Jesus is not the Messiah

[Gawen]

According to the Bible, the mission of the messiah includes:
•   Returning the world to God and His teachings. (Zechariah 14:9) He will rule at a time when the Jewish people will observe God's commandments (Ezekiel 37:24). The Torah is the Jewish guide to life, and its commandments are the ones referred to here. Do all Jews observe all the commandments? Probably not...but Christianity discourages observance of the commandments in Torah, in complete opposition to this prophecy.
•   Restoring the royal dynasty to the descendants of David.
•   Oversee the rebuilding of Jerusalem.
•   Oversee the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28) There is NO Temple in Jerusalem and some years after Jesus’ alleged death, the Temple was DESTROYED.
•   Gather the Jewish people from all over the world and bring them to Israel. (Isaiah 43:5-6)
•   He will rule at a time of world-wide peace (Micah 4:3).
•   Reestablish the Sanhedrin.
•   Restore the sacrificial system.
•   Restore the Sabbatical year and Jubilee.
•   He will rule at a time when all people will come to acknowledge and serve one God (Isaiah 66:23, Ezekiel 37: 24-28).

Why is it not clear to everyone that the Messiah was for the Jews and of the Jews? Why is it not clear to everyone that Paul's authors developed the biggest hoax the world has ever seen?

So far, one of the above has happened. Judaism has no notion of a messiah not doing these things on the first visit, let alone needing a second visit to complete them. Whenever these things are described in the Tanakh, the description says that a messiah will come and do these things…once. If an individual fails to complete even one of these conditions, he cannot be the Messiah.

A central theme of prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. Look at: (Isaiah 2:1-4; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Isaiah 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34). From these comes the idea of a Messiah. However, Jews (through the Torah) never speak about "believing in" a/the Messiah because he will be a historically verifiable reality and self-evident to everyone. It does not require belief or faith. No person has ever fulfilled the prophecy, and therefore, all Messianic claims have been rejected.

[freeservant]

I have to admit that I have not researched this much but I may have more time next month.

First your post is similar to what Jews have been claiming for two thousand years...

http://www.thejidf.org/2010/06/for-over ... ected.html

They rejected Jesus then and are in some respects still politically motivated to reject Him now.

On a side note guess what is back and re-established: http://www.thesanhedrin.org/en

In your biblical research why have you discounted these verses?

*  Messiah was to be born at Bethlehem: Micah 5:1
    * Messiah would be from the tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10
    * Messiah would present himself by riding on an ass: Zechariah 9:9
    * Messiah would be tortured to death: Psalm 22
    * Messiah would arrive before the destruction of the Second Temple: Daniel 9:24-27
    * Messiah's life would match a particular description, including suffering, silence at his arrest and trial, death and burial in a rich man's tomb, and resurrection: Isaiah 52:13-53:12

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/jesus/proofessay

Let us not forget the Trilemma : http://www.greatcom.org/resources/aread ... efault.htm

But then with your positive assertion that..

Why is it not clear to everyone that Paul's authors developed the biggest hoax the world has ever seen?

 I guess you have the Quadlemma then.  And the idea that Paul needed participation of a large group of people all knowing the message so as to all stay on the same page is indeed a massive but clever hoax if you can pull it off.  Presuming some did not know it was a hoax there where living witnesses all around that had to corroborate parts of this.  Not to mention the fact that Paul started off persecuting and sending Christians to there death.  Also that Paul was a Pharisees and technician in all things regarding Judaic law.  Paul was also on his way up the hierarchy and had good chances at the top post.  In summation this conspiracy of Paulism is professed by Muslims and others but has a definite problem with Occam's Razor.

Yet even if the Jews and Muslims have failed to squash Christianity I have no doubt you have a strong commitment to your faith based assertion that Jesus was not the messiah.  I look forward to your replies as it will challenge me.  I already know I have more to learn.

[i_am_i]

And the idea that Paul needed participation of a large group of people all knowing the message so as to all stay on the same page is indeed a massive but clever hoax if you can pull it off.  Presuming some did not know it was a hoax there where living witnesses all around that had to corroborate parts of this.  Not to mention the fact that Paul started off persecuting and sending Christians to there death.  Also that Paul was a Pharisees and technician in all things regarding Judaic law.  Paul was also on his way up the hierarchy and had good chances at the top post.  In summation this conspiracy of Paulism is professed by Muslims and others but has a definite problem with Occam's Razor.

No it doesn't. In fact it makes a lot of sense to me, the way you put it.

What if, just try to suppose for a moment, what if Paul and his followers were political activists whose goal it was to weaken Roman occupation of their land by unifying their people with some pretty compelling propoganda?

[freeservant]

...snip   Occam's razor.

No it doesn't. In fact it makes a lot of sense to me, the way you put it.

What if, just try to suppose for a moment, what if Paul and his followers were political activists whose goal it was to weaken Roman occupation of their land by unifying their people with some pretty compelling propaganda?

http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html

Here is a good book that puts into perspective the forces out there that where trying to kill Christianity.  It is remarkable to think that by the third century half the Roman empire was Christian at the time of Constantine.  If you where to read the first few chapters you would see the vast terrorist effort to suppress and defeat Christianity.  I think the biggest effort to kill off Christianity stands today and is known as The Holy Roman Empire.

So again the idea that you start a conspiracy only so that you will face torture and death does not make sense. It tends to point to this religion not being man made. It tends to point to a Higher Power helping the Christians to service and prosper in spite of all the efforts to stop it.

[Whitney]

As there is no contemporary secular evidence of Jesus, especially not Jesus performing miracles, it seems to me that it would be more reasonable to think that Jesus of the Bible (while he may have existed) had evolved into a tall tale by the time his story was put onto paper 50 plus years after his death.

[freeservant]

As there is no contemporary secular evidence of Jesus, especially not Jesus performing miracles, it seems to me that it would be more reasonable to think that Jesus of the Bible (while he may have existed) had evolved into a tall tale by the time his story was put onto paper 50 plus years after his death.

During the first century there where living witnesses that would naturally share any supernatural occurrences that they could empirically have verified.  But as you know there are a wealth of resources about the historicity of Jesus.

http://www.garyhabermas.com/

Gary Habermas is one of the experts on this and has a great deal of documentation.

But then we don't need the evidence to be contemporary or have it be from a secular source as most Historians agree that there was an actual historical figure that was Jesus Christ.

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/jesus_extrabib.html

Remember that when it gets to be 50 or 60 years after the death of JFK there will still be living witnesses or people related to living witnesses that will give testimony to what was seen and experienced.  This was no different in the time of Jesus so trying to discount His existence doesn't really work.

[pinkocommie]

Remember that when it gets to be 50 or 60 years after the death of JFK there will still be living witnesses or people related to living witnesses that will give testimony to what was seen and experienced.  This was no different in the time of Jesus so trying to discount His existence doesn't really work.

I think this is a bad comparison.  There were news reels and definitive first hand accounts of the JFK assassination whereas the only somewhat verifiable accounts that I am aware of of the existence of Jesus are, like Whitney said, from about 50 years after his death.  The biblical accounts are not really admissible in this instance because the Bible is where the story of Jesus originated and since you can't use a source to verify itself, the Bible can't verify the Bible.  We can literally watch the instant JFK was shot and he exists in countless forms of verifiable records before and after his death.  Jesus is a plausible but unverified entity who doesn't exist historically until 50 years after he died except in the bible which, as I mentioned before, can't be considered when trying to figure out the accuracy of itself.  I don't see how you could possibly compare the two instances as if they are similar.  The memories of JFK's death will add to an already overflowing abundance of evidence concerning his existence.  I don't think it's reasonable to compare that to the questionable memories of a few people 50 years after the supposed son of god died.

[Whitney]

Remember that when it gets to be 50 or 60 years after the death of JFK there will still be living witnesses or people related to living witnesses that will give testimony to what was seen and experienced.  This was no different in the time of Jesus so trying to discount His existence doesn't really work.

I'll consider that when people start trying to claim that JFK was the son of god, healed the sick and walked on water  

[Tank]

Reading to learn.

[Gawen]

I have to admit that I have not researched this much but I may have more time next month.

I can wait. Sad part is very few Cristians research their own religion.

First your post is similar to what Jews have been claiming for two thousand years...

Could it be because it may be true...at least to them? After all, it was a JEWISH messiah that they were waiting for...not Paul's.

On a side note guess what is back and re-established: http://www.thesanhedrin.org/en

Makes no difference to me or the Jews as far as a Messiah is concerned. At any rate, 1 out of ten requirements for Messiahship isn't something I would base a Messiah upon...especially when it wasn't a bonafied living Messiah.

In your biblical research why have you discounted these verses?

I'll get to these tonight when I'm home. These prophecies do not conform to the supposed Jesus Messiahship anyway.

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/jesus/proofessay

Even Jews can become decieved.

Let us not forget the Trilemma : http://www.greatcom.org/resources/aread ... efault.htm

Does not pertain to this topic. C.S. Lewis's apologetics are not that good and have been refuted.

I guess you have the Quadlemma then.  And the idea that Paul needed participation of a large group of people all knowing the message so as to all stay on the same page is indeed a massive but clever hoax if you can pull it off.  Presuming some did not know it was a hoax there where living witnesses all around that had to corroborate parts of this.  Not to mention the fact that Paul started off persecuting and sending Christians to there death.  Also that Paul was a Pharisees and technician in all things regarding Judaic law.  Paul was also on his way up the hierarchy and had good chances at the top post.  In summation this conspiracy of Paulism is professed by Muslims and others but has a definite problem with Occam's Razor.

I will cut quite a bit through this tonight

Yet even if the Jews and Muslims have failed to squash Christianity I have no doubt you have a strong commitment to your faith based assertion that Jesus was not the messiah.  I look forward to your replies as it will challenge me.  I already know I have more to learn.

[/quote]
You make me chuckle. I'll explain later tonight.

[Gawen]

Ummmm...where was I?
Oh yeah...

I guess you have the Quadlemma then.

I reckon you read a bit from Michael L. Love and how Celestrialism can integrate the Quadlemma. Apologetics at its worst.

And the idea that Paul needed participation of a large group of people all knowing the message so as to all stay on the same page is indeed a massive but clever hoax if you can pull it off.

First, Paul taught his own doctrine which was in conflict with the proto-Jerusalem Church. Paul teaches Paulanism. Not all of Paul's epistles were written by him.
Secondly, there was no large group of people knowing the message. There were very small groups that believed various things in the new proto-Christian theology.
Let the Councils of Nicaea and Constantine make the new religion mandatory.

Presuming some did not know it was a hoax there where living witnesses all around that had to corroborate parts of this.

Sadly, their witness is no longer available. Most Scholars now think that the Gospels were not eye witness accounts. And Mark, which most scholars think had a hand in starting the rest of the gospels reads like a poorly written Greek tragedy.
 

Not to mention the fact that Paul started off persecuting and sending Christians to there death.

A wonderful hook...plot device, if you will. The authors of Paul and Paul himself used coercion, threats and even threat of death to get his theology through to people.  

Also that Paul was a Pharisees and technician in all things regarding Judaic law.

This is laughable. Why is it that 'Paul' uses the Torah out of context and basically trashes it to make his points?

Paul was also on his way up the hierarchy and had good chances at the top post.

He was on the way up by usurping the Jerusalem Church.

In summation this conspiracy of Paulism is professed by Muslims and others but has a definite problem with Occam's Razor.

Not really. I submit that if you know of Occam's Razor, you're not shaving enough...*grinnin*

[Gawen]

In Christianity, the role of the messiah was redefined/recreated/re manufactured/reassigned. It had to be because the Gospel role of Jesus was as a "THE END IS NEAR!!!" preacher. Jesus' theology was apocalyptic in nature. The claim that Jesus will fulfill the Messianic prophesies when he returns does not give him any credibility for his “first” coming. The Torah never speaks about the Messiah returning after an initial appearance. Simply, the “second coming” apologetic is a desperate apologetic to explain away Jesus’ failure. The sad end result of all of this was to shift the Messiah's function from a visible level where it could be tested (as in Tanakh, what Christians call the "Old Testament") to an invisible level where it could not (Enter Paul, who never speaks of a living Jesus). This is a reworking and redefinition of a Tanakh theme from the redemption of Israel to the atonement for "original sin".  

In your biblical research why have you discounted these verses?

I haven't discounted anything. Yet I can ask you the same thing. Why haven't you responded to my 10 applications? All you have given us is a counter that the Sanhedrin are back...but not by a Messiah's doing.

As for Biblical prophecy concerning Jesus, none of the alleged prophecies are about him nor did they come true. Only Christians think they do by wishful thinking and special pleading and reworking Jewish Scripture to fit their need...much like Paul did.

Here is a good book that puts into perspective the forces out there that where trying to kill Christianity. It is remarkable to think that by the third century half the Roman empire was Christian at the time of Constantine.

I find it amazing that many Christians think they have been and still are persecuted. Well, I suppose they can say it. They are ignorant of history and their own Bibles. They do not seem to know that Constantine crammed the new religion down people's throats. To think of all the harm done to innocent people over the last 1700 years in the name of Jesus is sickening. Inquisitions....several crusades...lying...false witnessing...burning people for witchcraft and other assorted crap....paedophiles...I could go on and on. And to think that Christianity is (now, loosely) based on a Jewish tribal mountain war deity that knows no bounds when causing mayhem, death and suffering, whether by himself or condoning it or ordering it from others.


Jesus was no Messiah. Even if he was, disregarding Jewish Messiah attributes, his father was a conniving, psychopathic mass murderer and Jesus himself committed [strike:ozw9qlbt]suicide[/strike:ozw9qlbt] vicarious atonement, which we all know is not a good thing.

[Gawen]

But I'll go one step up, just to show you I can do it.

* Messiah was to be born at Bethlehem: Micah 5:1

Micah 5:1 “And you, O Bethlehem of Ephrath, Least among the clans of Judah, From you one shall come forth to rule Israel for Me.”
Good grief. What does the scripture say here? "Least among the clans of Judah". Bethlehem of Ephrath was a clan within the tribe of Judah...not a place. So your question remains, who does this refer to if does not refer to Jesus? Well, it refers to King David. David was of Bethlehem of Judah, the least of the clans. David fits the description much better than Jesus. AND it can be argued that Jesus was neither from Bethlehem of Ephrath, nor ruled Israel. The best Christians have to go on this is a loose, metaphorical interpretation.

* Messiah would be from the tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10

Genesis 49:10: "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, UNTIL Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be" . Jesus didn't do that at His FIRST coming, which is why the disciples ask him "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6)

* Messiah would present himself by riding on an ass: Zechariah 9:9

The verse is also (Messianically...if that's even a word) quoted in Sanh. 98 a, in Pirqé de R. Eliez. c. 31, and in several of the Midrashim. And here is why...in context:
Zech 9:1-8 is indicative of an advancing military campaign which begins to the north-east of Jerusalem, sweeps through Syria (9:1-2), then towards Tyre (9:3-4) before advancing to attack Philistia (9:5-7) and coming into Israelite territory to set up the throne in Jerusalem, probably in the Temple (9:. This passage (9:9) sits at the end of this advance and details the entry into the city of the conquering king. It does not prophecy Jesus but is used as an allegory, however the context is all wrong. Jesus conquered nothing. Reading on...in context:
Zech 10:9 proclaims that the people of Jerusalem are to ‘rejoice greatly’ and to ‘shout aloud’ when the ‘triumphant and victorious’ king approaches the city riding not at the head of his military forces and neither on a horse which was indicative in these times of a conquering liberator, but sitting an ass.
No Jesus here, I'm afraid.

* Messiah would be tortured to death: Psalm 22

Psalm 22:2 “My God, my God, why have You abandoned me; why so far from delivering me and my anguished roaring?” (JPS)

Psalm 22:1 “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?” (KJV)

Mark 15:34 “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (KJV)

Matthew 27:46 “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (KJV)
The Gospel authors would have us believe that Jesus quotes this Psalm. However, Jesus citing a Psalm is no evidence that he fulfilled a prophecy, or that Psalms 22 was a prophecy for Jesus at all. The fact is, there is no way to conclude from the Psalm or from the Gospels that it is a messianic prophecy â€" Christians essentially made this up.

* Messiah would arrive before the destruction of the Second Temple: Daniel 9:24-27

The prophecy has to do with the restoration of the city of Jerusalem. The scope of this prophecy transcends the mere rebuilding of Jerusalem when it speaks of:
Finishing the transgression.
Making an end of sin.
Making atonement for iniquity.
Bringing in everlasting righteousness.
Sealing up vision and prophecy.

A lot of woo woo in that book. Jewish translations of Dan 9 do not substantiate the Christian claims about this prophecy fulfillment. And it can be shown that the bombastic Christian assertions about Jesus being the only possible fulfillment of Dan 9 rely primarily on wishful thinking combined with arrogance. Other fulfillment scenarios, that don't include Jesus, are just as valid.
Disregarding the mystical 7 years equals whatever days hokum...the Second Temple would be built, and after tribulations a golden age was to arrive and conclude this dorky timeline.
The Temple and the city were rebuilt, but the golden age never happened. Blah blah blah Babylon and exile etc etc etc....we fast forward to:
The word came from God that the city would be rebuilt.
Jer 30:18(JPS Tanach): Thus saith the Lord: Behold, I will turn the captivity of Jacob's(Israel) tents, and have compassion on his dwelling-places; and the city shall be builded upon her own mound, and the palace shall be inhabited upon its wonted place.
(also see Jer 31:38.)

If God revealed his word of restoration to Jeremiah fairly soon after the city and Temple were destroyed, then the starting point for the prophecy would be around the time of the destruction of the Temple and city.
The time frame between the word going out and the arrival of an anointed prince would be 49 years, which is 7 weeks (each week containing 7 years), 7 x 7 = 49.
The rebuilding is to be be associated with an anointed one that was also a prince. Babylon was then conquered and ruled by the Persians.  Cyrus was the king that reigned after the conquest.
This prince would fulfill the word of God that was given in Jer 29:10, 30:18, and 31:38. The word messiah means 'anointed' (masciach), which could apply to a king or a priest. A messiah or anointed one does not have to be Jewish:
Isa 45:1-3,13 (JPS Tanach): Thus saith the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him, and to loose the loins of kings; to open the doors before him, and that the gates may not be shut:
I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight; I will break in pieces the doors of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron;
And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I am the Lord, who call thee by thy name, even the God of Israel.
I have roused him up in victory, and I make level all his ways; he shall build My city, and he shall let Mine exiles go free, not for price nor reward, saith the Lord of hosts.
No Jesus here, I'm afraid.

* Messiah's life would match a particular description, including suffering, silence at his arrest and trial, death and burial in a rich man's tomb, and resurrection: Isaiah 52:13-53:12

Ok...here goes...*sigh*...probably the most oft quoted quote taken from the Bible to fullfil Christian special pleading and wishful thinking:
Actually, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The singular form is used because the Jews ("Israel") are regarded as one unit. Isaiah states 11 times in the chapters prior to 53 that the Servant of God is Israel. Isaiah 53 clearly refers to the Jewish people suffering by other nations of the world. BUT... Isaiah 53 concludes that when the Jewish people are redeemed, the nations will recognize and accept responsibility for the suffering and death of the Jews.

Now...please tell me that you know that Jesus is the Messiah.

[freeservant]

Ummmm...where was I?
Oh yeah...

I guess you have the Quadlemma then.

I reckon you read a bit from Michael L. Love and how Celestrialism can integrate the Quadlemma. Apologetics at its worst.

I got the quadlemma from a book by Peter Kreeft.

http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics/christ-divinity.htm

In that case, who invented traditional Christianity if not Christ? A lie, like a truth, must originate somewhere. Peter? The twelve? The next generation? What was the motive of whoever first invented the myth (euphemism for lie)? What did they get out of this elaborate, blasphemous hoax? For it must have been a deliberate lie, not a sincere confusion. No Jew confuses Creator with creature, God with man. And no man confuses a dead body with a resurrected, living one.

Here is what they got out of their hoax. Their friends and families scorned them. Their social standing, possessions, and political privileges were stolen from them by both Jews and Romans. They were persecuted, imprisoned, whipped, tortured, exiled, crucified, eaten by lions, and cut to pieces by gladiators. So some silly Jews invented the whole elaborate, incredible lie of Chrisitanity for absolutely no reason, and millions of Gentiles believed it, devoted their lives to it, and died for itâ€"for no reason. It was only a fantastic practical joke, a hoax. Yes, there is a hoax indeed, but the perpetrators of it are the twentieth-century theologians, not the Gospel writers.

And the idea that Paul needed participation of a large group of people all knowing the message so as to all stay on the same page is indeed a massive but clever hoax if you can pull it off.

First, Paul taught his own doctrine which was in conflict with the proto-Jerusalem Church. Paul teaches Paulanism. Not all of Paul's epistles were written by him.
Secondly, there was no large group of people knowing the message. There were very small groups that believed various things in the new proto-Christian theology.
Let the Councils of Nicaea and Constantine make the new religion mandatory.

Yet you can not present to me where was the payoff?  Like above if you think this was a hoax you have to ignore history but then you have faith that your assertion of paulanism is truth or you would not make the claim.  I see that you have a strong faith.

Presuming some did not know it was a hoax there where living witnesses all around that had to corroborate parts of this.

Sadly, their witness is no longer available. Most Scholars now think that the Gospels were not eye witness accounts. And Mark, which most scholars think had a hand in starting the rest of the gospels reads like a poorly written Greek tragedy.

And any evidence to the contrary would be ignored if you are fully invested in your view of what 'most scholars think'

http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibmanu.htm

The most significant find, however, is a manuscript fragment from the book of Matthew (chapt.26) called the Magdalene Manuscript which has been analysed by Dr. Carsten Thiede, and also written up in his book The Jesus Papyrus. Using a sophisticated analysis of the handwriting of the fragment by employing a special state-of-the-art microscope, he differentiated between 20 separate micrometer layers of the papyrus, measuring the height and depth of the ink as well as the angle of the stylus used by the scribe. After this analysis Thiede was able to compare it with other papyri from that period; notably manuscripts found at Qumran (dated to 58 AD), another at Herculaneum (dated prior to 79 AD), a further one from the fortress of Masada (dated to between 73/74 AD), and finally a papyrus from the Egyptian town of Oxyrynchus. The Magdalene Manuscript fragments matches all four, and in fact is almost a twin to the papyrus found in Oxyrynchus, which bears the date of 65/66 AD Thiede concludes that these papyrus fragments of St. Matthew's Gospel were written no later than this date and probably earlier. That suggests that we either have a portion of the original gospel of Matthew, or an immediate copy which was written while Matthew and the other disciples and eyewitnesses to the events were still alive. This would be the oldest manuscript portion of our Bible in existence today, one which co-exists with the original writers!

Not to mention the fact that Paul started off persecuting and sending Christians to there death.

A wonderful hook...plot device, if you will. The authors of Paul and Paul himself used coercion, threats and even threat of death to get his theology through to people.

Yes any negative sinario will do. amiright?  The coercion and threats so that Christans could face coercion and death threats... got it.  I will not be able to present a good enough defense as your faith is to strong.  

More from the link above:

What is of even more importance is what it says. The Matthew 26 fragment uses in its text nomina sacra (holy names) such as the diminutive "IS" for Jesus and "KE" for Kurie or Lord (The Times, Saturday, December 24, 1994). This is highly significant for our discussion today, because it suggests that the godhead of Jesus was recognised centuries before it was accepted as official church doctrine at the council of Nicea in 325 AD There is still ongoing discussion concerning the exact dating of this manuscript. However, if the dates prove to be correct then this document alone completely eradicates the criticism levelled against the gospel accounts (such as the "Jesus Seminar") that the early disciples knew nothing about Christ's divinity, and that this concept was a later redaction imposed by the Christian community in the second century (AD).

In summation this conspiracy of Paulism is professed by Muslims and others but has a definite problem with Occam's Razor.

Not really. I submit that if you know of Occam's Razor, you're not shaving enough...*grinnin*

I bet every clue and bit of evidence can be defeated and thought refuted by one who is invested in only tearing others beliefs down.  Is there enough material that I could present that would falsify your view enough to convince you?  I don't think so.  I admit defeat right now.  Not a defeat of Christianity or the divinity of Christ.  But rather a defeat in that what you are undertaking to do is a vital function of the non-believer.  The non-stamp collector who must tear up all other stamps so that non-stamps are the great achievement.  I may have more to add later but this is my last day at my current job and you should be happy with what you have presented so far.  

[Whitney]

freeservant, if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen.  It is absolutely unnecessary for you to attack a person and a whole group of people simply because you can't refute an argument against Jesus as the Messiah.  I suggest you take a few moments to think about how your words here have tended to be scattered with derogatory language towards anyone who is not SDA.  I also suggest that you read the forum rules because you aren't following the guideline of acting civilly towards others.....use your head and think quit hiding behind your hate.