Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist
Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 8:59 am
ok boomer
https://earlywritings.com/forum/
Josephus, Antiquities..., 18, 2, 4:
Because your "strongest argument" is weak and fraudulent.
Man shut up you insufferable disingenuous idiot.If you are able to prove me wrong about Barabbas, then I will become a judaizer, too. I throw the challenge.
Because Barabbas isn't about an archangel.It is incredible how Joseph D.L. continues to talk obsessively about Jewish archangels without be able to explain the case Barabbas.
No, he isn't.Barabbas is the only window we have to infer the identity of the enemies of our authors. Hardly we have something of more evident, as window of that kind, than Barabbas.
Kirby really needs to ban you. I mean: really needs too.I am really sorry that the members of this forum have no better solution about Barabbas. I mean: really sorry.
The point, which you unsurprisingly missed, was that the theophany involved the appearance of an angel who possessed the name of God, thus proving that Philippians 2:9, and Marcionism overall, was Jewish focused. It had nothing to do with Barabbas. It was a response to your ignorant comment to perseusomega9 regarding YHWH and El Elyon.can you explain me what devil (!!!) matters Simon Magus (sic) about the solution of the enigma called Barabbas???
What are you asking me? To argue a position I don't believe? I'm not falling for your strrawman tactics.The question is raised also to Joseph D. L. (so at least he will have something of interesting to say…)
No it isn't. The Jesus and Barrabas episode is just an example of the transmigration of the Christ spirit, in the same vain as Simon of Cyrene and Joseph of Arimathea. One is released, the other is condemned; the host dies, the new host buries him.Charles Wilson wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:06 am This, Giuseppe, is a "real, serious alternative" to your Barrabas interpretation.
CW
stop here please. It is sufficient to disprove any your credibility. Your "solution" has to explain why YHWH is called Christ while the "Father of YHWH" (Never heard about a so idiotic idea!) would have the only sin of not being the ChristJoseph D. L. wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:01 pmEven if I held the position, I could easily say that Barabbas represented YHWH Hakatan while Jesus was YHWH,
Of course I didn't say it was a position I hold, only that it would be better there your nonsense, Giuseppe, you cretinous imbecile.
Come on. It is EVIDENT that the polemic is against adorers of a Jesus Son of Father who rejected the reduction of their Jesus to the status of a mere Jewish Messiah.
False equivocation. We're not talking about Hitler and St. Osnebruck. And Barabbas and Jesus were equated with each other. That's why they were given the same name you mentally incestuous neanderthal.If in the place of Jesus called Christ and Jesus Barabbas you would have St. Adolf of Osnabrück and Adolf Hitler, I challenge you to say that the two Adolphs have a dual role. Or, hear hear, a Ditheistic role.
Jews worship a god who literally calls himself the Lord of War and enacts genocidal policies in their scripture. Innocence and guilt is a meaningless distinction here.No, when a criminal is put before an innocent, a rivalry is in view, not a secret alliance between the two.
I think you mean race of the idiot Giuseppe.Learn this, race of idiot!!!![]()
For what I am interested, the notice fo you is that it is not better than my "nonsense". Sorry.Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:05 am
Of course I didn't say it was a position I hold, only that it would be better there your nonsense, Giuseppe, you cretinous imbecile.
what idiocy is this? Barabbas was invented by Judaizers against the adorers of the Jesus Son of Father who was enemy of Torah and of the god who gave the torah. Period.You yourself never adequately explained why Barabbas was written by "Judiazers" while it simultaneously is used to refute them.
So under the your hypothesis of demential ditheism, an adorer of YHWH reduced YHWh Hakatan (?) to the status of murderer and rebel. Really?Barabbas, being a murderer and insurrectionist would be fitting of the role of YHWH Hakatan.
Really is Barabbas worthy of worship for you ? REALLY???!
So even in Genesis there is a notion of two YHWHs, one who acts on behalf of the other.
no, they were only partially equated. Both the reader and the actors in the story, in primis Pilate, know that Barabbas is a moral monster who has to be absolutely NOT released because the security of Rome is in question here. Barabbas is as the nazi in a novel or in a movie: any reader knows in advance that he is the evil actor in the story.Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:05 am False equivocation. We're not talking about Hitler and St. Osnebruck. And Barabbas and Jesus were equated with each other.