A Body of Evidence

I know you are a rewarder of faith.
I know you reward those who diligently seek your face.
Wherefore, I am still poor; I am still alone?
Was it that I had not sought you?
I know without a doubt you are God...
Therefore, I know without a doubt I have sought you
With what I have, and with every moment of my life.
I have held onto you like Jacob had...
Abraham was buried in the grave, bought from Ephron the Hittite---
Abraham who lived from ~2023BC to 1848BC;
The Hittites in Anatolia at the beginning of the Second Millenium.
Moses writing the book, and Joshua yet had conquered the land.

Oh, you Sea People
Why are you called so?
Because you crossed the Red Sea?









el-Hammam

Trinitite is found in your ancient pottery,
And your sister city is found no more.
Surely, a nuclear blast destroyed you
Or something just like it.
The heat wave expanded over the entire Dead Sea
And burnt down the southern villages
Of Baba Dra, Numera, Fifa, and Conazeer
Are destroyed, and the remains of the Sulfur
Are there, across the entire Dead Sea.
Yet, Safi (Zoar) miraculously survived,
The city where Lot resided;
It should not be, yet it is.

Amenhotep

Amenhotep, you 
Fly with your chariots, yon
That Nuweiba beach.
Yet, the walls of water crash
Down upon you, and the Jews,
They flee to Sinai. 









The Wandering Israelites

Oh, you wandering 
Apiru, in the desert 
So long: Establish 
Yourselves! And break the Hittite 
Empire You "Sea People!"

Historicity of Genesis; Flood, Nimrod and Battle of Siddom

Mid-24th Century Anomaly, 
It collapses all civilizations;
Almost like a global flood? Then
The Earth divides during the life of Peleg, and then
Sargon that Nimrod, built His empire, 
And three hundred years later, would,
Ride, Abraham! and pursue those Elamite foes.
Make haste to avenge Ur, to impose that Amorite King
Melchizedek, king of Salem, to instill Babylonian rule.

"The Battle of Siddim was during the 45th and 46th years of Sulgi."










The Gospels as Witness

Mathew, if first written in Aramaic,
Papias says John Son of Thunder
Said Matthew was written by Matthew in Hebrew,
Does this not prove Matthew was written by
Matthew? Papias XX says John the Elder is
John Son of Thunder, and that John dictated his Gospel to Papias.
Luke is also considered a premier Historian.
Evidence that Demands a Verdict, 86.
And Mark is written by memory,
On the testimony of Peter.
And would Q not most likely be the man Jesus Himself?


















Pi Ramses

Pi Ramses,
You are named
Right when the
Prophet, good
Moses, lived.
You are proof
Exodus
Was written
Nigh the year
One thousand
Three hundred
Before Christ.
Right before
Moses would
See the land
That our God
Promised him.
Twenty years
Is within
A margin
Of error.

"Pi Ramses appears right at the 13th Century BC because the Jews had just built it."






King Tut

Anubis sits atop a vessel
In the pattern of the Ark of the Covenant.
How the LORD God freed Israel
From idolatry, and gave them a pure law.
For, instead of Anubis,
It is the Law of God
Between the Cherubim.
The Curtains of the Tabernacle
Cry out that Exodus was real.
So does the Ark of the Covenant.
So does all evidence prove the LORD Jehovah Jireh.

How also the Covenants between Egypt and the Hittites
Prove Moses, for a learned man of Egyptian Royalty
Wrote the Torah. Only one of such education could.

Quirinius

You reign in Syria, under Herod,
As a Prefect of Galilee issues
A Census. Mary is about to embark
On the sixty mile Journey to Bethlehem.
Joseph wishes to go, so his Son
Is born in Bethlehem
As he is of the lineage of David.
Mary tells the good doctor Luke
Only she conflated the two events
As the census was near the
Time of her embarkment 
On her most precious journey.
A Spear in Christ's Side

I am a poet, not an apologist.
So I make no apology when I say: you lie with such gusto.
I answered your claim about the Census in Luke
And I said it was based on Mary's memory
And she confused the two events.
That Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem
So Jesus could be Born, and
That Mary and Joseph and Jesus
Was taken in the census after they came back
Since the two events were so nigh one another.

And about El and Yah, I have written volumes
But you silenced me before I could answer.
Again my immortal words:
You Lie with Such Gusto.

Although God has died in the hearts of many,
He shall raise again.
For the evidence is on my side,
And again,
"You lie with such gusto."









The Facts

Jesus is a real historical figure
The Gospels are real accounts by eye witnesses.
Jesus really fulfilled over 300 messianic prophecies. 
Rome actually crucified Him. 
Tacitus actually found His death warrant. 
Josephus actually recorded He lived. 
The Apostolic Fathers actually saw eyewitnesses of the resurrection. 
James the LORD’s brother actually died believing He is the Christ. 
Nero actually persecuted Christians and blamed us for setting Rome on fire.

"Mary and Joseph must have went down to Bethlehem to have Jesus, and there happened to be the census at that time. As Joseph went down to his ancestral home so his adopted son could be born in Bethlehem."

Evidence in a Timeline

A Biblical Timeline of Evidence Corroborating Scripture:
24th Century BC – Flood myths appear on every continent and in every ancient civilization, including the Americas, which would be impossible, had not the Flood actually happened. There is also the 24th century Anomaly, which wipes out all civilizations on Earth, and leaves evidence in Ireland with tree rings. The Genealogical Records in scripture also helped me find this event.
1950bc - The Lipit-Ishtar, which has a law on it, number 27, that Abraham followed with Hagar, that God told him to ignore. Abraham corresponds to this in the Genealogical record. 
1800bc - Wadi el-Hol, found in Egypt, shows the earliest alphabet resembling that of proto-hebrew.
1750bc - We see the influence of Abraham on the laws of Mesopotamia, in the Hammurabi's Code, where some of the Hebrew laws in the Torah are first found. Which is likely, also, the reason Sumerian Legends contain Biblical material, was an original source penned by Abraham.
1420bc - The Temple of Soleb has the name of Yahweh inscribed in Egyptian Hieroglyphs, and shows Bound Hebrew Slaves on the Pillars, making mention of the fact that the Israelites were wanderers in the land of Egypt before they were enslaved.
1330bc - The Cult of Aten begins, which corresponds with Moses in the Genealogies. The Cult of Aten was an unexpected conversion to Monotheism by the Pharaoh of Egypt, which likely occurred as a result of the miracles performed by Moses. Also, Moses' genealogical record lines up right with it.
18th Egyptian Dynasty – Egyptian Chariot spokes are found off the coast of Nuweiba beach (Ra Gharrib), and many more like pieces remain under the Red Sea.
1250bc - Joshua's Altar. In Joshua's Altar there are Kosher animal ashes, along with the lead tablet described by the book of Joshua, and it is situated at the rear face of mount Ebal. It is even in the pattern of a Jewish Altar, with ramps instead of steps. Also found at the same dig site are mentions of King Hezekiah (Circa 765bc) and Jeremiah (Circa 670bc). The tablet has both El and Yah in it.
1050bc - A fragmented clay artifact is found in Khirbet Qeiyafa, containing Hebrew Mnemonic verses and the name of God (El), of interpretive transcriptions of the law. On the pot, it talks about being charitable to slaves, and judging them mercifully, and a rebuke against idolatry.
840bc - Tel Dan Stele records the death of King Jehoram, and reveals that he is from the HouseDavid---a Portmanteau of the Dynasty's Heraldry.
597bc - The Nebuchadnezzar Chronicles are a direct reference to the Jewish Captivity, of Babylon sacking Jerusalem. Ezekiel had already been taken captive, along with Israel, therefore, the captivity had already begun. Ezekiel records the Sack of Jerusalem and how bad it will be. As well as Jeremiah the Prophet.
537bc - Edict of Cyrus, which records the restoration of the Jews back to Israel.
100bc – The Great Isaiah scroll was transcribed, and still has the prophecy of Isaiah 53, detailing how a man's soul must be offered as a sin offering. Predating Christ by at least 130 years.
31ad – Christ sweats blood, and dies of a heart attack. The Gospel record shows Christ sweating blood, a condition called hematohidrosis, which happens because of severe stress, and also a heart attack, when His side was punctured with the spear, water flowed from the wound. Which is from a pustule sack developed around the heart during Pre-Cardiac Arrest.
31ad – Under the Emperor Guangwu, of the Latter Han Dynasty, there is record of the Darkening of the Sun which happened for three hours during the Crucifixion. In the records, twice it is declared, “A man has died for the sins of all the people. Man from heaven died.”


The Bible's Reliability, As Supported by The Evidence 

So, to begin, the Bible is the only surviving document of any great length from before 1000bc. It was first written—and we know this—at about 1300bc. Which is when the Exodus took place, if you study the Genealogical records of the kings dating back from Persian restoration.

And that’s important because if the Bible were written at 1300bc—it was started then—it’s pretty much what the Bible claims. And the religion was formed by Moses, when they were out in the desert. And there’s actually several pieces of evidence that suggest this happened.

The first, is a temple in Soleb, which has the name of Yahweh inscribed on it, and also a depiction of bound slaves. That’s actually in an Egyptian ruin, and I’ve seen it on a video. Which, is important because on that pillar, it says the Jews were a wandering people. Which is also what the Bible says. And when the slavery was initiated, it doesn’t say that. Only that the Jews were indeed enslaved, and they worshiped Yahweh.

So, another piece of evidence was found off the coast of Nuweiba beach. They found thousands of scattered Chariot spokes and wheels and other such things. And they recovered one, which dated exactly to the 18th Egyptian Dynasty. Which, was again, around 1300bc.




So, you’d think if this happened, there’d have to be some great revival in Egypt. The overwhelming evidence that God showed Himself to Pharaoh would have to have some impact on society. And it did. Akhenaten, a famous pharaoh, commissioned his state to be Monotheistic, and worship Aten. And, this is exactly dated at the Exodus. So, around 1340 is when Akhenaten lived. Forty years in the wilderness, there’s then going to be the conquest of Canaan. Which, you’d think there’d be historical evidence, and there is. Every siege the Bible mentions, there’s archaeological evidence supporting it. The conquests of the Jews is supported in the Late Bronze Age Collapse. There were diseases proceeding forth from God to help the Israelites win. And there’s a sharp reduction of populations during the thirteenth century. So, all of that lines up with the Biblical record.

But, you’d think if the Jews existed, they would have left evidence. Well, they did. There’s a structure that is patterned off of the biblical pattern of an altar. It was found on Mt. Ebal. There was Kosher animal ashes discovered at the site. The best records of the site date to about 1250bc. They found the lead tablet talked about in Joshua. They found the Tetragrammaton on that tablet. They found references to Jeremiah and Hezekiah—who visited the altar. And so, this is evidence yet again of the Jews right after the Exodus.

Then, there’s more evidence. Can you believe it? There’s a stele called the Merneptah stele, dated to around 1210bc, which names Israel, and Pharaoh boasts of having destroyed the Seed of Israel. Which, means he likely went through and burned all the records pertaining to them. As, Pharaoh and ancient civilizations were very keen on the records they kept. But, it mentions Israel by name. Obviously Israel wasn’t destroyed, as it’s still a people today. So, likely, this is just a fabrication of Pharaoh’s who would prefer them not to be in the Canaan strip, where they ensconced themselves, and also practiced their worship of God through the Law.

“But wait! The Bible wasn’t written until 400BC!” Nope. The Bible, because of something called Loan Words, was written in the thirteenth century. It was written in the Late Bronze age, due to Egyptian Words being used that didn’t exist at any other time. So, for that transference of data, the Bible would have had to be written around 1300bc and continued until, well, today actually. There’s still a record kept of the Jewish people, dating from this time of Moses to now.

And, you might say, “Well the Bible plagiarized Ancient Near East Myths.” Nope. Those myths are found in Assyrian libraries. The Bible does predate that. And, not to mention, there’s indirect references in the story of Abraham to a law found in Mesopotamian culture around 1950bc. It was on a law called the “Lipit-Ishtar”. And this was a law with regard to a prostitute—a concubine—and the person had to keep them like a wife. But, Abraham was told not to do this. Which shows, for that detail to exist into modern day, a continual transference of information dating back to at least 1950bc, but I would argue earlier.

So, there’s two different accounts in Genesis, and two different traditions being outlined. One of El (God) and the other of Yahweh. I believe these were both the same tradition, the one of El coming from Abraham, and the one of Yahweh coming from Jacob. And these two traditions, and the Law of God, came from the first instances of Monotheism in the world. So, the stories in Genesis were originated by the Jews, that’s what this evidence shows. And not only that, there’s two separate traditions—that’s why the Bible repeats itself sometimes, which I’ll get to later—and these two separate traditions were likely composed by witnesses of the events themselves. The slight differences are what we’d expect from witness testimony. It’s just a matter of fact, that this is what witness testimony looks like.

Which gets us to the prophets and the chroniclers of the Kings of Judah and Israel, that they were written down by witnesses, and transferred, as I’ve proven, at the time those events were taking place. So, the Old Testament, the entirety of it, were written by eye witness, and that I’ve just proven.

“Ah, but what about the New!” Here we actually have even more evidence to support. For one thing, Jesus actually existed. There’s about half a dozen references outside of the Bible to Jesus, some by famous historians. There’s internal evidence in the scripture saying Jesus lived, being that He sweat blood, a condition called hematohidrosis which the writers couldn’t have forged. And also He died, because the water flowing from His wound is consistent with a Heart Attack. This heart attack, what happens is a pustule sac develops beneath the rib cage, in pre cardiac arrest, and when it ruptures, it creates what looks like water. And when the centurion punctured Jesus, that pus flowed from His wound. Which could only be consistent with an actual death. Jesus could not have survived that.


So, also, how do we know the Gospels are true? Well, again, people as early as 90ad, were quoting copious amounts of information from the Gospels, Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, and it was already established at least then. What we do have is Papais saying who wrote two gospels. Matthew and Mark. Matthew was composed in Hebrew and later translated into Greek by Matthew. And Mark was given by Peter, who spoke it to him, and he wrote it down. Luke accompanied Paul, and therefore Paul, we know, met with James and Peter, being given the first creed of the faith, “He is God who died and raised”, and not only this, Luke would have known witnesses of the Gospel, too. So Acts and Luke were written through the testimony of first hand witnesses, so was Mark and Matthew.

The only one really difficult to believe based on evidence is John’s gospel. But, it was written at about 100ad to 120ad. Which if John were even 30 years old at Christ’s death, he could conceivably live to 120. That’s not out of the realm of possibility. Especially since Rome was a pretty hearty civilization. So, the Gospels were being written about 60ad, about thirty years after Christ’s death. Because they were copiously quoted by the Church Fathers at 90ad. I just showed that their origins are documented. And John could have lived to be 120, and if he were even an eleven year old when Christ died—who knows, right?—he could have been even younger when that Gospel was written. Which, we’re not talking about a lifespan outside of the reach of a human life. We’re talking thirty to seventy years after Christ died, that’s when the Gospels were written. Within the span of a human life.

Not to mention, Papais' source for who wrote Matthew and Mark was St. John, proving he was indeed alive at 90ad, only a decade before the Gospel of John was written at the earliest.

And again, it’s important to understand that historians documented some of these disciple’s deaths. Some of these men knew Jesus, or were related to Jesus, and they died on the testimony that Christ raised, and ate and broke bread with them. They were willing to sometimes die unspeakable deaths just for this testimony. Which, is important because a person doesn’t die willingly for what they know isn’t true. It’s one thing if the faith is far removed, and it’s a story. But these people lived it… and they would be the first to know if it were faked. And, Josephus documents that James, the LORD’s brother, died by stoning for this testimony.
So… both Old and New Testament are sufficed in the evidence. And they are witness accounts from the time periods. So, I firmly believe in them.

To conclude, there’s clear evidence of Judaism existing prior to Babylonian Captivity. And the evidence puts it at right when Judaism claims to have been founded. So, it’s actually older than most of the sources we have from the ANE.
It’s neat, actually. El (God) and Yahweh are probably the original monotheistic faiths. The evidence points to this, too, and I think Genesis was meant to combine the traditions of El and Yahweh into one master tradition. That being the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

And as for Jesus, there's clear reason to believe the Gospels are eyewitness accounts, and not fabrications.
Podcast The Evidence for Jesus Transcription

So I'm gonna go over a comprehensive analysis of the evidence that the scripture is true. So the first thing, how do we know the Bible's true? First thing that always comes up is the flood. Couldn't happen? Well, there's actually flood myths in every continent on the Earth, where there's people inhabiting it, and how does that happen? It's not a very good explanation to say that it's because they lived in flood plains; the fact is, it always has the same story of one person surviving on boat or some other object. And that's a common theme throughout all of them, which shows a common origin of the myth, which isn't so much a myth, if you think that had to have actually happened if this is what's dispersed across the entire world.

Second thing is the Lipit-Ishtar, and this is a law of Mesopotamia that basically described what Abraham's behavior toward his prostitute Hagar was, and this was in 1950 BC. And it's important that we understand this because in 1950 BC, this is when Abraham would have lived. If you take up all the genealogies, I mean, all the chronologies of the kings and stuff from Persian restoration, which we have an exact date for that it lines up exactly with 1950, etc, because the judges would overlap. And that's just a fact. And so right when Abraham is said to live, we find the Lipit-Ishtar. which shows not only that Abraham lived possibly but also a continual transference of written data because this would have been impossibly hard to forge with bronze age information technology---it would have been impossible to forge a detail like that.

And then there is something called the Wadi El Hol, which was a inscription in Egypt of cave scribings of basically ancient Canaanite script (even more ancient than Canaanite script). And for those of you who say that there was no other people who had a different language in Egypt, there actually are words written on the cave wall at Wadi El Hol, and this is dated to around 1850 BC, right around the time when Joseph would be coming to Egypt and his people going there.

Which gets to another thing, is in 1450 BC, Pharaoh erected a pillar at the temple of Soleb. It has the name of God Yahweh and also shows bound slaves being led away, and the slaves are called a wandering people. Now this is important because the Jews, they were a wandering people through the land of Egypt, and then they were enslaved and their God was Yahweh. 

Okay, next 1340BC, we see right at the tip of the 18th Egyptian dynasty, two things actually. One is that there's chariot spokes that an archaeologist, although this is disputed, took out of the Red Sea at Nuweiba beach, and he had it accredited by a prominent artifact historian and they dated it at 18th Egyptian dynasty; and this artifact shows that there was chariots from that time period off the coast of Nuweiba beach, and they found tons of them, but again, this is a disputed artifact.

But then you have the cult of Akhenaten's. What could change a Pharaoh so radically, if not witnessing that your slave peoples' God acted on their behalf by helping them cross a sea? What else can cause this? I don't see anything else. It's just randomly Akhenaten up and starts worshiping Aten. Why this is, it's probably because the Jews showed some pretty strange stuff and some strange miracles, and it convinced the Pharaoh to become, now they say it was monotheistic. Some people dispute that but it doesn't matter. There's a change in the religion; that shows us at the very the least something new is added to the Pantheon that wasn't there before. 

Then you have in 1250 BC, a newly discovered thing is the altar at Mount Ebal, which is exactly where it was supposed to be. And it was patterned off of a Jewish altar, and had ramps instead of steps. They did some scientific analysis on the ashes found at the site. They found only kosher animals, although they did find some deer and some wildlife. But it was all kosher animals showing that there was actually a Jewish altar. They found a lead tablet mentioned in Joshua, and on it, it mentions both El and Yah, but this is important because it's a huge thought up until now in academia that El and Yah were two different traditions that were merged together around 950 BC. This is actually not true because in 1250 BC, we have these two traditions right next to one another. Now while I do believe that there were two traditions, El from Abraham and Yah from Jacob at 1250bc, it's probably around 1300 BC when Joshua would have been conquering Canaan and writing the Bible. This shows that the Bible is being created at this time period it describes, which we'll get to the next thing. This is actually a concurrent proof that they already merged the two traditions of Jacob and Abraham and also that this was an important discovery because they were worshiping the God of Jacob Abraham and Isaac from 1300 BC, which is right when the Bible was said to be written. 

And we know that the Bible was also written at this time because of concurrent late bronze age phraseology that would have only been found in Egypt in the late bronze age; so we can pin the Bible as being written around 1300 BC. So right at the time period when Moses would have been conquering Canaan.

And even more evidence than this--- I know there's a lot isn't there? It's pertinent to understand that right at this time period, there's a late bronze age collapse that can't be explained by anything except plagues, and what does God send before the Israelites? Not to mention, there's about three sieges that are mentioned in Scripture. Every one of them has been archaeologically discovered, including Jericho. There's a site of Jericho; they're all sieges, and this shows that these sites were actually conquered by Israel. 

And if this isn't enough, there's one more piece of evidence called the Merneptah Stele, which was erected around 1210 BC, which has the name of Israel on it and likely the reason for this is that Pharaoh said he destroyed the seed of Israel completely. What he probably meant was he destroyed any record and censored the Israelites from ever existing. 

Okay, so now we get into other stuff because this was all the Exodus and before the Exodus--- Now we're after the Exodus and at Khirbet Qeiyafa, they found a tablet, a clay pot that had inscriptions on it from the law of telling you how to treat slaves nicely and praising God; and also, there's Sinai 349, which basically is a censure against Baal worship. 

Okay, we have lots of evidence here, I'm gonna have to go over it all.

Then jump forward about 200 years, you have a Stele called the Tel Dan Stele, which has a battle written on it, basically, exactly what the Bible says. It was king Jehoram who was in the battle and it's exactly what the Bible says. And guess what! It says HouseDavid on it; the house of David, showing that there was indeed a second kingdom of the Davidic bloodline, which is important. 

So now we've established that the scripture was written in 1300. We're seeing that it's actually being written at the time periods it describes. 

Okay, fast forward a little bit more. You got the siege of Babylon at Jerusalem. And this is pretty well known, and is really not that disputed, but we'll go over it anyways. The Nebuchadnezzar Chronicles, which chronicles Nebuchadnezzar sacking of Jerusalem. Fast forward about another seventy years, you get the Edict of Cyrus sending them back home, and then you fast forward about another 300 years, in 100 BC, you get the Dead Sea Scrolls, which has Isaiah perfectly preserved. It's exactly within 99% accuracy of what we have today. Very few little things change. But the important thing is that Isaiah 53 is still in the Scripture perfectly preserved. This is exactly what's in our Scripture today, but it's clearly a prophecy of Jesus. And I find that to be one of the most revealing facts that when we have these "quote unquote" scholars saying that there are anachronisms in the Bible, this proves that those anachronisms are not actually anachronisms, but are fulfilled prophecies.

Onto the next thing, 31ad. In 31ad we know Christ lived and died because of two particular pieces of evidence. One is a work written by Phlegon of Tralles, which has a reference to the three hours of darkness during the crucifixion. Now, this is secondhand because it's written in someone else's work saying that this had existed previously. But it's pretty much authentic. And the reason why we know this, is because in China, there's another concurrent record from about 31ad talking about the same exact eclipse happening at Passover. And this is the Chronicles of Guangwu, when they even prophesied Christ, it said, "Man from heaven died and covers the sins of all the people. Yin and Yang are reversed." It's amazing stuff, amazing stuff. And this is actually in the Chronicles; you can actually look it up in the original text, it's still in there. It's amazing. I was dumbfounded, I didn't believe it. And I had to go look up the text to see if it was reality. It's actually a really in there. 

And then you have another thing that proves Jesus existed. So we can't have people saying that Jesus never existed. A couple of things. Actually, one is a Roman historian Tacitus, who basically said Jesus was crucified under Pilate. And we would know that if he had any reason to doubt this, he would have said Jesus didn't exist because Rome wanted to crush Christianity, at this time, and it would have been too easy to go out and lie about it, if they had not kept the records of crucifixions and stuff, which they did back then. It would have been too easy to go down there and see that this was fake, if it were. And he basically must have went down to the records of Rome, and see that Jesus was actually crucified under Pontius Pilate. So Jesus had actually existed. That's Tacitus of Rome. 

And then though, this was about 50 years after, it's really kind of silly, because you know, there's really no historian that talks of contemporary events that much, especially things like this that are happening among the peasants. This isn't really something that's really big news to people, except for the common people. But after about 50 years later, it's typical that if it's creating enough stir in society, it'll be talked about; but it's only 50 years, people: it's not that much. 

And then there's Jesus sweating blood in pouring out water from his wound. Now, this is consistent with the heart attack, the water coming out of this wound. There's a pustule sac that develops around the rib-cage during pre-cardiac arrest. And then there's hematohidrosis, which is a condition of sweating blood, which is a disputed passage right now in the Scripture, but it shouldn't be disputed at all, because basically, Jesus sweat blood. It's what happens when you get really, really, really, really, really, really anxious. You can sometimes sweat blood and this would happen to Jesus, and there had been no way these two things could have been forged. Absolutely no way. It's just impossible. The people don't even today think of it having anything but a mystical significance. We don't realize that this is medical conditions and people back then, they didn't think to add those type of details; they couldn't. They didn't have compendiums upon companions and medical records and Google and things like that, to know that it actually happened, which is also another reason why we can think that the Bible's not myths being put together because that's kind of stupid, because it just seems to be authentically the history of a people. The water is the real point there, that piercing wasn't part of crucifixion, so Jesus had to have been pierced on the cross.

Now, lets get into two of the apostles, and their testimonies and how I can pretty much say that their belief is proof of the Bible.

One is James the LORD's Brother. Josephus records that James the LORD's brother died by stoning, and this on the testimony that Jesus ate and broke bread with him after He resurrected. And James died for it. The LORD's brother. Now you don't die for something you don't believe in. It's not like a thousand years later, where these people just had faith. They actually touched, lived, ate and broke bread with Jesus. And a common misconception that Jesus actually survived the crucifixion, he couldn't have, as the water flowing from his wound is indicative of certain death. It must have been catastrophic heart failure.

And not only that. we know that Jesus actually manifested to these people, because of Doubting Thomas. Doubting Thomas actually touched Jesus. He actually touched Him. And Jesus could have only but died. And doubting Thomas touched Him, and knew that this was His savior. Now this is so important because it's just more proof on the testimony of these men that Jesus actually raised from the Dead.

And as a last note, Papias is said to have dictated the book of John from John's word and testimony. And we'd have no doubt, that this were true, because Papias was a martyr of the faith, dying for the testimony of the truth of John's witness. And this is a final testimony, of a martyr, on the testimony that the Gospel is true.

There's a lot more than that that I've gone through, but it's just indisputable, based on evidence, that the Bible is true. Anyone who says otherwise is just lying through their teeth.


























Moses wrote the book of Exodus. He would have to. 

So, let’s just go down the whole list. We have Ira Friedman, who did deep scholarship, and says that Moses was active in the reign of Amenhotep III. And right after Amenhotep III, we have the reign of Akhenaten who
for some reason converted to Monotheism. At Neiweba Beach, they found chariot spokes in the Red Sea dated to the time period of the Eighteenth Egyptian Dynasty. Which, Sinai is right on route from Nuweiba Beach across the Red Sea. Then, we have a people called the Abiru people, and the Sea People, who conquered the Canaan Strip, and defeated the Hittite Empire. Probably the Israelites. The Abiru people would be the peoples wandering in the Wilderness. Then, we have Hittite and Egyptian contracts, written in a format similar to the Torah, from about the time Moses would have lived. That structure is indicative of the time period, and only that time period. Meaning a man of Egyptian Royalty would have had to written the Torah. And then you have the Ark of the Covenant, which is modeled off of an Egyptian Ark, similar to those found at the tomb of King Tut. Which also dates Moses to the time period we’re talking about, Circa 1350–1250bc. And then if that’s not enough, there’s Egyptian Loan Words from the thirteenth century found in the Torah, which means it only could have been written at that time period. All in all, it’s pretty clear Moses wrote the book of Exodus.





It’s actually pretty clear, by evidence, who wrote the books. Like, we know Moses wrote the Pentateuch, because it has the same structure as Egyptian writing did, back when Moses would have lived. We know Joshua wrote Joshua, because we have direct evidence of things talked about in the book, that we unearthed here recently. So also through the rest of the Bible, it seems to be corroborated by all the evidence, and not dismissed. Meaning the Bible was penned by people from those time periods. And Genesis, too, was penned at those time periods, as it relates to very obscure historical facts, that would be hard to preserve, unless there was a Codex that had preserved them, such as the war between the Elamites and Amorites, and even who the aggressor was in the conflict (Abraham allied with the Amorites, to reconquer Mesopotamia from the Elamites). And that’s probably how we got Genesis, were two Monotheistic traditions, which Moses merged into Genesis, and then continued documenting God’s interaction with His people in Exodus.
So also with the Gospels, Papias knew St. John—actually, John dictated to Papias the Gospel of John—and he told us who wrote Mark and Matthew. And indirect evidence shows this to be very plausible, as scholars will say Matthew was first written in Aramaic, and Papias claims it was first written in “Hebrew” which back then lay Greeks wouldn’t make a distinguishment between the two. Which shows pretty strong evidence of the authorship of those three Gospels. Luke, is probably the most authoritative, because it’s the most devoid of colloquialism, and is rooted in historical principles. People have noted the Gospel of Luke was a Premier Historical Text, just based on all the contemporary details it got right. But, so did the other Gospels, we’re starting to find out, as well.
So, the Bible does not have unknown authorship, but the world cannot understand that. So, even if shown direct proof of the Bible’s Authenticity, as I just did, it cannot know. As God hides it from them

Actually, the Bible predates those manuscripts. Modern Academics are talking about sources from Assyrian libraries, that would date to about 800BC. They’re likely inspired by the source Genesis was made from. You got it all backward. The Bible has source material way back further than that, to about 2400BC, maybe earlier.
I mean, Modern Academics are really talking about the Epic of Gilgamesh. Which, is nothing like the story of Noah. Not in the slightest. And Modern Academics are trying to make a leap of conjecture that the rebuilding of Zion is like the rebuilding of Uruk, but none of the actual hard evidence says that can be possible. That’s all deductions and a priori Biblical criticism not backed by any of the physical evidence, which is a lot supporting the Biblical texts. But, I do think there’s precedent that the stories of Genesis are older than that, considering we have remnants of Adam and Eve in China, and flood myths in the Americas.
Like, rationally, you might say that, until you look at the hard evidence. And it all supports the Bible being written—the form we have it—at about 1300BC, and there’s even more evidence that sources predating that existed, which probably comprised the earliest monotheistic faiths. As is respectively the God of Abraham, Isaac (El) and Jacob (Yahweh). As the Bible has hard evidence establishing it through provenance, of the religion being practiced in Egypt, and even evidence that the Jews were enslaved. And of course the Bible Genesises Abraham from Mesopotamia, where El was worshiped, but is generally the name Abraham probably called God at that early time in history. And Yahweh came from Egypt, as we have direct evidence of that, a Semitic language speaking people coming from Egypt who worshiped Him, and were called “Wanderers”.
And really, Jesus is nothing like Isis, Horus and Osiris. I read the Book of the Dead—a schizophrenic mess—and it’s nothing like the story of Christ. That story is a story about the sun rising and setting. Basically, Horus turns into Osiris at about mid day, and then dies, and then resurrects on the horizon. It’s just a silly story, and not based on an actual historical event like the Gospels are.
I can attest, the Bible is 100xs more lucid than anything in Egyptian Mythology.

Like, the Old Kingdom of Egypt didn’t start until 2700BC, which is probably wrong. It’s probably more like 2400BC. There’s probably a Neolithic Egyptian Civilization in the Early Dynastic Period, but that was wiped out around the flood.
There actually was a flood. They didn’t survive. There’s an abrupt gap in all historical civilizations at the time of the Mid 24th Century Anomaly. And looking at Naqadan Pottery, it’s consistent with the universal culture found in the Neolithic Civilization, similar to cave paintings in the Americas, and also art in Europe and China.
It just makes sense. The Mid 24th Century Anomaly seems to have happened in the Mid 24th Century, and there’s a world wide civilization that precedes it, that has its own pantheon and everything, and no trace of it can be found after that date. I mean, there’s a 100 year difference accounted in the Bible, but a little error like that means nothing in the grand scheme of thing. The Physical evidence all proves it. And the Genealogies all line up with it, if you take it back from Persian Restoration, and assume the Judges overlapped.
Actually, the date for the Bible perfectly aligns with the Exodus. Under Amenhotep III they left—we have a lot of documentation this is true—they crossed at Neiweba Beach, wandered the Desert—the Abiru people—and conquered the Hittite Empire as documented then as the “Sea People” or those who crossed the Red Sea.

But the Hyksos are not the Jews. The Sea Peoples and the Abiru peoples are. {…} The Sea Peoples caused the Bronze Age Collapse, and took control of the region. We even have the Merneptah Stele showing Israel was a people in 1200BC. Which if they destroyed "The Last Seed" then there'd be no Israel today.
Maybe Egypt thought they owned control of it, but the Jews maintained their State. We even have more recent evidence, in the Tablet at Mount Ebal.

{…} Abraham living in Mesopotamia, and worshiping El, and El having a Son predates (Christianity), too. You know, El, the word for God in the Hebrew Bible? Or, certain Jewish Sects waiting for “God’s Son”.
As Paul said on the Sermon on Mars Hill, “God winked through the Poets.”
Virgil’s Aeneid has a similar moral pattern to Christianity.
It’s not that myths predate it. It’s that the myths have their fulfillment in Christ. Who {…}was a historical man, actually lived, and witnesses actually saw Him raise from the dead. {…}
I mean {…} to go deeper, there’s only ever been two religions. The religion of Sin, and Baal-El, and the religion of Yah, and Christ. All religions are a variation of that, which find their final fulfillment in the revelation of God’s Son unto death, tying up all of true history, and philosophy and science into a package, calling Him the Son of Man. Which if you reject, you reject the truth. As now there’s only one path to salvation, and that’s Jesus Christ. As all truth proceeds from Him, and is established on His word.
{…} I was just reading sources about the Akkadian Empire, and how El meant “Lord” in that empire. From that, it looks like {…} [The Semitic] religions {…} plagiarized the Abrahamic Faith. Not the other way around.
The fact is, Christ was an actual human being, died an actual death, raised, and actual people saw Him after He was crucified. If not, the religion wouldn’t have ballooned to what it did, only 40 years after His death.
(And) what’s written in that book gets dug out of the ground 3000 years later, and exactly corroborates what it says. So, I’d say the book was probably written by the people who saw it, and is itself evidence on its own, being eyewitness reports.
And we know the Gospels were eyewitness reports because Papias tells us who wrote them, and that gets corroborated by independent research done by modern day linguistic scholars.
And eye witnesses are evidence. It’s one of the strongest forms of evidence.
Q is still alive. He is the LORD Jesus Christ, and His Word is still very alive.
[A]ctually{...}, like I said—{...}—Papias gives us the names of the gospels, and what he said is confirmed by modern scholars, that Matthew was indeed written in Aramaic first, which is what Papias said. So, he also gave us the name of Mark. And Luke is pretty much substantiated, from being the same person who traveled with Paul. He’s the writer of Acts, and used first person when describing his exploits with Paul.
John, we know is witness, because Papias dictated it from his mouth. As we have fragments of Papias saying such.
So, their argument is pretty flimsy, according to actual evidence. Modern Academics, again, are using the Documentary hypothesis and High Criticism, which isn’t substantiated on a single shred of hard evidence. It’s all textual criticism.
So, the gospels were compiled on the testimony of witnesses. They were written either on the word of Eyewitnesses, or compiled on the account of witnesses. Which, is what Papias says, and the fragment we have is self evident in the research.
Tacitus writes about him. Josephus does. Two first century Historians. There’s copious reasons to believe He really lived. None the least, the Gospels themselves.
{...}[My argument is], “The religion exploded in growth only forty years after Jesus, meaning there had to be witnesses to the resurrection; Tacitus and Josephus both record Jesus as a living man; the Gospels are eyewitness accounts based on what we have extant in Fragments of Papias; so is the Old Testament, due to artefacts we unearth that corroborate specific details to the very exact point; Abrahamic faiths were plagiarized by the Hittites, as the Akkadian empire had a word called “El” which meant “Lord”, and Abraham is said to come from Mesopotamia, meaning there’s a continual transference of stories from a purely monotheistic faith, where Abraham took those ancient stories, and handed them down, as did a separate source (The Yahwehist) exist in Egypt, when the Abiru People migrated from Mesopotamia into Egypt, and were enslaved for hundreds of years. And that those dual sources are confirmed to be separate witness accounts of the events, which corroborate even more with the evidence, such as the Battle of Sidom, which describes a war between the Amorites and the Elamites, which the Bible gets completely right, which shows a continual transference of data from that time.

{...}Abrahamic religions didn’t come from Baal-el. They came from an organic origin from a people called the Abiru people, who migrated from Mesopotamia, into Egypt, and worshiped El-Yahweh. Which “El” meant “Lord” in the time of Ur.
So, it’s very well documented who the Jews were. Not to mention, we have El and Yahweh on an artefact from about 1250bc, and evidence of the religion being practiced in Egypt.
Generally, what happened, was Moses wrote Genesis, based on two extant manuscripts at the time, and we know Moses wrote the Torah, due to it having similar structure to Egyptian Law back in the 1300s. Like, it mirrors the contracts Egyptians made, especially one we have extant with the Hittite empire.
As far as Noah coming from The Epic of Gilgamesh, that’s highly unlikely too, considering we have traces of Genesis in Chinese writing, not to mention the first couple verses in Genesis still preserved in Chinese literature. Dated to about 2300BC.
The Bible is indisputably true.
I mean, this is an important concept to understand, that The LORD is not Baal, and that’s why the Bible censured worship or identifying God will Baal. You’d be right that the peoples of Canaan practiced the Canaanite religion for some time, but the Bible’s clear about that, as well.
And it’s known that the “Sea Peoples” conquered the Hittite empire, which is probably a moniker of them crossing Neiweba beach, that they were a people that came by the way of the Sea, from Sinai.

{...}The Patriarchs were a pretty isolated group. I’m sure you don’t actually mean 4500BC. We have almost no records from those time periods, and the records we do have, are from the global civilization. Basically the one that made Cave Paintings and still lived with the dinosaurs. That would make sense, though, considering Job was about that old.
Generally, though, there’s Baal-El and Sin, and Yahweh, Christ and El. El just means “Lord”, and the records I have are from the Akkadian dynasty. That’d be interesting if people knew God pre Noah. As the flood happened in 2400BC. That we know for certain. So any civilization that worshiped El-Yahweh before then, any evidence of it, would be significant, as it shows an even older trace of the Hebrew religion, and that the Patriarchs had influenced peoples even earlier than that.
Yeah, because the first dynasty of Ur is the neolithic civilization, and the same pantheon. 2450bc the flood happened, and you can actually trace the collapse. Like there’s no second dynasty of Ur. It shows where the flood gaps the two dispensations.

And I’m not being sarcastic. “15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. 16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. 17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.”
25 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.
How did the Earth divide? We have evidence of that, and called it Pangaea How does the Bible know that? And Behemoth, is obviously a giant creature that eats grass, and moves like a reptile, and has a cedar like tail—a cedar is huge.
I didn’t believe it either. But the evidence is too strong, in favor of the Bible being true. I don’t know how these things are in there. It even appears in the original Hebrew. There’s no way around it. And then you look at the civilizations prior to the flood, they all had the same Pantheon, and worshiped it not only in Asia, Africa and Europe, but both Americas too.

No, Baal is a bull; that’s Sin. That’s interesting Moses would destroy the golden calf, as He obviously was trying to destroy the remnants of the Pagan Belief structure. Obviously, the book of Genesis comprises the history of the Patriarchs, as given by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, which is not Sin.
Basically, Modern Academics are telling it from the perspective of Sin. The tradition I come from wasn’t Sin, but Jehovah-Jireh. So, that’s generally what Modern Academics are missing.
Modern Academics' perspective are wrong. You’ve turned the LORD into Sin, and worshiped Baal as their God. Baal is not the true God of the Bible, and is even explicitly warned not to be worshiped
El—the Akkadian word for “Lord”,—came from Mesopotamia, and was Abraham’s God, and later would be called “Jehovah” or “Yahweh” by the Jews who were in Egypt, and was called so by Abraham. Those being the Abiru people, who worshiped a different Deity than Sin. And that tradition was what Moses used. Because Jehovah-Jireh, LORD Jesus Christ is not Sin or Baal-El. And we’re forbidden from worshiping it, as that’s not the tradition of my ancestors. Baal-El is not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but is a foreign God.
That’s what the evidence shows.
Modern Academics are conflating The LORD with Baal-El. Which I find kind of strange, actually. Because obviously Righteousness was taught long before Sin. I actually have an older, and more established religion than what Modern Academics are describing. It’s shown in Mesopotamian Law, and is why there’s similar stories to the Bible in Akkadian and Sumerian legend. Because the Patriarchs taught that, and those cultures plagiarized them. That’s also why we see the religion echoed in Chinese literature and writing.
Sin might be their god, but he’s not mine.

{...} Baal-El is Sin. There’s no getting around that. There’s really only ever been two religions. The religion of Sin, Baal-El and Ashra, and the religion of El-Yahweh Jehovah-Jireh Christ. So, Modern Academics are working from the Pantheon of Sin. Not the religion of the Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Modern Academics are right, the Torah was written during the Bronze Age Collapse. Because Moses and the Jews—the Sea Peoples—were conquering the lands. {...}We know the Kingdom of Israel was established around 1250BC, because we have reference to it in the Merneptah Stele and also the Altar at Mount Ebal, where it uses the name of El Yahweh.
Modern Academics are talking about the Mystery Cults. That’s not the origins of the Bible at all. That’s their explanation, but the simpler explanation is that a Patriarchal line, starting with Adam, and going to Noah, and then to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and recorded by Moses, and then continued throughout the time of the Jewish Kingdom, and then finally finished with the Apostolic ministry of the Saints, that’s more likely.
Like, you do know we have archaeological evidence for everything I’m saying, and I can veritably tell you Modern Academics are wrong about everything. Their dates are off, their entire argument is unfounded. The actual evidence shows the Abrahamic Religion being practiced as far back as 2400BC, and also remnants of that information being faithfully transferred. Due to information in the Bible that it gets right about the time period, like the Elamites and Amorites being at war during the time of Sodom and Gomorrah. Not to mention, we actually have evidence of a real Sodom and Gomorrah. There’s two cities that seemed to have been nuked, and have Trinitite embedded in the pottery, which only comes from a nuclear explosion. Ergo, the real Sodom and Gomorrah, and it’s in the place where Sodom and Gomorrah were. And there’s more than that, actually.
Like I said, Modern Academics are equivocating the God of the Bible with the Pantheon of Sin. And the Bible explicitly says not to do that. And I have strong reason to believe, that’s not the Pantheon that was worshiped by my ancestors. At all.

{...}The Kadesh Peace Agreement was in 1250BC, right when the Israelites were about to invade. And we have evidence of the Israelites invading. The Sea Peoples Conquered Canaan.
{...}Why does the Bible place [Abraham] right at the Amorite and Elamite war of the Isin Larsa period of Uruk? See, Modern Academics are breaking down. None of the things they're saying are accurate, or supported by the evidence. They're just wrong.
{...}Because Moses wrote the Torah in the same linguistic structure as the Peace Treaty of Kadesh. Meaning, the Bible had to be written by someone of Egyptian Royalty, of the Eighteenth Egyptian Dynasty. Not to mention, the Ark of the Covenant is patterned off of the same arks from that era. They're just wrong.
{...}El Yahweh is the God of Abraham, and he transplanted that word from Mesopotamia into Egypt, and then into Canaan. There’s no getting around that. That’s also direct evidence of a Mesopotamian origin for the Bible, along with the Elamite and Amorite war, showing Abraham lived at that time.
{...}The “Sea Peoples” [also] weren’t [just] “allowed” to conquer the Hittite Empire. They just did. And Pharaoh was so mad about the Israelites doing so, he raised the Merneptah Stele, saying he destroyed the last seed of Israel, which is likely why we don’t have records of them, and gaps in the records of Amenhotep III’s reign.
{...}But, it is nice to know God helped the Israelites. That is what God said He would do, and the added theater of volcanic eruptions and tsunamis is epic. Though, the Sea Peoples did conquer the Hittite Empire. And why are they called “The Sea Peoples”? Because they crossed the Red Sea. Pretty simple.

The Merneptah Stele obviously does say Israel. It was properly translated. The Merneptah Stele does say Israel. I know Archaeologists who’ve done videos of the thing, and translated it right there.
[The Merneptah Stele] literally phonetically says “Israel”. That’s the phonetic sounds the Hieroglyphs make. Later interpolations are probably reddit users trying to hide the obvious{...}.
Nowhere does any source give this explanation. I’ve looked at a dozen on the Internet, from varying degrees of traditions, and not one of them agrees with [the notion that Israel was translated wrong on the Merneptah Stele].
{...}They’ve even found earlier references to Israel than that. They're just making stuff up. Completely making stuff up. They can’t even defend themselves, but have to resort to lying.
Yet, it phonetically says “Israel”. Nothing I’ve read suggests that. If you can read hieroglyphs then I’d assume you’re also a liar. Maybe it’s dead to you. But I know people who read Hieroglyphs too, and they read it the right way.
Maybe Egyptians called Israel “Wanderers” and “Foreign” which makes a link to the Temple at Soleb, too. Only strengthening my case.
{...}
Like I just want Scholars to stop lying to us, and to themselves. They've been wrong on a number of things, this being the most obvious. Nobody says the Merneptah Stele was translated wrong. I looked at a dozen sources, even ones I was worried were going to confirm what they said, and on the ones I thought would agree with them, even say there’s earlier references to Israel than that. They're just wrong.
Like I’m sorry dude[s] for being so harsh, but scholars are just wrong. I could number about 15 errors in the common narrative at academia, and their dissertations here, and I’ve thoroughly gone over them with you. Now they're just going to go back on the God is “Baal” thing, which I’ve refuted twice. So, we’ve gotten to the point where we’re just rehashing the same arguments. And that’s not productive.
Those stories, [also] borrowed from the Bible. I look at the proof right in front of my face, and I see a Mesopotamian word being taken from Mesopotamia, and implanted in Egypt, and then taken to Canaan. Which, could only be proof of the Jews, and their migration.
{...}But, I’ve seen enough in my life to believe it. Maybe you need to grow up? Humans do need stories to function, and they do crave something bigger. Why wouldn’t at least one of them be true?
Anyways, this was a fruitful conversation. I learned a lot from you, especially on the nuances of Egyptian. Which, you’re likely not going to like that, but it’s still pretty neat how Egyptians layer meaning with symbols and phonetics.
The Merneptah Stele does say Israel. That’s the word.
I think the evidence I provided you is enough.
And I do indeed believe Abraham lived to be 175. And when Jesus said this Generation would not pass away, that means some of His disciples are still alive.
Academics have helped me learn a lot though, and I hope them well. But, they've just got to wake up and smell the coffee. It’s real.
You’ve been warned.

With regard to the enlightenment, the principle in Christianity which got it going was John 1:1. In the Christian walk{...} moral and rational truth is self evident. It’s even in the Bible, that God assumes His law is self evident, and that’s what holds people accountable to it, and why He’s justified in judging the entire world. Why God exists—why Elohim exists—is to bring judgment to people, because this life is not always fair. In fact, it can be very unfair. It’s not guaranteed that being a good person will get you anywhere, in fact quite the opposite, it can be a hindrance in many ways. So, as you know, “Elohim” means “Judge” or “Lord”, and the point of God isn’t to established right and wrong—though in the framework of the Declaration of Independence, we are endowed with “Unalienable rights” by our Creator, but with regards to that, I think Christianity assumed moral realism, until philosophers like Nietzsche came along, he tried to make moral frameworks only valid if there were God. Which, you’re right, the Enlightenment found ethics to be self evident, and I’d think Friedrich Nietzsche was the one who basically undermined that whole thing. Him and Kant. And then later even Heidegger. And then C S. Lewis built an entire field of apologetics around how God makes a thing right. But God exists to establish judgment, in the hereafter, because obviously people come on hard times for no reason, and not everyone who’s good will have a good life. So there needs to be something after.
As far as Jesus is concerned, I’ve read the Hebrew and Greek—I’ve spent probably 20 years studying this—it’s actually that Jewish Scribes changed the Bible after the fact, to erase the Messiah from it. You read older manuscripts, that are older than the Masoretic or Leningrad codexes, it’s actually the phrasings that establish Christianity, are older than the new texts. I could give an example, such as Psalm 22, where a Jewish Scribe put a tiddle in the one word, to make it say “Lion’s Tooth” when in fact, the original word is “Transfixed” or “Pierced”; and we know this from the Dead Sea Scrolls, which preserve all the Messianic Prophecies in their original wording, ironically,—at least the ones that are disputed—and we see the wordings that plainly reveal the Messiah are the more accurate. Also the KJV was written through older manuscripts that aren’t extant anymore, and probably has the original wording of the Hebrew even better than the Hebrew Texts we have today, from 1000AD.
I mean… but certainly, Isaiah 53 can only mean Jesus. Psalm 22 literally talks about someone being pierced. Many Academics find the prophecies so strong, they believe the New Testament was written after the fact, but that’s wrong because Jesus actually lived. We know this, and we know who wrote the Gospels—I know you’re going to dispute that, but it’s invariably true, through the record of Papias, which gets corroborated by modern textual criticism—and it’s almost certain that they’re eyewitness accounts. There’s people who study law, and witness testimony, and they credibly say that the Gospels are witness.
Not to mention, you get to the indisputable fact that Jesus had to raise from the dead, otherwise the religion couldn’t have ballooned out of control in 30 years. You have Christ dying in 31AD, and Rome being burned in 60AD, and being blamed by Nero on the Christians. Why? Because there were people alive who saw Him bodily raised after the fact. His own brother, was beheaded on the principle that Christ raised from the dead. Now you don’t get much more intimate with a person, than your own brother, and James died believing that Jesus raised from the dead. So did Papias die on the testimony that the man he copied down the Book of John from, was John the Apostle. And I’m sure of it. And that establishes that the book of John is indeed an eyewitness report.
So, you put that in there, and then see the messianic prophecies were fulfilled, you can’t come away from that without being at least a little mystified, that Jesus lived an actual life, and fulfilled those prophecies so perfectly, that people, scholars, today think the New Testament was reversed, and that it was written based on the old. Old. And Jesus actually lived that life, making it too obvious for me. I mean, the credibility of the New Testament is established on dozens of witnesses, recorded in the Four Gospels and Acts, and also Paul’s writings, and it’s just too much evidence to throw out. I’m firmly established that Christ is the Messiah.

Parable of the Grain
Unless those who are pure, sons of God die,
They cannot then grow again, into a new creature.

{...}[I}t’s invariably true [Jesus] couldn’t be a legendary figure. For one thing, the Gospels talk about two medical conditions, which Jesus suffered before and during the crucifixion.
The first is hematohidrosis, which was when Jesus sweat blood before He was crucified.
The second is the water that flowed from His wound when the Centurion pierced Him. That’s from a Pre-Cardiac Arrest.
Then you look at how fast the Gospel spread after His crucifixion. In 31AD is when Jesus definitively died, and in 64AD, only 33 years later, there were enough Christians in Rome that Nero blamed us on setting the city on fire. There were also enough for him to do all sorts of torturous things to… so there had to be Christians in the numbers of Hundreds of Thousands if not Millions throughout the Roman Territories during Nero.
And why you might ask? Because people who knew Him, like His brother, died on the testimony that they saw Him raise from the dead. That they touched, ate, and drank with Him. And enough people saw this, that it caused people to believe it.
Then you have the credibility of the Gospels as witness. We have Papias who tells us who wrote Mark and Matthew, and then he says he dictated the Book of John from St. John Himself in one of his fragments. And Papias was martyred believing that St. John was the man who he helped write The Gospel of John. If he had any reason to doubt, he wouldn’t have allowed himself to be killed.
So… invariably, Jesus was real, and the Gospels are witness testimony of Him.

Do you realize that all reason, at its core, is circular? Because it at some point has to be established on the credibility of itself? {...} I mean... just the fact that every continent on Earth has some culture somewhere that has a Noah's Ark like story, is enough for me to believe. You take that, and then look at the Genealogies in Genesis, and see they line directly with the 24th century, and see there's an anomaly in the Mid 24th Century that seems to be exactly dated at the flood, and then you take Chinese writings literally reflecting Biblical stories, and not to mention some direct passages from Genesis found in ancient Chinese Literature from around 2400Bc, it's hard to not come away with a very strong inductive argument for the Flood and Genesis. And then you add the mountains of other evidence, it's no longer inductive, but "Why the high heaven's doesn't anybody know this?" 

Because based on evidence, satisfied on its own credibility, the Bible's 100% true. It's not confirmation bias, it's the only way those facts can be pieced together, and make sense. 
Plus, the sources from Genesis would have to date to about 2400BC, and even 2000BC for some of the information they get. Such as the Isin-Larsa Period's war between the Elamites and Amorites. The Bible actually gets that right, and even gets the politics of it right. And it talks about Abraham and Sodom and Gomorrah--which we actually have excavated two cities around the Mesopotamian Basin that have seemed to been nuked, and have trinitite residue in the residual pottery.

[I]f you’re going to claim there was no Moses, then you’re going to have to explain why the Torah is written in the pattern of that like something Egyptian Royalty would write in the 18th Egyptian Dynasty. You’re going to have to explain why the Ark of the Covenant and the Tabernacle is patterned off of similar Arks and Tabernacles of the 18th Egyptian Dynasty. You’re also going to have to explain why 3 expeditions found an entire army, with Chariots off of Newiebu Beach, dated to the 18th Egyptian Dynasty. There’s a lot you’re going to have to account for, to claim Moses and the Exodus never happened.
As far as the Gospels, we do know who wrote them. As you’re going to have to also, explain why Papias wrote down who wrote the Gospel of Matthew and Mark, and why linguistic studies validate his claim. Such as Mark being written through memory on the account of Peter, and Matthew being written in Hebrew—as there’s a lot of puns made in the Book of Matthew that show it was written by an original Hebrew Source. How would Papias know that, unless it were true? And the Book of John was dictated by John to Papias, as we have surviving fragments of Papias saying that is who John the Elder was, and that John the Elder dictated the Gospel of John to Papias. You’re also going to have to explain why Luke accompanied Paul, and saying Paul didn’t actually know these people, is a bit of a stretch. You’re using an imaginative conspiracy theory, that doesn’t hold any evidential water. The fact is Paul was historical, did know early members of the Church—Josephus writes on the LORD’s Brother who died by stoning, and Paul actually met him, and was given the creed “He is God, Who died, and raised.”
Which gets to the next thing. In 31AD Christ is crucified. In 60AD there’s enough Christians in the Roman Empire for Nero to persecute, and blame Rome’s conflagration on. In 90AD there’s copious amount of writings from the Church Fathers, such members as Barnabas, or Clement who actually met Jesus as a child—purportedly—or the Didache which is the teachings of the Apostles, and this is in 90AD. So, in order for that to have happened, there would have to be real witnesses to Christ’s resurrection, and granted, people actually died, holding to the testimony that Jesus raised from the dead, and His disciples died believing they supped with him, ate and broke bread, and touched Him.
Now… that is all evidence. 1. The Gospel accounts are witness, as we have surviving authorities telling us who wrote them.
2. The evidence clearly shows an Egyptian Royal had written the Old Testament, and that there’s physical evidence of the Exodus, and circumstantial based on the Ark design and Tabernacle.

3. The gospel burst onto the scene, and many people believed it, and people actually were willing to be martyred on that belief, and historians actually recorded Christ being crucified, which would be Tacitus. Which shows, that Christ did raise from the dead, people He knew were willing to die on that testimony, and
4. The religious writings of Paul and the Gospels were heavily circulating by 90AD, enough for subsidiary epistles to be written and quote from them copiously, showing they do indeed have early authorship.

[...]Jews did believe in the Son of God. That is true. But that's because of Psalm 2 and Proverbs 30. They were all waiting for the Messiah, the root of Jesse and seed of David whom Rabbis knew to be God's son. But the prophecies say He destroys the Nations with a Rod of Iron. They just didn't know He would suffer on a Cross, despite it being prophesied in Isaiah 53 and Psalms 22. And also ancient Hebrew shows the Aleph (Ox) was to be slain on the Tav (Covenant, Cross). That's what my thumbnail represents. You can actually see that written in the stars, in Summer, there's a Triangle which represents the Trinity, and on the one side of it, is the Summer Cross, which the Triangle and cross make the same symbol on my thumbnail.

[...]Translated from a Jewish Tanakh. They haven’t had time to find this one, and change the words. [Of Proverbs 30:4]
Who has ascended heaven and come down?
Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hand?
Who has wrapped the waters in his garment?
Who has established all the extremities of the earth?
What is his name or his son’s name, if you know it?
“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn.”
That word “Pierced” is the word “דקרו” which is Strong’s Number H1856 which means stabbed. Zechariah 12:10
Another one is the Septuagint, which translates Isaiah 7:14 as Virgin. Which, is probably closer to the original meaning, as unbelievers have been hard at work to hide Messianic Prophecies from the public. [Which is word G3933 παρθένος And mind you the Septuagint was an approved translation for Greek Speaking Jews in Christ's day.]
Psalm 22:16 also says “Like a Lion’s Tooth” but it should say “Pierced” because that’s what we found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, until it was defaced here recently. It’s the difference between an aleph mark, really.
And in Zechariah 6:11-12 it literally names Jesus. In 6:11 and 12. It says that “Joshua” which is another way of saying “Jesus” is the “Sprout” or “Bud.” Which speaks that He is the Sprout of David. Jeremiah 23:5.




All the Dead Sea Scrolls were written before the New Testament. At least the fragments of the Bible, and the Dead Sea Scrolls weren’t stories, but like the Essene’s Talmud. The Great Isaiah Scrolls was about 100 years prior to the New Testament. There’s evidence for the Census. Rome was a highly sophisticated state, that kept tax records death and birth certificates and everything like that. Jesus was counted in the census.
[...]
Actually, Quirinius being governor makes perfect sense. Jesus was crucified in 31AD so around 6AD He would have been born. And Luke just states He’s the governor of Syria. The census was actually taken by someone else. And from what I heard, the Census places Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem. Which it seems Josephus records in Antiquity of the Jews that census, which is probably why Luke cited it.
Or maybe the Census we do have says Nazareth, I can’t remember, but the fact is Joseph and Mary were down in Bethlehem, as that’s who Matthew and Luke got their information from was Christ’s family like His brother and Mary. So, chances are the Census is in Nazareth, as the census being conducted right when Jesus was born, are slim. But you never know? I forget what I heard exactly.
[T]he Dead Sea Scrolls had nothing to do with the New Testament. They were all fragments of the Old Testament, and corpuses of Essene Talmudic Law. Your scholarship is very poor. And what’s actually important about them, is that the Bible Fragments and the Great Isaiah Scrolls predate and are early, and keep the original wordings of the Old Testament that prophesies Jesus.
[...]
[...]There could have been a time lapse between the two. Meaning Jesus was born about 4BC and the Census was taken in 6AD; interesting. That actually makes perfect sense.
And the Gospels are eyewitnesses, and based on their testimony. We actually know who wrote them.
And arguments from absence aren’t valid. About two dozen times, someone like you said a thing wasn’t, and it turned out it was. Just based on the evidence we have, the Gospels are recorded on sound evidence, at least the evidence we have.
And I didn’t hear about the census from Luke, but from a College Professor who actually saw the documents firsthand. The Vatican has those documents.
Interesting, maybe the Census says “Nazareth” because that’s their actual residence. Like when I go to Harrisburg to fill out paperwork, I don’t say “Harrisburg” but my actual home. He may actually have gone to Bethlehem to fill out the paperwork, that’s not out of the realm of possibility. But the fact is, there is a census, and I know someone who saw it. Though, I can’t remember if it said “Bethlehem” or “Nazareth” but it wouldn’t matter much in either regard.
And of course you’re trying to reconcile why Christ was born in Bethlehem, I mean, it’s a mystery. But the Census does exist. I mean, there is some contradiction in the historical record, but I guess you just have to have faith—given all the other overwhelming evidence—that it happened. I don’t think we’re going to have an answer for that.
Certainly though, we know two things. 1: There was a census, and 2: Jesus existed and fulfilled Biblical Prophecies. So, you know, I think I know what happened, but that doesn’t matter a lot in the grand scheme of things. I don’t think God wants pedants, He wants people who have faith.
Like, Luke records the Nativity story because he heard it from Mary and James. Which Paul knew Mary and James. So, that’s sound; we’d think Mary would know where Jesus was born, and my best recollection is she went down to Bethlehem twice, once for the Census and once for Jesus' Birth (Because Joseph was of the House of David, and it may be he knew his Royal Lineage) but remembered the two as if they were one event, as is consistent with human memory. And also the Census recorded in the Vatican is conducted by someone else, so Luke may have actually gotten the wrong name from Josephus. Which is fine. It’s not an important enough detail to change the facts.
[B]ecause Jesus actually existed and the Gospels are eyewitness accounts. As I proved.
:”because he belonged to the house and line of David.” : this is what you’re missing. I made a very nuanced point. I’ll read what you said, but you talked over my point, and didn’t address them.
No, I said that the Nativity story was based on Mary’s memory, and that she put the two events together of the Census and Christ’s birth, as is something human memory does. Proving it is indeed an Eyewitness[:] Mary.
I mean, everything you said is a factually untrue statement. But I know telling you why, it’s just going to be denied. So… let’s face it, I read what you said. I still believe, because there’s a lot of evidence, both in the Gospels and outside of it, that corroborate and prove Jesus is the Son of God.
Papias in the first century attributed three of the Gospels, and Luke we know accompanied Paul. So, you’re just wrong on all accounts, and believe something that isn’t founded on a shred of credible evidence.
And you even quoted this verse, and made it mean its complete opposite: “just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses”
The meaning of that sentence is that they were handed down by eyewitnesses. Handed down to Who? Luke. And Paul knew many eyewitnesses, and Luke traveled with Him. It’s just in a draw of an older dialect.
As for the “Contradictions” That’s just how witnesses work, and actually the witness reliability of the Scripture is exactly what it should be, if it were based on Credible eyewitnesses.
I mean what’s funny is that the last ditch effort is to say the New Testament was shaped to fit the Old. That’s incredible to me, because it means the Old Testament actually talks about Jesus, in the plainest terms, which I can assure you, was marvelous to Christ’s apostles, too, and why the religion spread like wildfire. You lose on that statement, because I know without a doubt all four Gospels are witness testimony, and because of that, it can only be that Christ is Who He says He is. Sometimes the Jews even changed the scripture to hide that.
[For the truth] [y]our whole argument [that the gospels aren't witness testimony] stands on willfully misinterpreting a Nosism. So, you’re just wrong. I mean, you’re really good at twisting things to make them mean something they don’t. Luke says, that his gospel was handed down to him by eyewitnesses. “Us” is Luke and the audience. Which, is something called a “Nosism” which used to be in common usage in ancient times, people would speak for, or as, a group in the plural sense.
Like the point of what Luke is saying, is that he recorded His gospel based on the accounts of Witnesses to the Gospel. “Us” is Luke and his audience, and the Gospel is the written record of witness account.
I refuted everything, in the most logical and precise fashion I could. Every point I beat you on. You just have better rhetoric. I mean, let’s go down your point.
1. You said the Dead Sea Scrolls were written to shape the New Testament. 
1. I said they had nothing to do with the New Testament, and that the Prophecies of Jesus remained in the older copies of the Bible, and that they proved the Jews altered the scripture. 
2. Then you said that the New Testament was shaped to conform Jesus to it. 
1. I said that’s not possible, because Papias tells us who wrote three gospels, and Luke is easy to attest, because he traveled with Paul. 
2. That the Gospels being eyewitness accounts, prove Jesus did indeed fulfill many Messianic prophecies. 
3. You said that the Gospels aren’t witness testimony and that the census never happened. And you quoted a passage in Luke 
1. I looked at the passage, and saw it use a Nosism that proved Luke was speaking as himself and the audience, and the passage can only be interpreted that Luke was handed down his account by Eyewitnesses. 
2. That the discrepancy in Luke about the census—as I said I had a professor who saw it, and that there was a different name on that particular document than Quirinius and it said Nazareth. 
1. That it probably said Nazareth because when people go to another city they don’t register the city, but their hometown. 
2. And all the Gospel says is that Quirinius was govern of Syria, which you brought forward the Tombstone [which said Quirinius governed twice]: that was probably the very same Quirinius. I didn’t, but I let that go. 
3. That Mary probably went to Bethlehem twice, once to give birth to Jesus because the Prophecy says the Sprout of David would be born there, and because Joseph was of the house of David, that’s why he went. And indeed another time for the census—although they could indeed be the same day, but it’s possible it’s a conflation of two events, as is consistent with human memory [and were just done in different areas, around the same time]. 
And then you said that J. Wallace wasn’t an expert on Eyewitness testimony, which I know also isn’t true, but like everything else you lie hard and with gusto. But, that’s what people want to hear, so you obviously win their hearts. But, so did Nero. I refuted everything, in the most logical and precise fashion I could. Every point I beat you on. You just have better rhetoric.


Actually, in Egyptian records there’s a marked collapse coinciding with everywhere else on Earth. There’s a global civilization and then there isn’t. You see that in the archaeological record. Which lines up perfectly with the 24th Century Anomaly, which lines right up with Biblical Genealogies, if you assume a 100 year gap of overlap with the judges. Naqadan pottery shows this world wide civilization, and the next dynasty has no more remnants of it. It happens in the Americas and Asia too.

{}The First Dynasty of Ur was a part of a global civilization. The Second is mythological, because the Flood happened, and we don’t have much records from that time anywhere—literally, every continent sees a drastic gap in all their civilizations around the 24th century. And the Third is generally the Summer of Akkad, and begins with the empire of Sargon—Nimrod. In fact, the Mesopotamian Basin was the first instance in history of a clash of empires. You had Summer, the Akkadians, the Amorites, the Elamites, and they were all fighting amongst one another. The first battle was the Battle of Sidim, under Sulgi’s 45th year, and that’s recorded in the Bible. As well as the politics of the time period.

[T]he First Dynasty of Ur precedes the Third—we don’t know about the Second, because it seems to be where the Flood gaps civilizations—and the First was part of a Global civilization, that spanned from Asia, into Africa, into Europe and then into the Americas. You can tell that by certain artefacts they find.
It was everywhere. The culture existed on all continents. You have cave paintings in New Mexico using the same red paints found in Egypt and Mesopotamia and cave drawings in Europe—Same subject sometimes, too, Venuses in the Americas, those same red paints used on Naqadan and Sumerian pottery, Venuses in Japan and China. There was a world wide culture at that time, as evidenced by what I’ve seen. You’ll never see an article written about it in a science journal because they hide that stuff. I know how that sounds, but it’s still the truth. And then it all disappears around the 24th century, where we have evidence of a catastrophic world event. Which all over the world, every civilization disappears, and with it that culture. Also Flood myths in China date to that exact time, and so does the Biblical genealogy.

[Tacitus would] go to the Roman records and see Christ was Crucified. He was a historian. That was his work. {...} Probably copies of it in the Tabularium right in Rome, as it is a complex empire, and will have records kept of the whole empire, on every official duty, wherever the central seat of Government is.

[B]oth of those [Josephus and Tacitus] wrote on the account of witnesses. {...}People from the time of Tacitus—when he was young—would have witnessed Christ. And why did Nero persecute Christians? It was because some of His followers saw Christ raised from the dead, and spread the religion like wildfire, and there were enough Christians there for Nero to persecute. Christ’s own brother died believing He was the Christ. That’s accounted in Josephus.

Tacitus hated Christians. There’s no way he believed any of it. But, he recorded Christ’s death, and that’s all that matters.

{...}Josephus did write the passage [pertaining to Christ]. There’s possibly a small Christian interpolation, but the bulk of the passage is original. It may just be all Josephus, too.

Luke actually does say the Gospel was written on Eyewitness accounts, and they don’t have to come out and say that. That’s stupid. We know who authored the Gospels. Papias leaves us a record of it, and it’s all through eyewitness. You assume they’re going to come right out and say “This is eyewitness account.” That’s silly. We know they were, based on the way they’re written, and their consistencies—and inconsistencies—with the other gospels.

No, the Authors didn’t witness all of it. Other people did. There were more than just the Gospel writers who were accounted in the witness testimony. Yes the Gospels are written from an Omniscient point of view, because it’s God’s word, and God is omniscient. Like the lady at the well, they learned it from her. When Jesus sweat blood, someone saw it. As the condition is a real medical condition that absolutely no one would have known about. Same with the water flowing from Christ’s wound, that’s a real medical condition too. It could only be Eyewitness report.

Well, there is a miraculous component to the world. So, Christ dying and raising from the dead, was an ultimate victory. For me at least.

Because Tacitus, though being a butt-head, was a first rate historian, and would not say Christ was crucified unless he had verification of it. Yes, Josephus does [say James the LORD's brother was martyred]. He was martyred. That’s what Josephus says. Why do you get martyred?

{...}

“Josephus didn’t tell us what James believed.” Then what is implied in the fact that James was put to death? Like all [the] arguments are about thus, they give no credit where there ought to be any, and are simply dismissive of something that for all intents and purposes, are probably good historical accounts.

Papias says Mark wrote the Gospel through Peter’s testimony. What Mark could it be?{...}

Literally, I have the fragment sitting on my bookshelf. It can mean nothing, unless it is the Gospel writer of Mark.

[Also] the Gospels were being quoted around 80AD, meaning they were in copious circulation by then. We have quotations from Clement, and Polycarp, and Ignatius straight out of the Synoptic Gospels, not to mention the Didiche[.]{...}

And it’s James the LORD’s brother. You’re the one altering the texts. Not the Christians. By all means, I doubt you 100% if these are the best arguments you can come up with, are conspiracy theories and generally, the passage in Josephus is known to be pretty much 90% accurate, and may actually be his words. He may have had a moment where He believed in Christ. It was possible. People were converting like wildfire, but at the very least, it’s well known most of the passage is original. That’s just well known. And not to be disputed, because it’s in his diction. Not someone else’s.

{...}

Okay, so just let’s frame one of your arguments. “Eyewitnesses are in first person.” Not if the eyewitnesses were not the writer. The writer wrote what he heard from eyewitnesses. In the case of Matthew and John, most of that is compiled through other people who also knew Jesus, like the Woman at the Well or Mary and Joseph. It’s pretty simple, actually, to understand. You’re taking large sweeping jumps to avoid the fact, that the simplest answer is that the New Testament is true, and Jesus lived, and actually fulfilled hundreds of Old Testament prophecies, so the religion is real. That’s the only conclusion you can have. No other.

Maybe Jesus taught them about the Devil and Him. You know, Jesus did teach His disciples? He was called the “Word of God.” He did have a mouth. Who’d think of that? And when His own brother saw Him raised from the dead, James died believing it. As why else do you get martyred unless you believe on Jesus. They usually would keep you alive, if you denied the faith.

In the Garden of Gethsemane, maybe some peasant saw Him? Why is that so hard? He sweat blood, we know that, and nobody would think to make that up. You can’t. I bet you didn’t even know about hematohidrosis yourself, until I told you.

Actually, you’re the one inventing wild eyed conspiracy theories, and trying to reinterpret texts that have been in circulation through countless millennia. You’re the one altering the evidence. I’m simply telling you what I’ve learned. You’ve misrepresented every source I’ve showed you, you’ve re-imagined it, in fact you’re doing what you accuse me of. Exactly what you accuse me of. Who’s really the religious fanatic here? The person who keeps putting words in Josephus’ mouth? The one who doesn’t think Tacitus did his job as a historian, and couldn’t but admit Christ died? The one who can’t figure out that the Gospel writers weren’t the only witnesses used?

It’s all quite plain to me.

“When therefore Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead; and Albinus was but upon the road. So he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus who was called Christ, whose name was James: and some others; [or, some of his companions.] And when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.” Josephus Antiquity of the Jews Book XX.

The Jewish Law [is what's being referred to here]. And for what? For Blasphemy, because he was a Christian. That’s how he broke the law.

{...}[Also,] if it’s not the Mark who wrote our Gospel, why even say it? {...} [I]t’s right there. Right there. Why did James get stoned? Because he was a Christian and the Sanhedrin called it Blasphemy. It’s an enthymeme. Why did Papias say Mark wrote a gospel and so did Matthew, unless it’s the gospels of Matthew and Mark? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever [to say it couldn't have been those gospels and those authors].

Mark’s gospel is out of order. Some of the events are displaced among the narrative. It was constructed by his memory. It’s not like the crucifixion is going to end up in the beginning, and all that stuff. It’s so obvious it’s Mark who wrote that gospel. You take evidence and then say it’s not. When it obviously has to be, and couldn’t be anything but.

[The Gospel of Mark] would reflect Peter’s [memories of Jesus' teachings], [but not] put him in the center of a narrative about Jesus['s life]. Like, why would it? [So, i]t’s based on his memory. And the teachings Peter handed down to Mark.

There’s lots of quotations from as early as 70AD in the writings of Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp, and also Barnabas. I have them on my bookshelf. They were written in the first century, and everyone knows that.

Yes, Papias told us who wrote them, from John the Presbyter, who is John Son of Thunder, as a close reading of the text proves it to be, and Eusibius is just like you, putting into doubt something that really isn’t a question if you read the text carefully.

It can only be Jesus Christ.

[W]hen a Court Recorder puts down what a witness says, it’s still an account from a witness. Just think about what I’m saying. It makes perfect sense. The court recorder isn’t a witness, but the person on the bench is.

So you can’t believe because of miracles? That’s all you got. “There aren’t miracles, so the Gospels can’t be true.” When indeed, there are lots of miracles, and science has known that for a long time. And those contradictions show the gospels aren’t plagiarism, and are indeed written by different accounts from different eyewitnesses. Which is what a professional who works in eyewitness testimony says about it. [J. Warner Wallace]

[T]he simplest  is the Presbyter John knew Mark and Matthew, and told us who wrote their gospels and how.

I really don’t think [Josephus or Tacitus] [were] corrupted. I think that’s your last ditch effort to avoid the obvious fact. No reason to believe that [they're] not authentic. 

{...} They didn’t exactly have book stores back then. Especially ones that sold the gospel, as it would have been illegal. They had libraries, with scrolls, which you had to travel too, and they didn’t have real access to lots of books like we do today. And a peasant with their penury wouldn’t be able to afford a book, so likely Irenaeus and the rest were trying to establish a proper canon to protect the Gospel from Gnosticism, and what they had were ragtag scrolls circulating around at the time period. That’s why John had to write the Book of John, through Papias, as it says in surviving fragments.

Like, we know who wrote the Gospels, because of Papias. It’s the only thing that makes sense. And we know the Sanhedrin stoned James for the same reason, that it talks about him being Christ’s brother, and they’d stone him for blasphemy as it doesn’t have to be said by Josephus as it’s implied in the text. An enthymeme is an important part of logic[.] {...} It just is. It can be the only logical conclusions to have, about those two things. Calculus is an enthymeme.

{...}Macrion or what have you, it wasn’t published at book stores, and likely Irenaeus and the rest of them wanted an established Canon, and found the books written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John—as John was written on the word of mouth by John through Papias—and through John they established the canon of Paul’s letters and the other epistles, and also the Gospel [and Revelation]







[The Bible] prophesies [Alexander's] conquest of Tyre and Egypt. {}[P]rophecies work through the whole of history. {}What happened to Tyre in the Bible is what Alexander did. And the Captivity of Egypt was accomplished by Cambyses II and Titus. Twice, once by Cambyses, when he conquered Egypt, Egypt went captive—that’s a whole episode in history—and then again when Titus sacked Jerusalem, the Jews went into captivity for forty years, as John says the city where Christ was crucified is mystically called “Sodom and Egypt.” And Alexander also took Egypt for no cost, which replenished his campaign against Tyre, so there’s three fulfillments.
Nebuchadnezzar didn’t fail to take Tyre. He conquered it, but through exploit. Not through breaching the walls. He had control of that region, too, but the Bible says he didn’t breech the inner city’s walls. It’s Egypt that he failed to take. And that was completed by Alexander and Cambyses and Titus.
And you know it’s not being rewritten, otherwise it wouldn’t imply Nebuchadnezzar. That stuff is actually in the Bible, and it actually does prophesy that. As well as prophesying Christ. It’s more than likely talking about the demonic principality of Babylon, rather than the literal. Prophecies can be delayed. They don’t always immediately get fulfilled either.
Which Nebuchadnezzar did [break down the city's walls and rampage the streets]. There’s two walls in Tyre. And he also took the city after conquering the outer wall, he managed to put a vassal over Tyre. It’s probably what the Iliad is about, in a round about way.

And who did that? Who took Egypt for nothing? Alexander the Great. Nebuchadnezzar is an archetype. He’s not just confined to one time, but his dominion and rule is an entire principality. It’s poetry. But in that regard, Isaiah did name Cyrus. But Alexander was the agent used by God to fulfill that prophecy. {}
Yes, Alexander did [fulfill prophecy]. The outer city was scraped to the foundations to be used to build the causeway to the inner city.
And it was completely destroyed by the Saracens.

Yes, Egypt did have a captivity. When Cambyses took it, he took many Egyptians back to Babylon. It’s talked about in the life of Pythagoras. Jerusalem also wasn’t completely destroyed, as some were left behind. And like I said, Nebuchadnezzar is a spirit. He may be rising up right this very moment, to fulfill more prophecy.
And when Titus sacked Jerusalem, St. John tells us that Jerusalem is called mystically “Sodom and Egypt” which you glossed over.
It’s just a fact, God’s word is eternal, and about all time and space. Nebuchadnezzar is a Prophetic archetype of the destruction of God’s enemies, and also the captivity of God’s people.
Tyre is [also] not rebuilt. It’s a different place than it once was. The New City is in a completely different location.
{}

I mean, Macedon is north of Lebanon. And that’s how Alexander came through, was from the North, he went down through Tyre, into Egypt, and then into Babylon. Fulfilling many prophecies. He even took Israel for nothing, and was replenished by them, too. Fulfilling more nuances.
It was more than 6,000 [captives in Egypt]. Pythagoras was taken captive among those numbers, that’s a modern interpolation.
No, but Jerusalem [was destroyed down to the animal, and taken into captivity] when Titus sacked it. There wasn’t a Jew around for a long time. I think the land is still desolate to this day, isn’t it? Like the Bible prophesied it would be? That’s happened many times in history to Jerusalem.
As I keep repeating, John said Jerusalem is called “Sodom and Egypt.”
Not to mention, there should be something like Tyre existing today, due to Isaiah’s prophecy. So, there also should be a modern Tyre, too. It’s just the old city that was destroyed.
17 And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years, that the Lord will visit Tyre, and she shall turn to her hire, and shall commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.
18 And her merchandise and her hire shall be holiness to the Lord: it shall not be treasured nor laid up; for her merchandise shall be for them that dwell before the Lord, to eat sufficiently, and for durable clothing.

This is talking about the end days. It’s talking about the Economy in the Millennium.
Obviously, the destruction of Tyre is talking about the Phoenicians won’t be rebuilt, and their destruction, which Rome completed when they destroyed Carthage. Which Rome is another prophetic type of Babylon. At least in Biblical Prophecy. So are the Caliphates.
Which, coincidentally, there’s absolutely no remnant of Carthage left. I just thought of that, actually. Not even a fragment of understanding about its culture or anything, beside the fact that it worshiped the Canaanite deities, and was a Phoenician Settlement.
Tyre did have two walls. There was an old city, and a new city. And the island Tyre used to belong to, is under the sea, now. I think you’re hearing what you want to hear. Also Pharaoh Hophra was taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar, That was the fulfillment of the prophecy. Not Amasis. You’re right, Nebuchadnezzar was fended off, but like I said, Alexander took it, fulfilling that prophecy, and so did Cambyses, and Titus took Jerusalem.
Cambyses took Egypt. Which it was much greater number than 6,000 people taken captive, because Pythagoras was taken captive, too.
But, that prophecy is about Jerusalem, and its reliance on the United States for its defense, and also its reliance on Egypt for its defense during the time of Nebuchadnezzar, which Nebuchadnezzar did take Hophra captive, and Egypt wasn’t able to help Israel survive.

Hophra was taken into captivity by Babylon, and that their army was destroyed. That’s what [it] meant. And later, [it] talks about how Cambyses would take Egypt, and also Alexander the Great.
Meaning the Battle of Carcamesh. Babylon destroyed Egypt as a world power, by Nebuchadnezzar II, and took control over the entire region.
[Tyre] was, though. several times. And the Bible clearly says there will be a Tyre in the Millennium. Even Alexander raised the entire city to the ground, due to Frustration. He may have rebuilt some of it, but it was no longer a Phoenician state, and it would later be completely destroyed by the Saracens.
Tyre shouldn’t be destroyed. Because in Isaiah it says it will be a state during the Millennium. But the Old City of Tyre is not there. And there is an Old City of Tyre, that was never rebuilt, that is given exact measurement by ancient sources. I’m not going to show you that, but I’ve seen it.
The Prophecy of Egypt is prophesying Israel’s destruction under Titus, where the Jews did go into captivity, and Jerusalem was a heap for some time.
The Battle of Carchemish was the point where Egypt lost hegemony over the world, and became a base kingdom, and I don’t know how you’re pulling that date for Ezekiel, when Ezekiel was taken captive some time before Jerusalem was completely sieged. Otherwise he wouldn’t be prophesying it.


Ezekiel wasn’t taken captive during the Siege of Jerusalem, but about a decade before that. The Captivity begins under Jehoiakim, so your date for Ezekiel’s prophecy is wrong, probably by about 20 years. So, Ezekiel did prophecy that, as it would make sense, considering Egypt was being prophesied by false prophets, to save Jerusalem from the siege.
Alexander is the fulfillment of [the] prophecy, when he replenished his armies through Egypt. So is the Battle of Carchemish which made Egypt a base nation. So is Titus sacking Jerusalem—Revelation says that Jerusalem is Spiritually called “Egypt”—is the forty year captivity. The Old City of Tyre was not rebuilt. It was a little bit south of it, and was a huge city, which Alexander scraped to its foundations, and none of that is there anymore. In fact Alexander destroyed the city utterly. He may have rebuilt it, but it wasn’t the original Phoenician city of Tyre… which like I said, A City of Tyre should exist today, because it’s prophesied that it will be a state in the Millennial Kingdom. The Old City is actually a large field right now, or a series of fields. And the city of Tyre was a Phoenician State, and it was never rebuilt. It’s also talking about Rome taking out the Phoenicians in Carthage, which the Phoenicians were never an empire ever again, after they were destroyed by Rome--which is another type of Babylon.
Like I said, Nebuchadnezzar is a spirit. So is the Prince and King of Tyre. It’s not linear or immediate. It accomplishes itself throughout time and space, and is a pattern by which history follows. Which I said about six times.


 {}I think Christians give the best scholarship on that, because we’re the only ones who know how to tell the truth. Because it makes more sense that someone motivated to find the answers, will find them. It’s like a proof in Geometry, 99% of us aren’t intelligent enough to find it. So, we have to see it for what it is, and construct the proof around already existing logic. I also have a mind, I can put together things, no matter who its from.
And the four gospels are witness accounts, so they 100% are the evidence. It proves 2 things.
1. Jesus fulfilled Messianic Prophecies, which some mathematicians say that the probability of fulfilling even 8 is 10^17 power. Jesus fulfilled 300. 
2. The gospels being witness prove Christ’s teachings are truly infallible, as no greater ethic was ever uttered by a single human being. 
Like a great example of this—you’re a Mason I suppose, talking like that, you like geometry—is I was trying to figure out why 1/2*1/2*1/2 equals 1/8. So I was looking at a cube, and it was completely different than what I thought it should be. So, having the example there—the logic already for me—I could figure it out through that.
These concepts are too advanced for us to find on our own, even some of the simpler things, and we need to have faith in it, and that faith brings us to the right answers. As the Bible and Christ is a lot more intelligent than I or you, and having the logic already framed, we find the answers to it, as if the Bible’s the word of God, you’d expect the evidence to be there.

You can’t, for instance, create the first principles of Geometry yourself. You have to have faith in Euclid’s ability to understand those things. Or Pythagoras’. You can build the logic, by already having the answer. That’s hard, but not impossible. It’s no different with the Bible. 
I’ve looked at all the counter arguments, looked at all the popular theories. It seems like God’s in-between the lines of them. Christianity has actual substance to it. Not only in its historicity, but in the man Jesus Himself. Which the Gospels are historical accounts, we know that by Papias telling us who wrote them. Which, the source for that is John the Apostle, which the only logical conclusion is that Mark and Matthew are the books so called. As why else would he use those names? And we know how they were written, which testifies that they were written through Eyewitnesses. Luke even says he compiled his gospel from Eyewitnesses.
So, we know who wrote all four Gospels, we know how they wrote them, we know why they wrote them. We know it is the historical Jesus. And because it is, it shows Jesus did fulfill prophecy.

The gospels are the witness of Jesus. And I guess on that foundation, you have to rest your faith that they weren’t lying. As I feel Christ’s moral law is indisputable and indispensable in this world, and nothing better is going to replace it. And I think Christ has a provenance in history, being described by Tacitus and Josephus—like you said—and then the Gospels themselves being handed down through many eyewitnesses. It’s 100% that the Gospels are witness, and Jesus did fulfill those messianic prophecies. So He is the LORD.
And Tacitus would know Christ lived and died through going to the Tabularium in Rome, where He’d find his crucifixion record—that’s what he would have done—and Josephus was a great historian in his own right. Which James the LORD’s brother died by stoning, at the hands of the Sanhedrin for “Disobeying the Law” which that disobeying the Law would be “Blasphemy” because he believed his brother was the Christ. So Christ’s own brother died believing He was the Christ, and that He raised from the dead.
[So,] Jesus is a real historical figure, the Gospels are real accounts by eye witnesses, Jesus really fulfilled over 300 messianic prophecies. Rome actually crucified Him. Tacitus actually found His death warrant. Josephus actually recorded He lived. The Apostolic Fathers actually saw eyewitnesses of the resurrection. James the LORD’s brother actually died believing He is the Christ. Nero actually persecuted Christians and blamed us for setting Rome on fire.

The God of the Bible was worshiped from Neolithic times, and a historical document of the Patriarchs was established, and kept through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and this document was of the God El--a Mesopotamian word for Lord--that migrated up into Egypt where you see the worship of Yahweh, which then gets transplanted to Canaan by Moses. So, the God of the Bible is not "Baal" but El Yahweh Elyon. As the God of the Patriarchs was always one preoccupied with righteousness, and opposed to sin. You see that from the days of Hammurabi, which were inspired by Laws codified probably by Abraham, and also why we find concurrent myths in the ANE that are similar to the Bible's, is that Abraham was a Mesopotamian Lord. As "El" is an Akkadian word that means "Lord".
{}El has a {connection} with Mesopotamia, [so because of that] it proves a Mesopotamian Link with the scripture, which is why we see El Yahweh Elyon come from Mesopotamia, into Egypt, and then{} those two traditions were merged by Moses, being the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob respectively. The flood happened at the break between the first and third dynasties of Ur. As, you see there's no Second, and all historical civilizations have a gap at that period. Sargon is Nimrod. So, that's about 200 years before Abraham.
{}[So,] there's a Mesopotamian link to the Bible, through El, and that Moses merged the El and Yahweh traditions together around 1300BC. Being respectively the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But, the flood happened in the 24th century BC, where we see there's a gap between the First and Third dynasties of Ur. Which, that Second Dynasty is when the populations are recovering after the flood. And we see a similar gap all over the world, and the universal Neolithic Culture disappears. And Sargon is Nimrod, so that's about 200 years before Abraham. Abraham lived under Sulgi, and the battle of Sidim is actually recorded by Sulgi's historians.
Also, under Biblical Poetry, the Chaldeans, Akkadians and Amorites are all Babylon. Or, there could have been Chaldeans there, we just don't know about it, as for most of history, we thought the Hittites were just made up. But, it turns out they weren't. It's more likely the Bible's right, and Babylon was part of the Mesopotamian Basin.

Egyptian mythology seems strange to me. But, it gives historical artefacts and context to the Biblical Poetry.

1. Showing the Bible is Authentic to its time period; because the diction of Egyptian Mythology looks like the Bible's in Exodus, showing a Man of Egyptian Royal Education wrote it.
2. And that the Bible's prophecies are a polemic against what conversations Israel and Egyptians were having; much like our conversations today. Prophecy had the Character of Ancient Apologetics.

Egyptian mythology is schizophrenic. Probably some of the least cogent mythology. It just interests me for historical artefacts to help me understand Biblical Poetry.

For instance, an idol was venerated for its wont to cause the Nile to dry and cause famines. Like that in Joseph's day. But Joseph correctly prophesied the famine, and so they stored grains, showing yet again. the Bible gets true geographic information. And the famine lasted 7 years. I find this fascinating. Joseph would live 400 years before Amenhotep III, in 1730BC. This famine occurred in the III Egyptian Dynasty, 2500BC, before the flood. Around the time of Naqad. 

Yet, we see the geographical propensity for famine, which Joseph prophesied. These 7 year famines have a propensity to happen, it seems, once a millennium. Yet, one sees again Pharaoh, the Nile Dragon, talked about and mocked, in Ezekiel. Also, a command in Genesis, that men, by acting on divine guidance, produce remedies for disasters; which Joseph may have been given this vision to avert the belief in pagan idols, and establish divine authority over even the Pharaohs and the Egyptian gods.

There were Hebrews in Mesopotamia. It was Abraham's clan. "Your Father was an Amorite and your Mother a Hittite." Leah and Rachel came from Canaan, and the Hittites occupied it at that time. Abraham was passed down the heritage of our God. And the Amorites were the predominant force who conquered Uruk against the Elamites. I actually am very familiar with your theory, I just reject it. Because I know the Hebrews were in Mesopotamia, and migrated to Egypt, and then Migrated to Canaan. I won't tell you how I know this... but generally... there's a lot of borrowing from the lineage of the Patriarchs in Mesopotamia. And you're right, a lot of the kings went astray--that's documented in the books of Kings and Chronicles. But, it's clear, there's an established Tradition, through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and a people's group with a Semitic language, that migrated from Mesopotamia--hence the reason why we have "El" in scripture--and into Egypt. I have it all documented, but I'm not going to publish 50 pages in a YouTube comment, but I've heard all these arguments before, and know for a fact, they aren't true.
Here's an alternative theory. Abraham was an Amorite, and fought in the Battle of Sidim against the Elamites, was faithful, and found the God of all creation, and had a tradition of his ancestors passed down to him, which he wrote, among various laws, and Mesopotamia used those stories and laws--like consider Gilgamesh's author might have actually met Noah or Shem or Japheth, and that's who Utnapishtim is---and then that people's group called the Hebrews moved from Mesopotamia into Egypt during a famine year, and then were enslaved, and then led out of captivity by an Egyptian Educated Prince, who wrote the Torah.

[W]hen Alexander was conquering Tyre, a Sea Serpent was said to come out of the waters, and ambush Alexander's forces on the Earthen Works he constructed[.]
Xerxes also had a dream from the LORD, concerning conquering Greece, but he didn't heed it, so the LORD gave Xerxes over to the Greeks at Thermopylae. That I've read in Herodotus.
And the Aztecs, when Cortez conquered them, it followed the patterns written in the Law, about God's aid to Israel when they were to go and conquer Canaan. I read that in Buddy Levy' Conquistador.
Among many, many, many other things. [I]t's reading in between the lines, but it's so obvious.

Eclipses in Assyrian Empire

Source, NASA's Eclipse Data-bank, 7.30.25

April 2nd 823BC – Assyria had an eclipse. Bur-Sagale Eclipse.

June 15th 762BC – The Eclipse near Sennacherib's Invasion of Jerusalem.

March 05 701 – The Date Scholars say was near when Sennacherib invaded.

Amarna Letters – This shows the Habiru –or Apiru—were conquering Israel at ~ 1330BC. Accounting the Exodus took place a quarter into Amenhotep III's reign, around 1374BC. And perhaps the letters addressed to Amenhotep were meant for Akhenaten, not knowing he ascended to the throne yet, or it was late in his reign.

Sinai 357

I've looked at it, and think it's legit. I think Moses made graffiti on the stone, as Sinai 357 comes from a Turquoise mine. He may have wanted people to recognize that the Jews were enslaved, or he was just being  a deviant. Could be either. Now,  I do think that Sinai 357 is too old, but the writing is faint, showing it was written in a different manner, so probably it's graffiti. Moses probably wanted to leave his mark on it. To note, it's written in Early Hebrew Script, like the Wadi-El Hol, as are many fragments of the Sinai findings. The fragment is dated 1800bc, but the graffiti is faint, meaning it must have been superficial, and therefore, meant to signify something, if to make a remembrance of the Jews' bondage, or maybe just being a Prince of Egypt and having fun. Who knows?

Synopsis of why the Gospels are Valid

[W]e have Church Fathers from the second century, talking about Christ, we have loads of Church tradition keeping record of that time, Roman Historians talking about Christians, we have Syriac preservations of the four Gospels in non canonical texts dated to the second century—called the Diatessaron—we have fragments of first and second century writers, telling us who wrote three Gospels, meaning they had to be eyewitnesses. And Christ fulfilled over 300 prophecies of the Messiah, which mathematicians say would be 1 in 10^17 power probability of happening, for only eight. So, it’s just showing Christ is the Son of God, and is the LORD. That’s what the evidence shows. 

{}Quirinius was governor twice. Even during the last years of Herod. So, Augustus probably issued the census then. Mary and Joseph went to Bethlehem because they were both of royal lineage, not to take the Census. Mary may not have known exactly what was happening, as she was a woman, and recounted the story to Luke. But the fact is both those events happened near one another, and Mary and Joseph accounted their Census, and registered that they were from Nazareth.

{}The census was in 5BC. Not 6AD. When Quirinius was Governor. I was just reading an article on that, actually. Not the census, but that Quirinius was governor. There’s a lot of gaps in history, but he was governor in 5BC, when Herod the Great would still be alive.

I mean, from what I’m seeing, Quirinius was governor of Anatolia (Galatia and Cicilia), which isn’t that much different to the colloquial mind of even a doctor of that day with Syria. The language would be indistinguishable from Syrian, as that’s the language group being used there. They are so close together. I don’t think he’s talking about the census from 6AD but rather a census taken in 5BC, when Quirinius was governor of those regions, as Herod the Great has to be alive, too. In other words, I don’t think he’s using Josephus as his source, but rather Mary and Joseph.

It was the census in 2BC. Because Quirinius is governor of Cilicia and Galatia (Syria) and Augustus made a census at that time. Because Augustus asked the Census take place for the entire world. And in 8BC he issued that, and the province of Judea wouldn’t issue that decree until 2BC, when Quirinius was governor of Syria (Galatia and Cilicia).

[Augustus] made a census in 8BC that matriculated Judea in 2BC. The year Christ was born. Christ was 33 when He died, He died in 31AD according to Guang Wu and Phlegon of Trelles. Herod the Great we have a discrepancy of 2 years, that he died in 4BC. Some sources say 1BC. Which, Roman Dating isn’t exact. So the timeline is perfect, actually.

Neifert, B. K.. Flirtations with A’te. Kindle Direct Publishing, 2018-2024. Text. pp. 203 – 280.