Search results

I think Yhwh/Jhvh is his name like Yeshua/Jesus is Christ's name. If you read Genesis you will find that the patriarchs used the name Yhwh/Jhvh long before Moses etc. God said I am Yhwh Gen 15:7, 18:14, 19, 28:13, Exod 3:15-16, 18 God said El/Eloah/Elohim Gen 9:6, 16, 17:7-8, 26:24, 28:13...

Its just a theory based on the idea that the gods derive from the preflood and postflood patriarchs. Cush is found in various pantheons like Hittite/Hurrian (Kusuh/Kasku), Sumerian (Kus), Arab (Qos), Egyptian (Khuns), Edomite (Kaush), etc. Qos is identified with an outcrop of black basalt, and...

Qos is probably from Cush the father of Nimrod.

I think the Shroud is a fake because John says strips of linen and a face cloth.

Matthew 27 does say "new tomb of him which he had cut in the rock". But Joseph (who was rich) could have cut the tomb in 1st temple architectural/artistic style. Mark 15 just says "a tomb which was cut out of a rock". Luke 23 does say "a tomb cut in a rock in which no had been no one not yet...

I don't think that is true, but I have to check my notes. They contradict saying (1) no 2nd temple burials, and (2) saying Jewish cemetery at time of Yeshua's death. (Unless they mean a 1st temple Judahite cemetery present at Jesus time.) Conventional dating methods also often give too...

I posted a thread here once on this but they deleted it because some people complain that it is supposedly like "anti-Catholic", and they have a rule that not allowed to offend any denonimations here. But an example is Easter is from Norse goddess Eostre. Jesus was not born at Chistmas. Many...

Again, the alleged date of the Garden Tomb is not deifnitely reliably proven or infallible proof. The biblical verse about it being a new tomb never used is also/alternatively not definitely certain (esp when comparing the other 3 gospels versions). The Holy Sepulchre has many doubts and reasons...

The bible may not be "an exhaustive history book" but surely it would say something about something as important as Peter being in Rome and the popes being Peter's successors. And the fact is there is zero biblical evidence for Peter being in Rome except that one Babylon verse which depends on...

The bible prophesies that the Vatican will move to Babylon, and I can imagine that in future one reason they will give is because Peter was in Babylon not Rome. It is highly unlikely that the Messianic-Jewish Peter was ever in Rome. The bible would surely say so if he was but it doesn't. (The...

PS: So for example the 1st 49 yrs in Daniel might be from Darius 26th to Artaxerxes 20th (Darius 9 + Ahasuerus/Xerxes 20 + Artaxerxes 20), or from Darius 36 or Ahasuerus 1/3 to Artaxerxes 30/32 (Ahasuerus 20/17 + Artaxerxes 30/32), or Cyrus 46 / Darius 6 to Ahasuerus/Xerxes 20/21 (Darius 30 +...

You have to question the conventional dates for those kings and the conventional dates for Christ first otherwise you will risk be using their wrong dates. I mean for example how do they/you get "538" bc for Cyrus, 445 bc for Artaxerxes, 26/30/33 ad for Christ? We should only use biblical dates...

Not true. In the paper I gave link to I provided evidences not excuses. Only reliable actual detail matches evidences matter, not credentials/authority. Even "experts" and majorities can by lying or wrong or exclusive. Jewish unbiased? Hello, remember how they treated Jesus and what Jesus said...

The date is not so certain as they claim. And even if it is the meaning of the words "new tomb" "never laid" is also not so certain meaning/interpretation as made out esp conparing all 4 gospels versions. So this recurring claimed disproof is not definite reliable proof/disproof of anything...

Nothing to do with Wyatt. The Garden tomb was found and suggested long before him. If you read my table in the academia paper it hardly refers to Wyatt and it has good evidences reasons. Besides which his claim that the Ark is under Skull Hill does seem somewhat possible supporting evidence...

See my notes on the Garden Tomb and Holy Sepulcher here Garden Tomb versus Holy Sepulchre (sorry too long to post here and I don't have the alot of time either). Note the bits on Aramathea/Arimathea, etc. I think the Garden tomb is surely right for all the reasons in the table there.

Sorry to hear that, but it doesn't deal with any details evidences and so is not really disproof/proof of anything just mere words claims. Contrary to your claim I did objective historical research after almost being convinced by a pro Pope poster that the pope was real successor of Peter, and I...

The period can be fitted into the 480 yrs. Eg 1 Samuel 7:2 says there were only 20 yrs from death of Eli to David bringing ark to Jerusalem. Samson was during Philistines. Eli and Samuel and Saul might have also been during Philistines. It is also maybe not certain they counted both the...

Personally I did look into all the Catholic claims about Peter and the popes since I was almost convinced some years ago and it seemed cool to think that the Pope was the successor of Peter, but I happened to find out in objective historical research that it was based on untruths, starting with...

Re last replies on previous page. 1. We are not talking about Noah's Ark, or the Ark of the Covenant or any other of "Wyatt's" alleged discoveries, they don't prove anything for the exodus or Sea Passage or Sinai. And the only thing that matters is details matches evidences, not claims about a...