweitzer
* The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Acharya S
(1999, Adventures Unlimited)
* Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
by Bart D. Ehrman (2005, Harper San Francisco)
/end
'There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the *man* Christ
Jesus'
1 Timothy 2
'God appeared in a *body*...was believed on in the world, was taken up in
glory'
1 Timothy 3
'Christ Jesus, who while testifying before *Pontius Pilate* made the good
confession'
1 Timothy 6
'Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from *David*.'
2 Timothy 2
'For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord
Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had
given thanks, he broke it and said, *"This is my body, which is for you;
do this in remembrance of me."* In the same way, after supper he took
the cup, saying, *"This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this,
whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."*'
1 Corinthians 11
'He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he
*appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared
to more than five hundred of the brothers* at the same time, most of whom
are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to
James, then to all the apostles'
1 Corinthians 15
------
Marcus.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: any scholars wanna comment...? |
01 Feb 2006 09:04:49 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:46:15 GMT, "M Dunne" <MaDu@home.com> wrote:
- Refer: <bLbEf.7593$Y6.6244@newsfe3-win.ntli.net>
I've seen the following quote in an old thread.
-------
there's a lovely bit in the film
'The God Who Wasn't There' which deals with the *utter* disconnect between
the fiction of the 'Gospels' and the nasty droolings of 'Saint Paul':
"And here's the interesting thing: if Jesus was a human who had recently
lived, nobody told Paul. Paul never heard of Mary, Joseph, Bethlehem,
Herod,
John the Baptist. He never heard of any of [the] miracles. He never quotes
anything Jesus is supposed to have said. He never mentions Jesus having a
Ministry of any kind at all. He doesn't know about any 'entrance into
Jerusalem'; he never mentions Pontius Pilate, or a Jewish mob, or any
trials
at all. Paul doesn't know any of what we would call the story of Jesus,
except for these last three events ['Christ put on the cross';
Resurrection'; Ascension'] -- and even these, *Paul never places on
Earth*: > just like the other 'saviour gods' of the time, Paul's 'Christ
Jesus' died,
rose and ascended *all in a mythical realm*. Paul doesn't believe that
Jesus
was ever a human being. He's not even *aware of the idea*...".
-------
Can I ask any scholars hereabouts if they'd care to comment on the above in
the light of the following Biblical quotations...? It would be interesting
to hear knowledgeable reactions. Thanks!
-------
'There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the *man* Christ
Jesus'
1 Timothy 2
'God appeared in a *body*...was believed on in the world, was taken up in
glory'
1 Timothy 3
'Christ Jesus, who while testifying before *Pontius Pilate* made the good
confession'
1 Timothy 6
'Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from *David*.'
2 Timothy 2
'For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord
Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had
given thanks, he broke it and said, *"This is my body, which is for you;
do this in remembrance of me."* In the same way, after supper he took
the cup, saying, *"This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this,
whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."*'
1 Corinthians 11
'He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he
*appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared
to more than five hundred of the brothers* at the same time, most of whom
are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to
James, then to all the apostles'
1 Corinthians 15
------
Marcus.
http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20060201000220916
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
