[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Gr8 King Rat wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Atheist wrote: [/QUOTENAME]sure i agree but you have to admit that religion is bad thing that destroys peoples lifes[/QUOTE]
No, its idiots like you that are fucking up this world. A world without faith is NOT a good thing. I'm seeing it right here in my own country. More and more people are turning away from God, and this country is going to hell in a handbasket.[/QUOTE]
You are one insanely disturbed figure. Your country is indeed going to hell: from an administration of religious fundamentalism, the crazed evangelists of the Deep South spreading their claws over the country and the hate of Islam being fed by Christian fundamentalists and Jewish fundamentalists who decide that the plutocratic government isn't so bad.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Beelzebub has a devil put aside for you.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]redspecial85 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Atheist wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Oh please! Freddie was a great singer, and musician, but he is not comparable to Jesus Christ! That's a gross blasphemy!
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy!
[/QUOTE]
and you christians arent retarded and crazy believing in a story book of lies and wearing a cross around your neck? its like wearing some torture symbol. THAT is crazy[/QUOTE]
Athiest,
You should really do your homework a little better on the reasoning behind Christian faith, if you're such an expert on the subject of faith and religion, why don't you back all that trash talk up with some common sense and intelligence?
[/QUOTE]
Amen to that, but sadly, that is where it ends.
[QUOTE]True Christianity is about having a relationship w/ God...its not about persecuting people, its about setting people free, among other great things.[/QUOTE]
Not true. Catholicism vehemently opposed notions of a personal bond with God, and burned people at the stake for it. Protestantism in its most common forms supported the personal bond (save for Church Of England and deriverates), but unorthodoxy was and still is violently beaten down. That is not setting people free, it is forcing dogma upon them. Maybe there is such a thing as 'true Christianity' which you mentioned, I think it was killed by the Inquisition, the Crusades (yes, they were against more than just the Muslims) and the enterprises of the Early Christian Church (the Orthodox part killed the Gnostic part) and the Protestants (mainly Puritans).
[QUOTE]Its the "religious fanatics" here in Western Society, who have gone around accusing and condemning people; those people have given Jesus a bad rap. It INFURIATES ME!!! Those people aren't TRUE CHRISTIANS!!![/QUOTE]
Amen again, you've scored another point!
[QUOTE]These fanatics and the damned media have painted a very bad picture of Christianity.[/QUOTE]
The media are innocent for once. Like with the claim of a liberal bias: the statistics prove the opposite. And not just some statistics, nearly all of them.
[QUOTE]I simply don't see how one could create a religion around Freddie Mercury. As a writer, musician, and performer...he's had a tremendous influence on me. But Freddie Mercury wasn't Jesus Christ. I love Queen's music but I don't worship them...[/QUOTE]
Me neither, but in an anthropological sense, it is exactly the same to worship Freddie Mercury as it is to worship Jesus Of Nazareth; both have left a (mostly folkloric) legacy from which a message can be constructed, and thus a religion created.
[QUOTE]Before WWII, any discussion among educated people reguarding Israel becoming a sovereign state again was quite a joke among people in positions of authority.[/QUOTE]
And they were quite right; there were Jews living there for ages, and they had very few problems with the Palestines. Then the FUNDAMENTALIST Zionists were given control of the independent states, they oppressed the voice of the moderate Zionists, and thus gave all the Jews of the world a bad name with their very own Israeli brand of Apartheid.
[QUOTE]Biblical prophecy said it would happen. They were occupied and slapped around for almost 3000 years under the yoke of the Persians, the Romans, and the Byzantine Empire (among several others). And to the shock and suprise of the international community; in 1948, Israel became its own sovereign nation.[/QUOTE]
That is one of the poorest examples of giving evidence and deducing from it that I have ever seen.
The Bible makes an enormous amount of claims of stuff that 'will happen'. Just because ONE OF THE THOUSANDS came true, doesn't mean it all will. Besides, much of the Bible is filled with contradicting claims. I can find you a Biblical reference f
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy!
[/QUOTE]
and you christians arent retarded and crazy believing in a story book of lies and wearing a cross around your neck? its like wearing some torture symbol. THAT is crazy[/QUOTE]
Athiest,
You should really do your homework a little better on the reasoning behind Christian faith, if you're such an expert on the subject of faith and religion, why don't you back all that trash talk up with some common sense and intelligence?
[/QUOTE]
Amen to that, but sadly, that is where it ends.
[QUOTE]True Christianity is about having a relationship w/ God...its not about persecuting people, its about setting people free, among other great things.[/QUOTE]
Not true. Catholicism vehemently opposed notions of a personal bond with God, and burned people at the stake for it. Protestantism in its most common forms supported the personal bond (save for Church Of England and deriverates), but unorthodoxy was and still is violently beaten down. That is not setting people free, it is forcing dogma upon them. Maybe there is such a thing as 'true Christianity' which you mentioned, I think it was killed by the Inquisition, the Crusades (yes, they were against more than just the Muslims) and the enterprises of the Early Christian Church (the Orthodox part killed the Gnostic part) and the Protestants (mainly Puritans).
[QUOTE]Its the "religious fanatics" here in Western Society, who have gone around accusing and condemning people; those people have given Jesus a bad rap. It INFURIATES ME!!! Those people aren't TRUE CHRISTIANS!!![/QUOTE]
Amen again, you've scored another point!
[QUOTE]These fanatics and the damned media have painted a very bad picture of Christianity.[/QUOTE]
The media are innocent for once. Like with the claim of a liberal bias: the statistics prove the opposite. And not just some statistics, nearly all of them.
[QUOTE]I simply don't see how one could create a religion around Freddie Mercury. As a writer, musician, and performer...he's had a tremendous influence on me. But Freddie Mercury wasn't Jesus Christ. I love Queen's music but I don't worship them...[/QUOTE]
Me neither, but in an anthropological sense, it is exactly the same to worship Freddie Mercury as it is to worship Jesus Of Nazareth; both have left a (mostly folkloric) legacy from which a message can be constructed, and thus a religion created.
[QUOTE]Before WWII, any discussion among educated people reguarding Israel becoming a sovereign state again was quite a joke among people in positions of authority.[/QUOTE]
And they were quite right; there were Jews living there for ages, and they had very few problems with the Palestines. Then the FUNDAMENTALIST Zionists were given control of the independent states, they oppressed the voice of the moderate Zionists, and thus gave all the Jews of the world a bad name with their very own Israeli brand of Apartheid.
[QUOTE]Biblical prophecy said it would happen. They were occupied and slapped around for almost 3000 years under the yoke of the Persians, the Romans, and the Byzantine Empire (among several others). And to the shock and suprise of the international community; in 1948, Israel became its own sovereign nation.[/QUOTE]
That is one of the poorest examples of giving evidence and deducing from it that I have ever seen.
The Bible makes an enormous amount of claims of stuff that 'will happen'. Just because ONE OF THE THOUSANDS came true, doesn't mean it all will. Besides, much of the Bible is filled with contradicting claims. I can find you a Biblical reference f
Looks like someone just read a book! Can we personally attack know-it-all idiots like ThomasQuinn? The self-satisfied, craptastic idiots like this.
Did you catch the gem of a quote from TQ?
"I could go on like this for hours, but I will refrain from delving any deeper than the top of my head here."
Oooooh. He's so smart! Making fun of people and attacking them for their religious faith!
And this from the country that assassinates filmmaker Theo Van Gogh for a movie!
Get a life -- stay in school, TQ!!!
Did you catch the gem of a quote from TQ?
"I could go on like this for hours, but I will refrain from delving any deeper than the top of my head here."
Oooooh. He's so smart! Making fun of people and attacking them for their religious faith!
And this from the country that assassinates filmmaker Theo Van Gogh for a movie!
Get a life -- stay in school, TQ!!!
Thomas Quinn...
Intereting points here. As far as your last point concerning pastoral authority. There are a lot of people that are abusive of their authority, that's clearly no secret. Look at the problems that the Catholic diocese has had on its hands for years. Its quite sad, yet revolting that such horrors could happen.
All due respect, I don't quite see what Matthew 16:19 has to do with pastoral authority...the scripture says, "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." That's a quote of Jesus speaking to Peter. Even if you expand a few verses it basically says in context that Peter will be the rock of the church. Any pastor that uses that as a defense for his authority is an idiot. I believe there is a level of "spiritual authority" that they have and should exercise over his/her congregation. But that verse isn't by any means a basis for their authority. They aren't the apostle Peter...period.
Jesus came to fulfill the Mosaic Law and the Prophets and did so. And he stood against and out debated the Pharisees and Saducees. Whom were the "religious fanatics" of the day. They share a striking similarity to the religious fanatics we have in the 21st Century. I don't agree with Catholic doctrine, orthodox doctrine, or any denominational doctrine...Jesus' brought his message to draw his people together and save the lost...True Christianity and Jesus' Gospel is very unorthodox, and counter-cultural. After the 1st Century People really lost that purpose, and begin to add and pervert things. They became their worst enemy. The book of Acts is the example the church was given as to how to conduct themselves, and how to function. I think people like Paul had a good heart, and had the right intentions...I personally don't agree with 100% of what Paul says in his epistles. However, I do agree 100% what Jesus says.
I won't bother arguing with you concerning the relevancy of the prophecys in Revelation. It'll be as pointless...because of our separate experiences and opinions. I believe in them...you don't...That's fine.
As far as the translations are concerned...scholars have in recent memory (the past 50 years I think...) have done a reverse translation...and re-translated the scriptures in, what I believe to be a more full and accurate translation known as the Amplified Bible. Why don't you pick up a copy of it and read it with an open heart and mind, you won't see any contradictions in it. I don't know what would make you believe such things aside from the fact that there are so many ignorant people that label themselves "Christian." To me personally, Christianity is all about a Relationship with God.
When I said I hope everyone comes to know Jesus...I meant it sincerely. I did not mean it in a haughty way. You made a lot of interesting points...take care...peace...
Intereting points here. As far as your last point concerning pastoral authority. There are a lot of people that are abusive of their authority, that's clearly no secret. Look at the problems that the Catholic diocese has had on its hands for years. Its quite sad, yet revolting that such horrors could happen.
All due respect, I don't quite see what Matthew 16:19 has to do with pastoral authority...the scripture says, "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." That's a quote of Jesus speaking to Peter. Even if you expand a few verses it basically says in context that Peter will be the rock of the church. Any pastor that uses that as a defense for his authority is an idiot. I believe there is a level of "spiritual authority" that they have and should exercise over his/her congregation. But that verse isn't by any means a basis for their authority. They aren't the apostle Peter...period.
Jesus came to fulfill the Mosaic Law and the Prophets and did so. And he stood against and out debated the Pharisees and Saducees. Whom were the "religious fanatics" of the day. They share a striking similarity to the religious fanatics we have in the 21st Century. I don't agree with Catholic doctrine, orthodox doctrine, or any denominational doctrine...Jesus' brought his message to draw his people together and save the lost...True Christianity and Jesus' Gospel is very unorthodox, and counter-cultural. After the 1st Century People really lost that purpose, and begin to add and pervert things. They became their worst enemy. The book of Acts is the example the church was given as to how to conduct themselves, and how to function. I think people like Paul had a good heart, and had the right intentions...I personally don't agree with 100% of what Paul says in his epistles. However, I do agree 100% what Jesus says.
I won't bother arguing with you concerning the relevancy of the prophecys in Revelation. It'll be as pointless...because of our separate experiences and opinions. I believe in them...you don't...That's fine.
As far as the translations are concerned...scholars have in recent memory (the past 50 years I think...) have done a reverse translation...and re-translated the scriptures in, what I believe to be a more full and accurate translation known as the Amplified Bible. Why don't you pick up a copy of it and read it with an open heart and mind, you won't see any contradictions in it. I don't know what would make you believe such things aside from the fact that there are so many ignorant people that label themselves "Christian." To me personally, Christianity is all about a Relationship with God.
When I said I hope everyone comes to know Jesus...I meant it sincerely. I did not mean it in a haughty way. You made a lot of interesting points...take care...peace...
God is one big vagina
i totally agree....jesus is crap compared to freddie mercury!!! all hail freddie!!!
I've read the old Testament in Hebrew (and the parts in Aramaïc in Aramaïc); as for the New Testament, I have contented myself with the Jehova's Witnesses translation, used in most theology faculties around the world: the original text, followed by a word-by-word literal translation below it, and a natural translation below that.
Being the son of a theologist, I haven't much of a choice save knowing my religions. However, call it cynical if you wish, I cannot find comfort in the scriptures, only people trying too hard to force their views upon others in the form of 'divine sanction' (and if you are a scholar of Medieval History, you will find that this is less ascetic than it might sound).
Being the son of a theologist, I haven't much of a choice save knowing my religions. However, call it cynical if you wish, I cannot find comfort in the scriptures, only people trying too hard to force their views upon others in the form of 'divine sanction' (and if you are a scholar of Medieval History, you will find that this is less ascetic than it might sound).
ugh
alright im back, and ive read further debates.
TQ actually has some pretty good points in the last thread he posted. they are well said and have a proven point, that is not condescending for once :)
now i do believe in a higher power, but i don't go to church, nor do i read the bible (i think one would call me agnostic). ive read parts of it before, and i cant necessarily say i can put stuff together easily. plus a healthy portion of it was deleted over the years, which means akot of history and truth was vanished, and manipulated by hundreds of translations and patriarchal societies.
its really whatever you interpret as. some people (the fundamentalists) only see what is in front of them, and are only 'god fearing' because they are still unsure so they feel that forcing others to believe will give them strength somehow, which is what i can see that will give them an acknowledgment. theyre really just sick sad people who dont know what to believe and will do anything to convince themselves that they believe in a god, and that reading the bible is an 'easy ticket' to get to heaven. my dad used to be this way but luckily has changed over the years (to this day i cant stand it if he backs up his opinions because of religion, even if they seem to have a good point)
the thing that just annoys me about all this is that people are insulting ones belief or insulting intelligence because some of us believe certain things. i dont condemn those who believe differently than i do. the only thing i feel is wrong is when there is in any form, some kind of harm done to attempt to get people to see it their way, which is stupid and a waste of breath and time. just leave it be if thats the case. there is no wrong or right opinion, which is why its called an opinion.
alright im back, and ive read further debates.
TQ actually has some pretty good points in the last thread he posted. they are well said and have a proven point, that is not condescending for once :)
now i do believe in a higher power, but i don't go to church, nor do i read the bible (i think one would call me agnostic). ive read parts of it before, and i cant necessarily say i can put stuff together easily. plus a healthy portion of it was deleted over the years, which means akot of history and truth was vanished, and manipulated by hundreds of translations and patriarchal societies.
its really whatever you interpret as. some people (the fundamentalists) only see what is in front of them, and are only 'god fearing' because they are still unsure so they feel that forcing others to believe will give them strength somehow, which is what i can see that will give them an acknowledgment. theyre really just sick sad people who dont know what to believe and will do anything to convince themselves that they believe in a god, and that reading the bible is an 'easy ticket' to get to heaven. my dad used to be this way but luckily has changed over the years (to this day i cant stand it if he backs up his opinions because of religion, even if they seem to have a good point)
the thing that just annoys me about all this is that people are insulting ones belief or insulting intelligence because some of us believe certain things. i dont condemn those who believe differently than i do. the only thing i feel is wrong is when there is in any form, some kind of harm done to attempt to get people to see it their way, which is stupid and a waste of breath and time. just leave it be if thats the case. there is no wrong or right opinion, which is why its called an opinion.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]jkdrummerboy wrote: [/QUOTENAME]hello again you fucking piece of SHIT.If you think you hurt my feelings you must be fucking reterted!!! You are nobody in my eyes and I wouldn't even waste my spit on you!!! Once again you are a fucking piece of SHIT who doesn't deserve to LIVE...[/QUOTE]
Oh boy, how nice. A religious nut. Did you know that Jesus was either not immaculately conceived or female?[/QUOTE]
from what i understand the definition of a 'virgin' back in the day usually referred to someone who was 'not married yet' and not nessesarily saying that someone hasnt had sex yet
aw yeah mary got it on with god ;-) :-p
im going to hell...anyway...
its interesting that you say that Jesus may have not been a male, i never thought of that. i stick with my claim of too many patriarchal societies in part of writing the bible.
also i read somewhere the term 'prophet' is used loosely as well. a prophet was usually what was called a 'very wise and/or intelligent person, for example, like you said, Nostradamus. who knows? maybe Jesus was an excellent doctor and merely observed the world and people made different interpretations.
Oh boy, how nice. A religious nut. Did you know that Jesus was either not immaculately conceived or female?[/QUOTE]
from what i understand the definition of a 'virgin' back in the day usually referred to someone who was 'not married yet' and not nessesarily saying that someone hasnt had sex yet
aw yeah mary got it on with god ;-) :-p
im going to hell...anyway...
its interesting that you say that Jesus may have not been a male, i never thought of that. i stick with my claim of too many patriarchal societies in part of writing the bible.
also i read somewhere the term 'prophet' is used loosely as well. a prophet was usually what was called a 'very wise and/or intelligent person, for example, like you said, Nostradamus. who knows? maybe Jesus was an excellent doctor and merely observed the world and people made different interpretations.
btw...love the quote you use from the lyric of "Shine on You Crazy Diamond"
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sparrow wrote: [/QUOTENAME]from what i understand the definition of a 'virgin' back in the day usually referred to someone who was 'not married yet' and not nessesarily saying that someone hasnt had sex yet[/QUOTE]
Actually, the focus on Mary's virginity came from a mistranslation. In the late first century, the gospel writers were using a Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint. At the time it was written, the Greek word "parthenos" meant "young woman", but over time, it evolved to mean "virgin". Anyone who has studied ancient Greek knows that... as long as they don't let their traditional beliefs hinder their work. And that's the problem... you'll have a tough time finding someone who can properly translate ancient Greek for this reason. Most books will report that "parthenos" means "virgin", but they will omit that it originally meant "young woman". Even most of the scholars are trying to protect what's left of Christianity.
[QUOTE]im going to hell...anyway...[/QUOTE]
Only if you believe it exists... which it doesn't. Christianity invented the idea of hell. Read the history books... it didn't "exist" before.
And Thomas... thanks for the links on "Gnostic John". Fascinating stuff.
Actually, the focus on Mary's virginity came from a mistranslation. In the late first century, the gospel writers were using a Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint. At the time it was written, the Greek word "parthenos" meant "young woman", but over time, it evolved to mean "virgin". Anyone who has studied ancient Greek knows that... as long as they don't let their traditional beliefs hinder their work. And that's the problem... you'll have a tough time finding someone who can properly translate ancient Greek for this reason. Most books will report that "parthenos" means "virgin", but they will omit that it originally meant "young woman". Even most of the scholars are trying to protect what's left of Christianity.
[QUOTE]im going to hell...anyway...[/QUOTE]
Only if you believe it exists... which it doesn't. Christianity invented the idea of hell. Read the history books... it didn't "exist" before.
And Thomas... thanks for the links on "Gnostic John". Fascinating stuff.
The 'parthenos' bit is a bit of a source for many scholarly friendships to end prematurely, I'm afraid...
We have sources of Athena Parthenos where it is clear that the word means 'virgin' (as well as "Artemis Parthenon" where the word is taken to mean 'virgin' as well), and these texts date back to the Archaic Period (ca. 800-490 BC). However, from the same period we also have text using the word in reference to girls / young women to mean precisely that: girl / young woman. Like the Latin 'virgo' really.
There is no linguistic source to show us that there was any change to the usage of the word over time until the post-Roman era (>330 AD), which leads me to conclude that both translations are possible, and since no context is provided, are equally viable.
Personally, I am inclined to believe that the term was meant as an unmarried woman, but I can of course not be sure.
We have sources of Athena Parthenos where it is clear that the word means 'virgin' (as well as "Artemis Parthenon" where the word is taken to mean 'virgin' as well), and these texts date back to the Archaic Period (ca. 800-490 BC). However, from the same period we also have text using the word in reference to girls / young women to mean precisely that: girl / young woman. Like the Latin 'virgo' really.
There is no linguistic source to show us that there was any change to the usage of the word over time until the post-Roman era (>330 AD), which leads me to conclude that both translations are possible, and since no context is provided, are equally viable.
Personally, I am inclined to believe that the term was meant as an unmarried woman, but I can of course not be sure.
:DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
hmmm...would be nice to sing "Somebody to Love" at the top of your lungs during a church service...I bet Jesus & Freddie would share a laugh
excellent posts TQ thanks!
168 BCE Seleucid king Antiochus Epihphanus places statue of zeus in Holy of Holies in Jerusalem
41 BCE Herod the Great, descended of Esau and builder of villas in south France, gains power
21 BCE Herod announces rebuilding of temple. Design offered by royal Jewish families rejected.
9 BCE John the Baptist conceived
7 BCE Jesus the Anointed born (his mother Mary, member of one of the royal families, held the title 'temple servant' thus the parthenos issue)
17 CE Jesus initiated into Zadokite priesthood
18 CE Caiaphas becomes high priest
29 CE Jesus rebaptised by John, along wth the 12 Apostles, opposes the priests, and disagree among themselves on political issues: Jesus wanted to spread peace with Rome, Judas & Simon Magus were zealots ('sicarii'...'Iscariot')
33 CE Crucifixion
40 CE Assignment of Saul to ministry as Paul
44 CE Agrippa I assasinated by snake poison. Communities established by Peter and Simon Magus went into exile in Antioch and Cyprus. Peter's group in Antioch declared independence and adopted the name 'Christian.'
54 CE Nero becomes emperor.
61 CE The Word of YHVH arrives in Rome with the ministry leadership, to begin planting the new seed. Paul was in custody of the Romans for hearings regarding Felix, a Roman governor suspected for murder.
64 CE Nero blames the Christians for the Great Fire of Rome. Peter and Paul are executed.
70 CE destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in reprisal for the zealot uprisings
74 CE Masada
The Q-document, "quelle" in German for 'source,' a catalog of sayings of Jesus and the general oral tradition surrounding His minstry, led to the the writing of gospel Mark by Eutychus, also called John Mark. Augustine started the erroneous view that Mark simply summarizes Matthew; indeed, Mark is the first gospel. Mark and 'Q' constitute the two sources which inform Matthew and Luke. John certainly contains gnostic elements, and the four gospels do match the lion (Matthew - Judah), ox (Luke - Samaria), eagle (Mark - gentile powers given domination over the Hebrews) and human (Jesus the Anointed) faces in the vision of Ezekiel.
<Mark & Method: New Approches in Biblical Studies>, JC Anderson & SD Moore, Fortress Press Minneapolis 1992 ISBN 0-8006-2655-9
http://www.mystae.com/reflections/messiah/samchrist/JesustheSamaritan.htm
excellent posts TQ thanks!
168 BCE Seleucid king Antiochus Epihphanus places statue of zeus in Holy of Holies in Jerusalem
41 BCE Herod the Great, descended of Esau and builder of villas in south France, gains power
21 BCE Herod announces rebuilding of temple. Design offered by royal Jewish families rejected.
9 BCE John the Baptist conceived
7 BCE Jesus the Anointed born (his mother Mary, member of one of the royal families, held the title 'temple servant' thus the parthenos issue)
17 CE Jesus initiated into Zadokite priesthood
18 CE Caiaphas becomes high priest
29 CE Jesus rebaptised by John, along wth the 12 Apostles, opposes the priests, and disagree among themselves on political issues: Jesus wanted to spread peace with Rome, Judas & Simon Magus were zealots ('sicarii'...'Iscariot')
33 CE Crucifixion
40 CE Assignment of Saul to ministry as Paul
44 CE Agrippa I assasinated by snake poison. Communities established by Peter and Simon Magus went into exile in Antioch and Cyprus. Peter's group in Antioch declared independence and adopted the name 'Christian.'
54 CE Nero becomes emperor.
61 CE The Word of YHVH arrives in Rome with the ministry leadership, to begin planting the new seed. Paul was in custody of the Romans for hearings regarding Felix, a Roman governor suspected for murder.
64 CE Nero blames the Christians for the Great Fire of Rome. Peter and Paul are executed.
70 CE destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in reprisal for the zealot uprisings
74 CE Masada
The Q-document, "quelle" in German for 'source,' a catalog of sayings of Jesus and the general oral tradition surrounding His minstry, led to the the writing of gospel Mark by Eutychus, also called John Mark. Augustine started the erroneous view that Mark simply summarizes Matthew; indeed, Mark is the first gospel. Mark and 'Q' constitute the two sources which inform Matthew and Luke. John certainly contains gnostic elements, and the four gospels do match the lion (Matthew - Judah), ox (Luke - Samaria), eagle (Mark - gentile powers given domination over the Hebrews) and human (Jesus the Anointed) faces in the vision of Ezekiel.
<Mark & Method: New Approches in Biblical Studies>, JC Anderson & SD Moore, Fortress Press Minneapolis 1992 ISBN 0-8006-2655-9
http://www.mystae.com/reflections/messiah/samchrist/JesustheSamaritan.htm