Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

...Climb down brother and embrace the frail...

Hugs for Zan!

Thanks man....I really love you Bruv!!!!!

Praise the Lord... you are saved!!!

(Sings)

We will gather by the river...
The beautiful the beautiful river....

We will gather by the river.......

[Get Real!]

From the Urantia book. Paper 123, page 1358.

Well praise the Lord for Kafenes! Hugs for Kafenes... can't reach around him!

[kafenes]

From the Urantia book. Paper 123, page 1358.

Well praise the Lord for Kafenes! Hugs for Kafenes... can't reach around him!

In this book there is also mention about Jesus trip to Cyprus. He came to Paphos, stayed for around 3 weeks and left from Famagusta port.

[denizaksulu]

...Climb down brother and embrace the frail...

Hugs for Zan!

The beginnings of a love affair??
Thats right, Cypriots Unite

[denizaksulu]

From the Urantia book. Paper 123, page 1358.

Well praise the Lord for Kafenes! Hugs for Kafenes... can't reach around him!

GetReal, what a metamorphoses? Hugs for everybody. There is still hope then, Oh Lord

[devil]

OK, seriously.

Jesus was definitely a historical character. I don't think any scholar of Judaism, Christianity or Islam (or, for that matter, atheism) can deny it. There is far too much evidence to even think otherwise from sources both within and without the New Testament. Josephus, noted historian of the 1st c, testified to the historical existence but his wording is controversial as to whether Jesus was divine, although he stated that Christians believed so.

The one reference in the NT to Jesus as a lad was that he discussed the scriptures with the rabbis. This implies he attended a rabbinical school, as a large percentage of Jews did in those days (and still do, amongst the Orthodox). This meant that he was certainly taught to read. Some of his teaching, as recorded in the Gospels and expanded in later books, had an apparent Essene eschatological flavour, which was far from mainstream Judaism. As the Essenes were a sect almost persecuted to nothing by ~30 AD and were most active in the lower Jordan valley, well away from Nazareth, it would seem unlikely that he ever had personal contact with them, but he could have read their prolific writings (some of which still exist today in the Dead Sea Scrolls).

I would therefore say with reasonable certainty that Jesus was able to read fluently, as were a large percentage of Jews of his day. Now which languages? Hebrew, certainly. His spoken language was Aramaic, and very little was written in it, so he possibly could not have read that. However, Greek was the Lingua Franca of the Holy Land in his day (hence the NT being originally in Greek). Saul, a Jew of Tarsus, was fluent in both Greek and Hebrew and he was only a tent-maker. He adopted the nickname Paul (Pavlos), because of his diminutive stature, later. Latin was the invaders' lingo, of course, so there was a real hotch-potch of languages. I admit to curiosity about Jesus' appearance before Pontius as to which language was used in the proceedings!

[CopperLine]

From the Urantia book.

Total and utter bollocks. It is quite extraordinary that in this day and age people can refer to such manifest nonsense and expect to be taken seriously. These people are away with the fairies ...

On a separate note, Josephus is as unreliable as the rest of them. Jospehus was born after Jesus supposed death, and his writings are at least some 50 or so years later so he's certainly no eye witness and his text shows no particular interest in Jesus nor any effort to verify sources. So what is offered as an ostensibly authoritative and contemperaneous account is ... neither. Just another yarn that religious believers can draw out yet more tendentious threads.

[kafenes]

From the Urantia book.

Total and utter bollocks. It is quite extraordinary that in this day and age people can refer to such manifest nonsense and expect to be taken seriously. These people are away with the fairies ...

On a separate note, Josephus is as unreliable as the rest of them. Jospehus was born after Jesus supposed death, and his writings are at least some 50 or so years later so he's certainly no eye witness and his text shows no particular interest in Jesus nor any effort to verify sources. So what is offered as an ostensibly authoritative and contemperaneous account is ... neither. Just another yarn that religious believers can draw out yet more tendentious threads.

Well? Could Jesus read and write or not.

[denizaksulu]

From the Urantia book.

Total and utter bollocks. It is quite extraordinary that in this day and age people can refer to such manifest nonsense and expect to be taken seriously. These people are away with the fairies ...

On a separate note, Josephus is as unreliable as the rest of them. Jospehus was born after Jesus supposed death, and his writings are at least some 50 or so years later so he's certainly no eye witness and his text shows no particular interest in Jesus nor any effort to verify sources. So what is offered as an ostensibly authoritative and contemperaneous account is ... neither. Just another yarn that religious believers can draw out yet more tendentious threads.

Well? Could Jesus read and write or not.

[color=red]YES[/color]

[denizaksulu]

From the Urantia book.

Total and utter bollocks. It is quite extraordinary that in this day and age people can refer to such manifest nonsense and expect to be taken seriously. These people are away with the fairies ...

On a separate note, Josephus is as unreliable as the rest of them. Jospehus was born after Jesus supposed death, and his writings are at least some 50 or so years later so he's certainly no eye witness and his text shows no particular interest in Jesus nor any effort to verify sources. So what is offered as an ostensibly authoritative and contemperaneous account is ... neither. Just another yarn that religious believers can draw out yet more tendentious threads.

Well? Could Jesus read and write or not.

[color=red]YES[/color]

Must have run out of red color. Were we voting on this?