|
|
Subject: Al Franken on shortwave
From: Mister Fixit Date: 4/3/2004 3:53 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: On 03 Apr 2004 18:06:25 GMT, (Llgpt) wrote: And Limbaugh's and Hannity's aren't being bankrolled by wealthy Republicans? I refrain from using the conservative word, as the majority of republicans are not conservative. Just wondering................. Les Limbaugh and Hannity are "Bankrolled" by companys that buy advertising time during their programs. They buy these ad times because millions of people listen to these show daily. However, about 60% of the successful businesses in the US are owned or operated by Republicans, so I suppose you could say they are bankrolled by Republicans. If there is such a thing as a smart Democrat Businessperson, they would also be wise to advertise to such a large audience. " Businessperson" You spell just like that other Republican........... Not very smart. Were you born and raised in Mississippi too? Les |
"Mike Terry" wrote in message ... Which shortwave stations carry this to Europe please? None of the new Air America shows seem to be on shortwave: http://www.airamericaradio.com/www/pub/resStations.htm It's unlikely any of the shows will be carried on SW, unless they get picked up by Armed Forces Radio. Sounds interesting? Not interesting yet, but they may figure out how to appeal to a wider audience. They do have a webcast shown under "Listen Live: http://www.airamericaradio.com/ Mike Frank Dresser |
Subject: Al Franken on shortwave
From: Mister Fixit Date: 4/3/2004 5:21 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: On 03 Apr 2004 22:16:44 GMT, (Llgpt) wrote: Subject: Al Franken on shortwave From: Mister Fixit Date: 4/3/2004 3:53 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: On 03 Apr 2004 18:06:25 GMT, (Llgpt) wrote: And Limbaugh's and Hannity's aren't being bankrolled by wealthy Republicans? I refrain from using the conservative word, as the majority of republicans are not conservative. Just wondering................. Les Limbaugh and Hannity are "Bankrolled" by companys that buy advertising time during their programs. They buy these ad times because millions of people listen to these show daily. However, about 60% of the successful businesses in the US are owned or operated by Republicans, so I suppose you could say they are bankrolled by Republicans. If there is such a thing as a smart Democrat Businessperson, they would also be wise to advertise to such a large audience. " Businessperson" You spell just like that other Republican........... Not very smart. Were you born and raised in Mississippi too? Les Nope, the failed Liberal school system here in New York state failed to teach me many things. And I am not a Republican. Wow 0 for 2, you suck at this guessing thing. I've never guessed at anything asshole. You spell bad, that was what I pointed out. I asked if you were born in Mississippi. Take comprehension 101 over again. No liberal ever failed you asshole, I can read write and spell correctly. It was living in New York that failed you with the spics and coons. I was educated before that eternal sleeper ronald reagan coined the "liberal" phrase. A war baby, not one of the "me" generation, like yourself. Les |
"Michael Bryant" wrote in message ... From: "Stinger" Here we are, presented with the abundance of evidence of your own, personal ignorance, yet you choose to indicte the entire state. Gee, Stinger, I never saw you making this response to Steve Lare when he was running through his Kentucky insults. I haven't been reading much of the flame war, but Mike, if I lived in Kentucky, I might well have responded. I live in southern Mississippi (and love it), and don't like it when ignorant jackasses like Les feel the need to put our great state down. Consistency, right? BTW, there's no "e" on the end of indict. Thanks for the correct spelling of indict....and no... I won't go there. -- Stinger |
"Llgpt" wrote in message ... No liberal ever failed you asshole, I can read write and spell correctly. It was living in New York that failed you with the spics and coons. SNIP Les Well, I guess we know what kind of problem you have with Mississippi now, don't we, dirtbag? You sure you can't leave sooner? Oh yeah -- Welcome to my kill-file. PLONK -- Stinger |
Subject: Al Franken on shortwave
From: "Stinger" Date: 4/3/2004 6:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: "Llgpt" wrote in message ... No liberal ever failed you asshole, I can read write and spell correctly. It was living in New York that failed you with the spics and coons. SNIP Les Well, I guess we know what kind of problem you have with Mississippi now, don't we, dirtbag? You sure you can't leave sooner? Oh yeah -- Welcome to my kill-file. PLONK -- Stinger That's the way, killfile instead of meeting the problem head on and solving it, the Mississippi way that is. If you can't admit the lowering of the education bar is due to the coons, then I feel sorry for you dummy! Born and bred in Mississippi, what an albatross to have hung around one's neck. Goodbye indeed. Les |
On 03 Apr 2004 23:28:40 GMT, (Llgpt) wrote:
Subject: Al Franken on shortwave From: Mister Fixit Date: 4/3/2004 5:21 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: On 03 Apr 2004 22:16:44 GMT, (Llgpt) wrote: Subject: Al Franken on shortwave From: Mister Fixit Date: 4/3/2004 3:53 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: On 03 Apr 2004 18:06:25 GMT, (Llgpt) wrote: And Limbaugh's and Hannity's aren't being bankrolled by wealthy Republicans? I refrain from using the conservative word, as the majority of republicans are not conservative. Just wondering................. Les Limbaugh and Hannity are "Bankrolled" by companys that buy advertising time during their programs. They buy these ad times because millions of people listen to these show daily. However, about 60% of the successful businesses in the US are owned or operated by Republicans, so I suppose you could say they are bankrolled by Republicans. If there is such a thing as a smart Democrat Businessperson, they would also be wise to advertise to such a large audience. " Businessperson" You spell just like that other Republican........... Not very smart. Were you born and raised in Mississippi too? Les Nope, the failed Liberal school system here in New York state failed to teach me many things. And I am not a Republican. Wow 0 for 2, you suck at this guessing thing. I've never guessed at anything asshole. You spell bad, that was what I pointed out. I asked if you were born in Mississippi. Take comprehension 101 over again. No liberal ever failed you asshole, I can read write and spell correctly. It was living in New York that failed you with the spics and coons. I was educated before that eternal sleeper ronald reagan coined the "liberal" phrase. A war baby, not one of the "me" generation, like yourself. Les Wrong again, my pa was a Staff Sargent in Burma during WWII. |
ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote in message ...
From: (UJ) In a genuinely competetive free market situation, this new liberal network wouldn't last more than a few weeks. However, I suspect that it is being backed financially by some deep pocketed extremists who have a socialist agenda that is more important to them than financial profits. Is anyone else laughing as hard as I am over this nonsense. Rich socialists throwing away their money?? Rich socialists have been throwing away their money for years. Ever heard of the Rockefeller Foundation? Maybe it is possible that wealthy capitlaists and Americans are tired of the hate being spread daily on the AM frequencies by the right. I'll try to keep from labeling them as Nazis, but that makes as much sense as calling Democrats socialists. It makes perfect sense to call Democrats socialists.There is a group in the US Congress called the Progressive Caucus.Here is a list of their 54 members, overwhelmingly if not entirely comprised of Democrats: http://bernie.house.gov/pc/members.asp . Presidential candidate and Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Dennis Kucinich is at the top of the list. So what, you ask? Well, the Progressive Caucus has close ties to the Democratic Socialists Of America http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html . As far as I know, there is no organization called the Republican Nazis Of America, so your Democrat/Socialist = Republican/Nazi comparison is way off target. MB |
UJ wrote: ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote in message ... From: (UJ) In a genuinely competetive free market situation, this new liberal network wouldn't last more than a few weeks. However, I suspect that it is being backed financially by some deep pocketed extremists who have a socialist agenda that is more important to them than financial profits. Is anyone else laughing as hard as I am over this nonsense. Rich socialists throwing away their money?? Rich socialists have been throwing away their money for years. Ever heard of the Rockefeller Foundation? Maybe it is possible that wealthy capitlaists and Americans are tired of the hate being spread daily on the AM frequencies by the right. I'll try to keep from labeling them as Nazis, but that makes as much sense as calling Democrats socialists. It makes perfect sense to call Democrats socialists.There is a group in the US Congress called the Progressive Caucus.Here is a list of their 54 members, overwhelmingly if not entirely comprised of Democrats: http://bernie.house.gov/pc/members.asp . Presidential candidate and Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Dennis Kucinich is at the top of the list. So what, you ask? Well, the Progressive Caucus has close ties to the Democratic Socialists Of America http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html . As far as I know, there is no organization called the Republican Nazis Of America, so your Democrat/Socialist = Republican/Nazi comparison is way off target. Most of his crap IS off target! |
From: (UJ)
Rich socialists have been throwing away their money for years. Ever heard of the Rockefeller Foundation? Wow. The Rockefeller's are socialists? Boggling! Call the newspapers. It makes perfect sense to call Democrats socialists.There is a group in the US Congress called the Progressive Caucus.Here is a list of their 54 members, overwhelmingly if not entirely comprised of Democrats: http://bernie.house.gov/pc/members.asp . Presidential candidate and Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Dennis Kucinich is at the top of the list. So what, you ask? Well, the Progressive Caucus has close ties to the Democratic Socialists Of America http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html . As far as I know, there is no organization called the Republican Nazis Of America, so your Democrat/Socialist = Republican/Nazi comparison is way off target. So, because a small number of Democrats belong to the Democratic Socialists, all Dems are socialist? Gee, that reasoning seems suspect. And when I check your dsasa.org site I don't see anyplace where it says that everyone in the Progressive caucus is under their wing. I don't mean to be insulting, but you're going to need better evidence than this specious connection to prove that all Dems should automatically be labeled socialists. That rhetoric is ridiculous. Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL Louisville, KY R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K, DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76 (remove "nojunk" to reply) |
|
|
|
Michael Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV Says the King of Off Topic Crap. At least I'm not the King of False Claims, Lies and Fabrications! But you are the King of Unproven Accusations. It's part of your "I'm the toughest asshole in the world" attitude. What is unproven Fat Boy? You can't document your PhD can you? Here is an interesting quote: "...significant insights into Mr. Bryant, who is, incidentally, NOT a professor of anything. He is not an associate professor. He is simply an instructor at Weber..." Generally one with a PhD would not be merely an 'instructor' would they? Curious... |
UJ wrote:
Rich socialists have been throwing away their money for years. Ever heard of the Rockefeller Foundation? The taxation structure is set up in such a way that they aren't 'throwing' anything away. This foundation may well be a very lucrative write off for another branch of the family's business. They lose nothing with this 'generosity'. mike |
|
Michael Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV Generally one with a PhD would not be merely an 'instructor' would they? Many PhDs are classified as instructors. It generally denotes someone who is hired on a renewable basis versus someone on a tenure track timeline. When on tenure-track, you have to jump through more publication and standing committee hoops. In institutions without tenure systems, all teaching employees are called instructors. Obviously, you have little understanding of the structure of most universities. I'm sure we await your info. BTW, I've decided to do a little more investigation of you. For $25 some of these web pages claim they investigate anyone. I think the newsgroup might be really entertained by your background... Any DUIs you want to admit to? How long have you been retired? Remember that little battle where you insisted you had a job, but posted to the NG pretty much 24/7? I know you say you're retired, now, but then you were claiming specific employment.... Yes, entertainment potential abounds... Have fun! Guess I could blow a few bucks on a private detective myself! It might indeed prove interesting!, and to be truthful, I was considering that very thing earlier this evening. LOL |
Michael Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV Generally one with a PhD would not be merely an 'instructor' would they? Many PhDs are classified as instructors. It generally denotes someone who is hired on a renewable basis versus someone on a tenure track timeline. When on tenure-track, you have to jump through more publication and standing committee hoops. In institutions without tenure systems, all teaching employees are called instructors. Obviously, you have little understanding of the structure of most universities. I'm sure we await your info. BTW, I've decided to do a little more investigation of you. For $25 some of these web pages claim they investigate anyone. I think the newsgroup might be really entertained by your background... Any DUIs you want to admit to? How long have you been retired? Remember that little battle where you insisted you had a job, but posted to the NG pretty much 24/7? I know you say you're retired, now, but then you were claiming specific employment.... Oh by the way, I've never stated I was retired! I did make a joke about retirement once, but if you'll read that post you'll quickly determine it was a joke. Oh heck, what was I thinking! I forgot your level of comprehension was low! |
|
|
Michael Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV Guess I could blow a few bucks on a private detective myself! It might indeed prove interesting!, and to be truthful, I was considering that very thing earlier this evening. It wasn't hard to guess where you were headed. In fact, most of your actions are fairly predictable. There's just no surprising the Fat Boy! |
Michael Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV Oh by the way, I've never stated I was retired! I did make a joke about retirement once, but if you'll read that post you'll quickly determine it was a joke. Boggling, isn't it, folks. Are you sure you haven't claimed that you had worked hard so that you could listen to radio whenever you wanted? Well I can! But I in no way consider myself to be retired! I'm sure you'll offer us a creative definition of not being retired. Creative? Nothing creative about it! I'm not retired Fat Boy! I'm just not currently working! If I was retired I'd certainly be expecting a pension check! Or Social Security! I get none of that! And i remembered that I was dealing with someone who makes most lawyers look honest in comparison. You've had experiences with lawyers? Tell us about t! LOL! |
|
Michael Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV I'm sure you'll offer us a creative definition of not being retired. Creative? Nothing creative about it! I'm not retired Fat Boy! I'm just not currently working! If I was retired I'd certainly be expecting a pension check! Or Social Security! I get none of that! So, you WERE lying when you ridiculed me for calling you unemployed? Perhaps at that time I was actually employed! You go dig up the post! I'm sorry, I didn't understand. That's becoming evident Fat Boy! Sounds like the incoming funds may be lower than what your used to. I now understand why you seem so grouchy. I certainly hope you haven't had anymore problems with you house's heater, like you mentioned before... Oh no, that has indeed been fixed! Sorry, Steve. Ne need to be sorry for me Fat Boy! I'm doing just fine! It's you we're all worried about! |
Stinger wrote:
Gosh, Les... I'm SURE you'll be missed. Don't forget not to write. Nice double negative. -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
In article ,
(UJ) wrote: In a genuinely competetive free market situation, this new liberal network wouldn't last more than a few weeks. However, I suspect that it is being backed financially by some deep pocketed extremists who have a socialist agenda that is more important to them than financial profits. Poor ratings, which are nearly certain, will have no bearing on the network's longevity. This is all theory, mind you,and only time will tell. snip The CEO is Mark Walsh and he plans on dumping money into it for three years see: http://www.broadcastingcable.com/art...op+of+the+Week &promocode=SUPP And this http://www.cmpa.com/FinancialTimes--March25.htm "Mr Walsh, a veteran of HBO, America Online and the Democratic National Committee, was volunteering for Democrat presidential contender John Kerry's campaign when he joined the radio network last autumn. While he has no formal ties with the Kerry camp, the "Bring it On!" slogan that Mr Kerry has adopted appears on some Air America posters." " The group has raised $25m in equity, mostly from wealthy individuals who, Mr Walsh said, made their investments "based on belief and business"." "A separate arm, called Equal Time, which has $30m in debt capacity, will acquire and operate radio stations. The group expects to lose money in its first two years and become profitable early in its third." ****************************** They are defiantly anti capitalistic and are communist. Don't worry about Franken or what he says worry about what the people supporting this effort want. I want to find out who these "wealthy individuals" are. I'll bet they are communists. Air America Radio web site: http://www.airamericaradio.com/ -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Michael Bryant wrote:
Is there any historical proof that Jesus existed? Not to detract from the above. There are very strange similarities to Osiris and others. Religion has a very long history. ========================================== Osiris: He came to fulfill the law. Called "KRST," the "Anointed One." Born of the virgin Isis-Meri on December 25th in a cave / manger, with his birth announced by a star and attended by three wise men. Earthly father named "Seb" (translates to "Joseph.") At age 12 he was a child teacher in the Temple and at 30 he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years. Baptized in the river Iarutana -- the river Jordan -- by "Anup the Baptizer," who was beheaded. (Anup translates to John.) Traveled widely, taught men and "tamed them by music and gentleness, not by force of arms" [Plutarch] Performed miracles, exorcised demons, raised El-Osiris from the dead. Walked on water. Betrayed by Typhon, crucified between two thieves on the 17th day of the month of Athyr. Buried in a tomb from which he arose on the third day (19th Athyr) and was resurrected. His suffering, death, and resurrection celebrated each year by His disciples on the Vernal Equinox -- Easter. Called "The Way, the Truth, the Light," "Messiah," "god's Anointed Son,' the "Son of Man," the "Word made Flesh," the "word of truth." Expected to reign a thousand years. http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker...ts.html#osiris |
N8KDV wrote: You are 100% correct. Air America at the present time is not driven by advertiser revenue. That may indeed change, time will tell. But if history holds true, Air America will fail. Or shift over to some kind of listener-supported model, which may be a more promising direction for them. The long term survival of any low-circulation political magazine, either on the left and the right, depends usually on a mix of some kind of foundation set up by a motivated jillionaire, a small amount of revenue from special-interest advertising, and annual or semi-annual appeals to subscribers. There's nothing wrong or un-American about it. The market is just bad at supporting predominantly political media. Right-wing talk radio is exceptional probably because the Rush Limbaugh phenomenon gave it enough momentum to become commercially viable. Randi Rhodes on Air America has survived on what I think is a commercial outlet for something like 9 years in southern Florida, so it can happen on the left, at least in specific markets. Larry |
UJ wrote: It makes perfect sense to call Democrats socialists.There is a group in the US Congress called the Progressive Caucus.Here is a list of their 54 members, overwhelmingly if not entirely comprised of Democrats: http://bernie.house.gov/pc/members.asp . Presidential candidate and Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Dennis Kucinich is at the top of the list. So what, you ask? Well, the Progressive Caucus has close ties to the Democratic Socialists Of America http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html . As far as I know, there is no organization called the Republican Nazis Of America, so your Democrat/Socialist = Republican/Nazi comparison is way off target. MB This is a ridiculous argument, and I assume it's at least partly a joke. The "Democratic" in DSA of course has nothing to do with the Democratic Party, but is an adjective to distinguish the DSA from the various anti-democratic (i.e. pro-Soviet) socialist parties that have been around. The link you provide is that of Bernie Sanders, who as you doubtless know, is not a Democrat. By the way, you used "comprised" incorrectly. |
Telamon wrote: They are defiantly anti capitalistic and are communist. Don't worry about Franken or what he says worry about what the people supporting this effort want. I want to find out who these "wealthy individuals" are. I'll bet they are communists. Air America Radio web site: http://www.airamericaradio.com/ It's childish to tar people with whom you disagree with nasty labels. Do you really think these people are communists? Do you know what a communist is? This is just as stupid as calling William Buckley or Rush Limbaugh fascists. There are people of both the left and the right who believe in democracy and capitalism. If you are going to disagree with someone's position, attack the position, don't just call names. |
In article ,
Telamon writes: I want to find out who these "wealthy individuals" are. I'll bet they are communists. - I love the idea of "wealthy Communists"; Marching on may day, Followed by a Black Limosine ; |
Diverd4777 wrote: In article , Telamon writes: I want to find out who these "wealthy individuals" are. I'll bet they are communists. - I love the idea of "wealthy Communists"; Marching on may day, Followed by a Black Limosine ; Somehow I get the picture of a Randy Newman song... |
Bill O'reilly pays KABC $500,000 a year for his air time.
Sean Hannity is #15 in New York. They too are being subsidized. The Washington Times has lost over a billion dollars. Yet it continues to publish. Is this the ''free market'' at work. Let's not get all high and mighty here. Giant corporations fill the airwaves with simple-minded extreme right-wing broadcasters in order to keep their favorite whores in office. On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 12:58:02 -0500, "T. Early" wrote: "Michael Bryant" wrote in message ... From: (UJ) In a genuinely competetive free market situation, this new liberal network wouldn't last more than a few weeks. However, I suspect that it is being backed financially by some deep pocketed extremists who have a socialist agenda that is more important to them than financial profits. Is anyone else laughing as hard as I am over this nonsense. Rich socialists throwing away their money?? Maybe it is possible that wealthy capitlaists and Americans are tired of the hate being spread daily on the AM frequencies by the right. I'll try to keep from labeling them as Nazis, but that makes as much sense as calling Democrats socialists. Yet further devaluation of the word "hate." I'm wondering at what point this term became co-opted as a an all-purpose slur on those with whom the left disagrees. Given the invectives hurled at Bush on a daily basis from that side of the spectrum, it's particularly ironic. The first poster's comments are not that far-fetched. Airamerica is being bankrolled--the buying of stations and/or air time without regard to market demand--by wealthy liberals--although I doubt they qualify as socialists. I don't have a problem with that, but let's not confuse this, at least not yet, with the marketplace at work. Of course a lot of people would have trouble admitting that those dang ol' rich conservatives aren't the only people in this country who use their dollars to influence opinion. |
Thanks for this thread, guys.
I've been meaning to try the scoring system and kill filter in my newsreader. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll retire to listen to my anti-capitalist bankrolled, socialist radio along with all my communist friends, while I dream of taking everything away from "conservatives"/Republicans and giving it to other people, just like Jesus the Socialist. I better listen while I can because, you know, the station will fail soon because all those ads by advertisers like Crest and Campbells can't be real, or anything, or help support the station even a little bit. Funny. I stumbled in here with the best intentions of discussing short wave radio. I apologize for my obvious error and hope I've caused no offense. N8KDV wrote in : Michael Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV I'm sure you'll offer us a creative definition of not being retired. Creative? Nothing creative about it! I'm not retired Fat Boy! I'm just not currently working! If I was retired I'd certainly be expecting a pension check! Or Social Security! I get none of that! So, you WERE lying when you ridiculed me for calling you unemployed? Perhaps at that time I was actually employed! You go dig up the post! I'm sorry, I didn't understand. That's becoming evident Fat Boy! Sounds like the incoming funds may be lower than what your used to. I now understand why you seem so grouchy. I certainly hope you haven't had anymore problems with you house's heater, like you mentioned before... Oh no, that has indeed been fixed! Sorry, Steve. Ne need to be sorry for me Fat Boy! I'm doing just fine! It's you we're all worried about! |
|
Llgpt wrote:
snip No liberal ever failed you asshole, I can read write and spell correctly. It was living in New York that failed you with the spics and coons. snip Perhaps you could start a "Racists for Kerry" group. |
MWB - Nicely Presented ~ RHF
.. .. = = = ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote in message = = = ... From: N8KDV Sorry, there is no contemporary record that shows that that particular 'Jesus' actually lived. Is there any historical proof that Jesus existed? The ancient historical record provides examples of writers, philosophers and historians who lived during or not long after the time Jesus is believed to have lived and who testify to the fact that he was a real person. We will look at what some of these people have said. Cornelius Tacitus Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustus’ death in A.D.14 to Nero’s death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Nero’s death and finish with Domitian’s death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Nero’s decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesus’ surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christus’ or Christ’s death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record. Lucian of Samosata Lucian was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesus’ name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus. Suetonius Suetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrian’s government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ]. Pliny the Younger Pliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god. Thallus and Phlegon Both were ancient historians and both confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified. This parallels what the Bible said happened when Jesus died. Mara Bar-Serapion Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus. Josephus Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in either 37 or 38 AD and died some time after 100 AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquites and in one famous passage described Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works and calls him the Christ. He also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and actually rose from the dead! The four Gospels The four Gospels are the four accounts of Jesus’ life, which are contained in the New Testament part of the Bible. Historians will tell you that the closer an historical document is written to the time of the events it describes, the generally more reliable it is as a source of information about those events. Matthew’s Gospel account of Jesus’ life is now reckoned to have been written sometime between AD 70 and AD 80. Mark’s Gospel is dated between AD. 50 and AD. 65. Luke’s Gospel is dated in the early AD 60s and John’s Gospel sometime between AD 80 and 100. If Jesus died sometime in the AD 30s, it is clear that Mark, Luke and Matthew wrote their Gospels within living memory of Jesus’ death. John’s Gospel comes later and probably outside of living memory for most as John lived to an unusually old age for the ancient period, but the accuracy of his Gospel was verified no doubt by those who read the earlier Gospels. Another feature of the Gospels is that they were written by men who either knew Jesus personally, or who knew people who themselves knew Jesus personally. Matthew was a former tax collector who became a disciple of Jesus. Mark was a close associate of Simon Peter, who is regarded as being Jesus’ most prominent disciple whilst Jesus was on the earth. Luke was a close associate of Paul who is the most famous of Christian missionaries and who wrote the largest contribution to the New Testament. Paul, in turn, was a close colleague of Simon Peter. John was the former fisherman who became the closest disciple of Jesus. The accounts of such men need to be considered at least seriously! Steve, open your eyes! Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL Louisville, KY R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K, DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76 (remove "nojunk" to reply) |
I'll omit the posting to which RHF is responding. All
of the sources, except for the Gospels, cited in that post are already hearsay reports, or merely refer to the beliefs of the Christians. Josephus to take just one example, "affirms" that Jesus rose from the dead, but he wasn't even born when the event he "affirms" occurred. I'm not taking a position on whether there was a real Jesus, but the citations in MWB's post certainly don't constitute independent evidence of anything. RHF wrote: MWB - Nicely Presented ~ RHF . . |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:31 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com