![chasedelephant Wal Mart Now Selling Anti Gay Childrens Books [UPDATED]](http://www.truthwinsout.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/chasedelephant.jpg "chasedelephant")
Great, now they’re marketing hate speech at the Wal-Mart. I understand that Wal-Mart caters to a certain, um, clientele, much of the time, but is this really necessary?
A children’s book written by the wife of anti-gay Standard of Liberty president Stephen Graham is being carried by over 100 Walmart stores. Chased by an Elephant, the Gospel Truth about Today’s Stampeding Sexuality by Janice Barrett Graham was written to “help shed the clear light of truth on today’s dark and tangled ideas about male and female, proper gender roles, the law of chastity, and the God-given sexual appetite,” according to Janice Graham in the book’s introduction.
“The number of our young people involved in sexual sins has greatly increased in recent years. Some of the most stalwart-seeming youth find themselves involved in pornography, fornication, promiscuity, homosexuality, and the like,” Janice continued.
The Grahams claim that their son, Andrew, successfully changed his sexual orientation and is now a happily married man.
And Andrew wrote a book about being in the closet too!
Whatever happened to The Poky Little Puppy, which is still, by my expert opinion, the finest children’s book of all time?
Why do these bigots feel the need to plant the idea in their kids’ heads when they’re children that, if they happen to be gay, they’re evil?
And then, as Sarah Silverman said in her video, they’re just shocked when kids start bullying other kids to death for being gay. Sarah’s right: they learn it from watching the purported “adults” in their lives. Adults like Janice Barrett Graham and her confused son.
Also, what on earth is up with that book cover? Is the elephant gay? If so, why is he not pink? And why is he so menacing? Is this what, in the author’s warped little mind, she thinks happened to her son? Why is the kid unsupervised out in elephant-land? These are important questions.
[h/t Queerty]
UPDATE: Hahahah, commenter Theresa on our Facebook page, in regards to this story:
“Yeah, Poky Little Puppy beats the hell out of Stampeding Jesus Sex Elephant. Sorry, Wal-Mart.”
Stampeding Jesus Sex Elephant is either the best name for a children’s book ever, or maybe a phenomenal name for a band.
I wrote “You believe there was a Mohammed, and a Buddha, but what about Vishnu or Gonesh from Hinduism? It is just as improbable (as in not at all) that such a movement could have started if there were not really a Gonesh or Vishnu.”
Bob said “These are not questions of probability and I think you know that. They are questions of history and each case is unique.”.
Oh, but you did say this was a question of probability, you said “However, the case for a historical Jesus does not rest on Josepheus. It seems highly improbably to me that such a movement could have started over a fictional person.”.
Once again, its just as improbable (as in not at all improbable) that the Hinduism major movement could have started over a fiction.
“You don’t HAVE any eye witness accounts of Jesus and you have NO non-christian references to Jesus from around his time. You have roughly 40 historians”
I’d be interested in a link to this information please. I mean some sort of list of the works.
“You said the beliefs of the Heaven’s Gate cult and halebop comet were an “obviously flawed belief system” but that statement contradicts your claim that certain facts (comet halebops existence, people believing aliens exist, and “credible” ufo sightings) are evidence that the cults beliefs were true (suggestive real historical underpinnings).”
Oh, not evidence that the cults beliefs were true in any sense just like a case that Jesus of Nazareth existed as a living person is not evidence that Chrisianity is true.
I only meant just as they formed a belief system from know phenomenon (comet, scientific thoughts on the likely existence of aliens somewhere, a few possibly credible UFO sightings or just the claims of such), Christianity may have ultimately formed from the life and death of Jesus and the actions of his disciples.
Priya, I wrote a response regarding the James quote being a “lie” but five time the system won;t let me sent it and I don’t know why?
Anyway here is the source information;referring to the James quote, the Wiki page Josepheus and Jesus;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus#cite_note-Louis_H._Feldman_pp._990-1-6
“The above quotation from the Antiquities is considered authentic in its entirety by almost all scholars.[7]”
[7] ^ a b Louis H. Feldman, “Josephus” Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, pp. 990-1.
I have been trying to get the actual quote but I can’t find it online and I don’t actually have this work.
“David Koresh said he was the messiah and people willingly died for him.”
Hilariously, I live literally a mile away from a settlement built by a religious cult that was founded by a guy who called himself Koresh, who said he was the messiah. Said we lived inside a hollow earth, too.
His followers believed him so much that, when he died, they kept him in a bathtub for almost a week waiting for him to resurrect, and didn’t bury him until the health department told them they had to move him. And even after they stuck him in a mausoleum out in the gulf, they kept a little rowboat outside for him to row back in. Took thirteen years and a hurricane for them to give up that idea.
I don’t think any Koreshans were killed for their beliefs, though, ‘cept maybe Teed in some indirect sense. It was pretty peaceful, for the most part. Lasted almost a hundred years, haha.
Bob said “I’d be interested in a link to this information please. I mean some sort of list of the works.”.
I posted that link in my comment #138.
Bob said “Oh, not evidence that the cults beliefs were true in any sense just like a case that Jesus of Nazareth existed as a living person is not evidence that Chrisianity is true.
I only meant just as they formed a belief system from know phenomenon (comet, scientific thoughts on the likely existence of aliens somewhere, a few possibly credible UFO sightings or just the claims of such), Christianity may have ultimately formed from the life and death of Jesus and the actions of his disciples.”.
There is no evidence to support that assertion. If you take the term UFO literally (unidentified flying object) then of course there are UFOs in terms of something that was seen but not identified. If you take the term UFO to mean an extraterrestial vehicle there are most certainly no credible sightings. Once again the Heaven’s gate cult proves people may be utterly convinced of the truth of something and willing to die for it even though it is false and there is no evidence whatsoever to support those beliefs. Strength of beliefs is in no way evidence that those beliefs are true.
Bob said ““The above quotation from the Antiquities is considered authentic in its entirety by almost all scholars.[7]”
[7] ^ a b Louis H. Feldman, “Josephus” Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, pp. 990-1.”.
The trouble with that is that Feldman is a devout christian, a graduate of a Christian university and as such is far from objective or unbiased on the truth of the historicity of a Jesus character or how many scholars consider that quotation authentic. Further damaging to your cause is that “the above quotation” which contains the reference to James isn’t disputed as authentic except for the reference to James, “the brother of Jesus who was called the christ”. That may refer to a James the Just who was known to exist and the phrases “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ” were added by the same Christian copiests who forged the earlier passage which has Josphus unbelievably saying “he was the Messiah”.
Further damaging to your case is that Feldman agrees taht the earlier paragrah that refers to Jesus wasn’t written by Josephus and he counts 87 articles published during the period of 1937-1980, “the overwhelming majority of which question its authenticity in whole or in part”.
Given that Josephus never converted to christianity it is clear he wouldn’t have written a paragraph saying “He was the messiah”. That Josephus could report that Jesus had been restored to life “on the third day” and not be convinced by this astonishing bit of information is beyond belief. Once Feldman agrees that the first paragraph speaking of Jesus is false because christian copiests forged it He has no basis to claim the the later reference to James as the “brother of Jesus” is authentic. In fact once he acknowledges the first paragraph is a forgery to promote christianity it simply isn’t credible that the later reference isn’t a forgery as well.
According to William Benjamin Smith’s skeptical classic Ecce Deus, 15 there are still some manuscripts of Josephus which contain the quoted passages, but the passages are absent in other manuscripts – showing that such interpolation had already been taking place before the time of Origen but did not ever succeed in supplanting the original text universally.
15. William Benjamin Smith, Ecce Deus: Studies Of Primitive Christianity, Watts & Co., London, 1912, p. 235.
The first person to make mention of the obviously forged paragraph refering to Jesus the messiah rising from the dead was the church father Eusebius, in 324 CE and as noted earlier Eusebius advocated forgery to promote Christianity. As late as 891, Photius in his Bibliotheca, which devoted three “Codices” to the works of Josephus, shows no awareness of the passage whatsoever even though he reviews the sections of the Antiquities in which the disputed passage should be found. Clearly, the testimonial was absent from his copy of Antiquities of the Jews. 13 As late as the sixteenth century, according to Rylands, 14 a scholar named Vossius had a manuscript of Josephus from which the passage was absent.
13. J. P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Græca, Tomus CIII. Photius Constantinopolitanus Patriarcha, Garnier Fratres, Paris, 1900, Cod. 47, 76, and 238.
14. Rylands, op. cit., p. 14.
Clearly there were copies of Josephus from which there were no references to the Jesus character, something that wouldn’t have been the case if the original had contained those references, especially given that only Christians had copied those manuscripts and early church leaders would have been eager for such ammunition to “prove” christianity true and would have used it if they’d have had it.
Again, f Josephus had really written about Jesus church fathers in the following 200 years would surely have refered to it in fending off critics of Jesus’ being just another myth. But, not once does Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, or Origen ever refer to Josephus’ Jesus testimony. We know Origen read Josephus because Origen’s writings criticize Josephus for attributing the destruction of Jerusalem to the killing of James. The church fathers made no reference to Josephus’ alleged Jesus testimony because it was not in Josephus’ writing.
Priya, in post 150 you used Feldman to argue your case.
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2009/02/louis-feldman-on-jesus-and-truthfulness_5276.html
Then you write:
“The trouble with that is that Feldman is a devout christian, a graduate of a Christian university and as such is far from objective or unbiased on the truth of the historicity of a Jesus character or how many scholars consider that quotation authentic. ”
Here is his CV from his own web page at Yesheva U.;
Education: B.A. (Phi Beta Kappa, Valedictorian), Trinity College, Hartford, 1946; M.A. (in classics), Trinity College, 1947; Ph.D. (in classical philology), Harvard University, 1951 (diss.: “Cicero’s Conception of Historiography”); L.H.D. (honorary), Trinity College,
So where is the ‘Christian ” college here. I see a small
private liberal arts college (Trinity College is no Liberty University), then a Harvard doctorate.
Where is your source that Felman is a devout Christian?
It seems he is a devout Jew.
So it seems to me you are very inconsistent here.
“Given that Josephus never converted to christianity it is clear he wouldn’t have written a paragraph saying “He was the messiah”.”
I agree maybe not “Messiah” but the relevent question here is not what he personally believed but did he mention Jesus by name at all.
Referring to the James reference in Josepheus;
“That may refer to a James the Just who was known to exist”
But James the Just is a title for James the brother of Jesus, the leader of the Church in Jerusalem.
Also, regarding your reference to the 40 works that you state should have references to Jesus. Among them is Ptolemy.
Ptolemy wrote about astronomy not religion or even history.
Bob said “So where is the ‘Christian ” college here. I see a small private liberal arts college (Trinity College is no Liberty University), then a Harvard doctorate.
Where is your source that Felman is a devout Christian?
It seems he is a devout Jew.”.
I can’t believe you’d call yourself a Christian and then ask “where is the ‘christian’ college here” with regards to Trinity college. “Trinity” refers to “The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit” which is a common reference to christianity and basic christian beliefs. Trinity College’s motto is “For the Church and For the Nation” and its first president was an episcopal Bishop.
You are correct however that I may have been premature in saying Feldman was a devout Christian, I assumed that was the case given that his initial education was heavily based in a christian college but I see he now teaches at a Jewish university. I was unable to find any definitive statements on the internet as to his religion so I’ve sent him an email asking him which one it is. I’ll let you know if I hear back from him.
I wrote “Given that Josephus never converted to christianity it is clear he wouldn’t have written a paragraph saying “He was the messiah”.”
Bob said “I agree maybe not “Messiah” but the relevent question here is not what he personally believed but did he mention Jesus by name at all.”.
The problem with that is that once you acknowledge that Josephus wouldn’t have remained a Jew after writing “He was the Messiah” and that Jesus rose from the deadits clear that christian copiests forged at least that part of the text to counter the claims that Jesus was a myth. Given that there is no basis upon which to claim the later references to Jesus are authentic and in fact it is extemely doubtfull that the same forgers weren’t responsible for the later refernces to Jesus.
I wrote “That may refer to a James the Just who was known to exist”
Bob said “But James the Just is a title for James the brother of Jesus, the leader of the Church in Jerusalem.”.
That’s what christians like to say but there is no evidence that that is the case and scholars disagree a great deal about whether there is any truth to that or not. Historians speculate that James the Just may refer to James the Less, James the Greater and it is far from settled who the parents were of those people were or if they were the same or different people.
Bob said “Also, regarding your reference to the 40 works that you state should have references to Jesus. Among them is Ptolemy. Ptolemy wrote about astronomy not religion or even history.”.
There was another Ptolemy who wrote about history, however he was from around the year 300 and the list suggests the people on it were from around the time of Jesus or shortly after so that might exclude that Ptolemy. I’ve sent an email to the author of that page and list asking him about this and will get back to you if he responds.
Having read more about “james the just” I retract my statement tha he was known to exist as that is far from clear. Further, that that Josephus reference refers to James the just is speculation and may not in fact refer to such a person, real or otherwise. Once you remove the forged phrases “brother of Jesus who was the christ” it is not clear as to who the James referred to is.
“I can’t believe you’d call yourself a Christian and then ask “where is the ‘christian’ college here” with regards to Trinity college. “Trinity” refers to “The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit” which is a common reference to christianity and basic christian beliefs.”
I think it was pretty obvious that by your charge that Feldman went to a “Christian” college as a critique of his neutrality you inferred a religions school in the sense of an strongly Evangelical school. While it is true that Trinity was started with a religious affiliation, as were Harvard and Yale and many colleges in the US, I find no evidence it is anything but a liberal arts school with a very liberal religious affinity.
“Historians speculate that James the Just may refer to James the Less, James the Greater and it is far from settled who the parents were of those people were or if they were the same or different people.”
I’ll take either one as they both were disciples of Jesus.
So, if one of these James was mentioned there is a direct link to someone who knew the man Jesus.
“I’ve sent him [ Feldman] an email asking him which one it is. I’ll let you know if I hear back from him.”
Great, but I still want to know of his purported quote about the James reference is valid. If he writes would you ask him, as long as you are already communicating with him.
“The problem with that is that once you acknowledge that Josephus wouldn’t have remained a Jew after writing “He was the Messiah” and that Jesus rose from the dead its clear that christian copiests forged at least that part of the text to counter the claims that Jesus was a myth.”
Josepheus seems a very complex person, a Jew but loyal to the Romans perhaps out of fear, certainly a witness to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and the second diaspora. Who are we to discern for sure what he may or may not have actually believed. Scholars are free to make a case one way or the other but it is not mathematics, meaning provable. Besides, people are known to be inconsistent sometimes. Perhaps he was a closet Christian in person coming out in print…
Bob said “you inferred a religions school in the sense of an strongly Evangelical school.”.
I never said any such thing, I can’t be responsible for what you imagine I inferred.
Bob said “While it is true that Trinity was started with a religious affiliation, as were Harvard and Yale and many colleges in the US, I find no evidence it is anything but a liberal arts school with a very liberal religious affinity.”
I never said it didn’t have a liberal religious affinity, I simply said it was a christian college and its obvious it is given its christian name and motto of “For the Church and For the Nation”. For you to suggest it is other than a christian college is utterly dishonest and preposterous.
the Gospel of John does not include anyone called James among Jesus’ disciples.
I wrote “Historians speculate that James the Just may refer to James the Less, James the Greater and it is far from settled who the parents were of those people were or if they were the same or different people.”
Bob said “I’ll take either one as they both were disciples of Jesus. So, if one of these James was mentioned there is a direct link to someone who knew the man Jesus.”.
Nice try but the Gospel of John does not include anyone called James among Jesus’ disciples so even your religious texts are uncertain about there being a James (apostle or otherwise) or what his alleged relationship (if any) was to an alleged Jesus. As far as being a “direct link to someone who knew the man Jesus” no James has left any such account and once again even if it existed it would be hearsay.
Bob said “Josepheus seems a very complex person, a Jew but loyal to the Romans perhaps out of fear, certainly a witness to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and the second diaspora. Who are we to discern for sure what he may or may not have actually believed. Scholars are free to make a case one way or the other but it is not mathematics, meaning provable. Besides, people are known to be inconsistent sometimes. Perhaps he was a closet Christian in person coming out in print”.
Yeah, right. And I’m a closet christian too. By all accounts Josephus was an observant Jew his entire life, that is considered accepted fact and uncontroversial. You can make up whatever fantasies you want but just because you like them doesn’t mean they’re even remotely close to true. That you would start making up stories about Josephus being a closet christian when there is no evidence to support that and much contradictory evidence only emphasizes your total lack of convincing arguments for the Josephus Jesus references being authentic. And even if that pulled-out-of-your-a*s speculation were true that would simply erase Christians’ main claim to have a non-christian reference to a historical Jesus.
I appreciate your interest in this discussion. I was not being dishonest (at least on purpose).
You wrote: “I never said it didn’t have a liberal religious affinity, I simply said it was a christian college and its obvious it is given its christian name and motto of “For the Church and For the Nation”. For you to suggest it is other than a christian college is utterly dishonest and preposterous.”
But did you or did you not attempt to question Feldman’s objectivity by saying he went to a “christian” university.
You said: “The trouble with that is that Feldman is a devout christian, a graduate of a Christian university and as such is far from objective or unbiased…”
Do you think that Trinity is a biased an unobjective university because is has a liberal Christian history?
You wrote “I may have been premature in saying Feldman was a devout Christian, I assumed that was the case given that his initial education was heavily based in a christian college”
So I pecked aroud the Trinity site and found virtually no references to anything “Christian” but I did find this disclaimer:
“Although its earliest heritage was Episcopalian, its principal founder and first president having been the Rt. Rev. Thomas Brownell, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut, its charter prohibits the imposition of religious standards on any student, faculty members or other members of the college, consistent with the forces of religious diversity and toleration in force at the time.”
and … “Trinity moves confidently into the future as one of the nation’s leading independent liberal arts colleges.”
Sounds like they are saying it’s not a religious. therefore not a “Christian” institution anymore.
So, my statement is that it is not a “Christian” college in the meaningful sense that it favors and promotes a Christian worldview, not in the trivial sense of whether or not it has a Christian legacy name.
Now, as to my final comment “Perhaps he was a closet Christian in person coming out in print”. That was tongue in cheek, not a serious speculation. I should have made that clear.
Priya writes;
“Nice try but the Gospel of John does not include anyone called James among Jesus’ disciples so even your religious texts are uncertain about there being a James (apostle or otherwise) or what his alleged relationship (if any) was to an alleged Jesus.”
Thanks. You are correct that the name James does not appear however James is mentioned in the book. James and John were also known as “the sons of Zebedee” mentioned below.
John Ch. 21
“1 Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias.[a] It happened this way: 2 Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together. “
Bob said “But did you or did you not attempt to question Feldman’s objectivity by saying he went to a “christian” university.”.
He DID go to a Christian university. Trinity is a reference to Christian beliefs, Trinity college’s motto is “For the Church and For the Nation” so drop this BS about it not being a christian university. It does not impose religious standards because that was a condition for getting its charter from the state.
Bob said “Do you think that Trinity is a biased an unobjective university because is has a liberal Christian history?”.
Any christian or christian institution is biased by definition.
It is not clear that the josephus reference refers to James the Just and there is no solid evidence that a James the just exists. It is however clear that the references to Jesus are forgeries. Josephus’ writing style was to write paragraph after paragraph about even the most minor of characters. Josephus’ work is voluminous and exhaustive. It comprises twenty books. Whole pages are devoted to petty robbers and obscure leaders. Nearly forty chapters are devoted to the life of a single king. it is inconceivable that he would have written only 4 sentences about someone who he allegedly said was the messiah, worked wondrous deeds and rose from the dead. Further damning evidence is that nowhere else in any of Josephus’ works does he use the word christ other than the reference he allegedly wrote about James.
That brief and simple paragraph is the “best proof” of Jesus’s existence in the entire ancient non-Christian library comprising the works of dozens and dozens of historians, writers, philosophers, politicians and others who never mentioned the great wise man and wonderworker Jesus Christ, even though they lived contemporaneously with or shortly after the alleged messiah.
Mattathias, the father of Josephus, should have been a witness to the miracles which are said to have been performed by Jesus, and Josephus was born within two years after the alleged crucifixion, yet in all the works he says nothing whatsoever about the life or death of Jesus.
The paragraph about Jesus was not quoted or referred to by any Christian apologists prior to Eusebius in the 300′s although they wrote extensive defenses of Christianity against the accusation it was a myth and Jospephus was mentioned by many of them.
The church leader Origen in the 200′s also wrote extensive defenses of Christianity and referred to Josephus often and even though Josephus referred to more than a dozen Jesuses Origen said he didn’t consider any of them “the christ”. Clearly the paragraph referring to Jesus didn’t exist in his copy of the Josephus work.
Even after Eusebius suddenly “found” the paragraph in the 300s, several other church leaders into the 400s “often cite Josephus, but not this passage.”(Wells, JM, 202)
It was not quoted by Chrysostom (c. 354-407 ad) even though he often refers to Josephus in his voluminous writings. It was not quoted by Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople (c. 858-886 ad) even though he wrote three articles concerning Josephus, which strongly implies that his copy of Josephus’ Antiquities did not contain the passage. in the sixteenth century Vossius had a manuscript of the text of Josephus in which there was not a word about Jesus.
The Catholic Encyclopedia (CE) even admits “The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations.”
Eusebius advocated forgery to fight the idea that Jesus was a myth. The forged paragraph even though it uses the phrase “Now, there was about this time” which was used to great extent by Josephus was written in a style that was otherwise inconsistent to Josephus and typical of the writing of Eusebius. All this evidence combined with the impossibility of Josephus remaining a Jew and writing “He was the messiah” and that Jesus rose from the dead make it impossible to credibly claim these references to Jesus were authentic.
Priya insists; “He DID go to a Christian university.”
Okay Priya, if you insist but only in the sense that Maryland a Christian state and Corpus Chrisi, Los Angeles andSan Fransisco are Christian cities.
Also, the USS City Of Corpus Christi is a Los Angeles-class submarine with a motto: “For God and Country”.
I guess we have to call it a Christian submarine… :)
“it is inconceivable that he would have written only 4 sentences about someone who he allegedly said was the messiah, worked wondrous deeds and rose from the dead”
This is merely a statement of your credulity.
“That brief and simple paragraph is the “best proof” of Jesus’s existence in the entire ancient non-Christian library comprising the works of dozens and dozens of historians, writers, philosophers, politicians and others who never mentioned the great wise man and wonderworker Jesus Christ, even though they lived contemporaneously with or shortly after the alleged messiah.”
Well, most modern historians say nothing about the Mormons. Perhaps they don’t really exist. There is no official “best proof”.
But I want to thank you for awakening in me an interest in the topic of the historicity of Jesus and other NT figures.
Bob said “Okay Priya, if you insist but only in the sense that Maryland a Christian state and Corpus Chrisi, Los Angeles andSan Fransisco are Christian cities. Also, the USS City Of Corpus Christi is a Los Angeles-class submarine with a motto: “For God and Country”.
I guess we have to call it a Christian submarine”.
http://www.meth-addiction.com/
Bob said “Well, most modern historians say nothing about the Mormons.”
http://www.meth-addiction.com/
Priya responds with only :
http://www.meth-addiction.com/
Thankfully I have never had a substance abuse problem. I am still interested in pursuing the Feldman quote and would like to hear back if he responds to you. Thanks.
Bob said “Also, regarding your reference to the 40 works that you state should have references to Jesus. Among them is Ptolemy.
Ptolemy wrote about astronomy not religion or even history.”.
The author of that article and list responded as follows:
“The reasons are as follows.
As an astrologer, Ptolemy was vitally concerned with religion–so much so that I study Ptolemy’s astrology to gain insight into the origins of Christianity, which I have strong reasons to conclude began as an astral mystery cult. Astrology concerned not only the sky but the earth as well. Astrologers, including Ptolemy, were also geographers because they believed particular Zodiacal signs governed particular regions of the earth. Although it is not entirely certain, it appears as though Pisces (the fishes) governed Palestine in some ancient astrological systems. Although I don’t think Ptolemy agreed on this point, he would have “researched” Palestine as elsewhere in his working out of the religious implications of his astrology and astronomy.
Again, I must point out that geography in ancient times meant more than what it does today. It also included what today we would call ethnography, the cultural anthropology of different lands and places. His “Geography” should have made note of Jesus if he had done anything of religious or cultural importance at all. It is important to note also that Ptolemy, like all other ancient geographers, the Old Testament, Josephus, and the Talmud, never heard of Nazareth either. There is strong evidence to show that Nazareth was not inhabited at the time Jesus and his family should have been living there. If there was no Nazareth at the time, there could not have been a “Jesus of Nazareth” either.”
Priya asserts; “There is strong evidence to show that Nazareth was not inhabited at the time Jesus and his family should have been living there.”
Well, I wasn’t there at the time so I don’t really know however I found this recent reference from an archaeologist.
“In 2009 Israeli archaeologist Yardenna Alexandre excavated archaeological remains in Nazareth that might date to the time of Jesus in the early Roman period. Alexandre told reporters, “The discovery is of the utmost importance since it reveals for the very first time a house from the Jewish village of Nazareth.”[29]”
29^ House from Jesus’ time excavated (December 23, 2009) in Israel 21c Innovation News Service Retrieved 2010-01-05
Also, if there were no N. inhabitants (or even just no Jewish inhabitants) at the time of Jesus’ youth then we have to assume the earliest writers of the Gospels, writing within decades of Jesus’ supposed death, were oblivious to that fact which is very odd since they were apparently trying very hard to convince Jews who would have known obvious facts like the existence or non-existence of a town nearby. Certainly the quote “It is important to note also that Ptolemy, like all other ancient geographers…never heard of Nazareth either” would have to be corrected that to assert they never wrote about it, for who knows what they actually knew
or didn’t know?
Priya– since you have obviously done a lot more reading on these subjects than I have– and becuase at 60 I can barely remember to brush my teeth:
I seem to remember reading something aobut the connections between Nazareth, the Nazarites (I think Samson was one of those), and the Nazarenes, which Jesus is often referred to as being one of.
I didn’t write that bit about Ptolomey in my comment #167, the author of the article I linked to in #138 did.
There is a long history of archaeological forgeries that have supposedly “proven” the existence of Jesus and it is highly likely that the one Bob refers to is yet another:
“On December 21, 2009, news regarding an excavation in Nazareth was released simultaneously to multiple press agencies around the globe. Many articles immediately touted discovery of house remains “from the time of Jesus,” a view allegedly expressed by the archaeologist herself. However, the brief official statement from the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) does not support this thesis. The IAA release is the primary report and supersedes secondary sources such as articles in the press and interpretive remarks. This will continue until a scholarly report with independently verifiable itemizations, diagrams, and discussion appears in print.
The IAA report makes no mention of first-century remains, much less of evidence from the turn of the era (“time of Jesus”). Consistent with other excavations in Nazareth, structural remains found in this excavation date to “the Roman period,” which lasted into the fourth century CE. The only other dating divulged in the report is of structural remains from the Mamluk period. The alleged presence of a “small camouflaged grotto” could point to a hiding place at the time of the Second Jewish Revolt (132-135 CE), consistent with other material from Nazareth, not to the time of the First Revolt (c. 70 CE).”
http://www.nazarethmyth.info/
If people would like to discuss this further I suggest they go to the link at my comment #138 and go to the contact list and get the email of Frank Zindler and discuss it with him. He obviously knows a great deal about this and seems willing to discuss it.
Frank Zindler, editor of American Atheist Magazine, has asserted that Nazareth did not exist in the first century.[52] His arguments include the following:
* No “ancient historians or geographers mention [Nazareth] before the beginning of the fourth century [AD].”[53]
* Nazareth is not mentioned in the Old Testament, the Talmud, nor in the Apocrypha and it does not appear in any early rabbinic literature.
* Nazareth was not included in the list of settlements of the tribes of Zebulun (Joshua 19:10-16) which mentions twelve towns and six villages
* Nazareth is not included among the 45 cities of Galilee that were mentioned by Josephus (37AD-100AD).
* Nazareth is also missing from the 63 towns of Galilee mentioned in the Talmud.
And once again, the idea that historians from around the alleged time of Jesus knew about a man who performed miracles, rose from the dead, caused the dead to come to life and walk around a town would choose not to write about it simply isn’t credible.
I’m done here.
Priya-don’t go yet. you gotta answer my question in 169.
http://www.nazarethmyth.info, Zindler and other professional athiests can cast as much doubt on this as they want but that is irrelevent since they have known biases. All Priya’s source really said is that its not official yet. I enclose the actual press release from the IAA, a professional organization below so you all can judge for yourselves.
IAA Release;
For the Very First Time: A Residential Building from the Time of Jesus was Exposed in the Heart of Nazareth (12/21/09)
An archaeological excavation the Israel Antiquities Authority recently conducted has revealed new information about ancient Nazareth from the time of Jesus. Remains of a dwelling that date to the Early Roman period were discovered for the first time in an excavation, which was carried out prior to the construction of the “International Marian Center of Nazareth” by the the Association Mary of Nazareth, next to the Church of the Annunciation.
According to the New Testament, Mary, the mother of Jesus, lived in Nazareth together with her husband Joseph. It was there that she also received the revelation by the Angel Gabriel that she would conceive a child to be born the Son of God. The New Testament mentions that Jesus himself grew up in Nazareth.
In 1969 the Church of the Annunciation was erected in the spot that the Catholic faith identified with the house of Mary. It was built atop the remains of three earlier churches, the oldest of which is ascribed to the Byzantine period (the fourth century CE). In light of the plans to build there, the Israel Antiquities Authority recently undertook a small scale archaeological excavation close to the church, which resulted in the exposure of the structure.
According to Yardenna Alexandre, excavation director on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, “The discovery is of the utmost importance since it reveals for the very first time a house from the Jewish village of Nazareth and thereby sheds light on the way of life at the time of Jesus. The building that we found is small and modest and it is most likely typical of the dwellings in Nazareth in that period. From the few written sources that there are, we know that in the first century CE Nazareth was a small Jewish village, located inside a valley. Until now a number of tombs from the time of Jesus were found in Nazareth; however, no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period”.
In the excavation a large broad wall that dates to the Mamluk period (the fifteenth century CE) was exposed that was constructed on top of and “utilized” the walls of an ancinet building. This earlier building consisted of two rooms and a courtyard in which there was a rock-hewn cistern into which the rainwater was conveyed. The artifacts recovered from inside the building were few and mostly included fragments of pottery vessels from the Early Roman period (the first and second centuries CE). In addition, several fragments of chalk vessels were found, which were only used by Jews in this period because such vessels were not susceptible to becoming ritually unclean.
Another hewn pit, whose entrance was apparently camouflaged, was excavated and a few pottery sherds from the Early Roman period were found inside it. The excavator, Yardenna Alexandre, said, “Based on other excavations that I conducted in other villages in the region, this pit was probably hewn as part of the preparations by the Jews to protect themselves during the Great Revolt against the Romans in 67 CE”.
In a few of the archaeological excavations that were carried out in this crowded city, a number of burial caves dating to the Early Roman period were exposed that are situated close to the inhabited area. The modern Church of the Annunciation was constructed in the heart of Nazareth, above the Crusader Church of the Annunciation and atop the ruins of a church from the Byzantine period. In the middle of these churches is a cave that was already ascribed in antiquity to the house of Jesus’ family. Many storage pits and cisterns, some of which date to the Early Roman period, were found in the compound of the Church of the Annunciation.
The “Association Mary of Nazareth” intends on conserving and presenting the remains of the newly discovered house inside the building planned for the “International Marian Center of Nazareth”.
Priya writes “And once again, the idea that historians from around the alleged time of Jesus knew about a man who performed miracles, rose from the dead, caused the dead to come to life and walk around a town would choose not to write about it simply isn’t credible.”
Oh yeah, if they write about it they are biased and not credible so they are discounted as “believers” and if they don’t write that is evidence nothing happened. Nice argument.
Priya departs with “I’m done here”
Thank you then for your time and interest.
Ben,
The Nazerites were devout Jews who made a convenent to not cut their hair as a sign of their commitment. I don’t know if there is a real historical connection to the ancient town of Nazareth before it was destroyed around 750 BCE but I suspect the reason that Jesus has historically been depicted with long hair has some connection to the Nazeritets in the minds of the European painters.
Therei s more to it than just that, bob, though I can’t remember what it was. i’m getting old. I’ve seen both spellings.
Ben,
I refuse to allow your “I’m getting old” attitude!
You are not old. You are not sick. You are healthy by your own admission in another thread. You might live for another 50 years! I hope you do.
To your point. I am not an expert on all things regarding Nazareth and Nazerites. But I suspect you can Google just as well as Priya can.
BTW, Priya’s position, that there is no evidence of a historical person Jesus is in the fringe minority among scholars. She buys into the The Jesus myth theory which is being pushed by the so-called New Atheists like Dawkins, Hitchens ect. They are certainly not scholars in this erea. “Most scholars who study early Christianity believe that Jesus existed, (1) “. “”nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed”.[2].
1. ” For example, see Stanton, Graham. The Gospels and Jesus. Oxford University Press, 2002; first published 1989, p. 145. He writes: “Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed and that the gospels contain plenty of valuable evidence which has to be weighed and assessed critically.”
Wells, G. A. “Jesus, Historicity of.” in The New Encyclopedia of Disbelief, ed. Tom Flynn. Prometheus, 2007, p. 446: “Today, most secular scholars accept Jesus as a historical, although unimpressive figure. They are aware that much that is said of him, and by him, in the New Testament is no longer taken at face value even by scholars within the mainstream churches, who either discount much of its material as inauthentic, or justify it by more novel interpretations.”
Dickson, John. “Facts and friction of Easter”, The Sydney Morning Herald, March 21, 2008, quoting the classicist Graeme Clarke as saying “Frankly, I know of no ancient historian or biblical historian who would have a twinge of doubt about the existence of a Jesus Christ—the documentary evidence is simply overwhelming.” ”
2)” Graham Stanton, The Gospels and Jesus (2nd ed.), (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) p. xxiii “