Reddit is lockstep with legacy media... What does that say?
(www.reddit.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (48)
sorted by:
Stop it. I have challenged your knowledge repeatedly. But the best you can do is insult me? Your knowledge is from a fringe millennial book claiming Jesus was a homo? Not quite, but see how that works. It's quite ironic.
We were discussing your claim of hedgemony. It is irrelevant. Jews are a modern narrative. Revisionism. Almost every claim towards has been a recent insertion. Hebrew or Aramaic is older and it isn't completely Jewish.
Greeks wrote the bible we have today. They're quite responsible for all the superpowers. These debatablely aren't in other versions, resurrection etc. As far as the new Testament went. There is only controversy. Centuries of conflict on its origin and it was written centuries and centuries after supposed events.
If we trace Jews they historically didn't exist until after the fall of Babylon. There are only presumptions.
But claiming Cleopatra was Jesus's mother. Hahahaha. Did the ass's milk impregnate her? She bathed in what? Come on. Away in a manger.
You insult yourself. You made an conclusion without reviewing the material. I even gave you a quicker method of podcast interviews on YouTube. And, the book says nothing about Jesus being a homosexual. It says he was married, and had children. Tuck that ignorant rage baiting in.
Ralph Ellis is heavily cited by Michael Tsarion, and heavily cites both original manuscripts, and Lawrence Gardner.
Yawn that's not material. I haven't insulted anyone.
I have questioned origin. I am not assuming I am correct, unlike yourself equally providing me with conspiracy. You have set a paradox into stone. A paradox I have tried to establish is fraught with controversy. Any origin is gibberish there is only controversy. So questionably it is where any counter arguments come from like your claim. But they are ultimately baseless because any origin is debatable.
I am challenging you to be open minded. Specifically about that origin. Lastly I utterly refute Cleopatra was Jesus's mother. It would make him a mortal, birthed by whom? Roman origin, Caesar, Mark Anthony, Octavian, a gigglo, an ass? Come on. Angering far more than any Jews. Of which he wouldn't have been crucified, because he was royalty. There were no pharaohs after her. None. It is utterly ridiculous.
So no I am not reading, although I am sure it's fascinating. But it proves nothing, outside of vague insertions.
The close minded don't get to challenge other to be open minded. You made a conclusion on material you haven't reviewed, and refused. Why are you wasting my time?!
You've proved you're hostile. Look down votes. Pretty closed minded. All because I didn't share your joy at yet another Cleopatra. Who ironically you're assuming is the mother of Christ. Hahaha. Instead of historically the Whore of Egypt.
Pause and think about it. You see Egypt was around for thousands of years, it weathered invasions, hostile Empires, civil wars, and tyrants. Until guess who ended its tradition and religion by being the last of its dynasties. Hence the obvious title.
But these millennial remakes haven't shown that shame. Because she has been romanticised by actors since Shakespeare as some other empowerment. Instead of factually portraying what she caused.
For all we know she was Jezebel? It is how inaccurate the Bible is. Instead of no, isn't the timeline also out? Conjecture you're providing.