Oliver,
Thanks for your comments and I agree that the timing of Joshua's death with the Passover is problematic. Personally, I think he was executed sometime in August / Sepember which would coincide with the Jewish feast of the tabernacles; as far as I know the prohibtions of the Passover did not apply then. Of course, the early writers of the testaments were determined to show that he fulfilled all the requirements of the son of man as dictated by the old testament scriptures and so the necessity of placing him in Jerusalem at this time.

Historical sources are silent on whether or not the legion would have moved from Caesarea to Jerusalem for such an occasion; although they do confirm the legion moving to their Jerusalem barracks during the passover. Its an important point because the presence of the legion or its absence may shed light on Pilates state of mind in dealing with insurrection.

Joshua was a talmud scholar and the good book tells us that much of his life was spent in discourse with temple priests and other scholars. I think that we can safely assume that these discussions evolved around interpretations of the scriptures.

Just a quick general point. If christianity as a religion claims historical accuracy in these events then it should not fear historical investigation. When I hear, these same christians proposing a theory of intelligent design be incorporated into science at secondary schools; then its clearly time to look at the doctrines that are supporting these proposals

Thank you, Netab. Busy at the moment and will come back.

[Regarding Herod and Joshua (aka Jesus) you probably know I intended, "covertly" killed. There would need to be some reason to make things a public display, methinks.]

But does Flemming have the guts to have a go at Muhammad?
Or is he afraid to mock the Prophet?
Christians are an easy mark for the Intestinal Fortitude Challenged.

Is Mise,

Both Christianity and Islam have reli-political origins. The former involved the Jews who had been suppressed by the Greeks and Egptians and were in Middle East in the first century of the current era under Roman occupation. Significantly, Greek power lost its hold, and, the Jews looking retrospectively [archaism trait] felt more empowered, albeit, the reality Roman power had simply replaced Greek power. The Roman inititally respectful antiquity and being polytheists did allow the Jews a long leash. There Messiahs aplenty. But in was still a leash. A leash with a chocker collar as was evidenced by the first and secend Judeo-Roman Wars in two instalments c. 60-135 CE. Christianity grew from a Jesus Cult to the foundation of a denomination religion.

Leading to the seventh century the Arabs nominally pagan (civil) and did worship at shrines. But had not developed the same mystery cults, holy places and the concept of the spirit, as did Christianity. Moreover, there were Bedouin tribes in Hijaz abd Najd regions, wherein, the concept of "darh"[fate] and "muruwah" were strong. Tribal membership allegiances were strong and the word of the "sayyid" unchallengable. One dedicated oneself to "chivalrous duties" [Armstrong] against committmited against one's own tribe by other tribe. The Arabs were disunited and in competition and supremely obedient to different leaders.

Geophysically, the Arabs were surrounded by Sassanid Persia and the Byzantine Empire. [Post-Temple]Judaism still existed and Christianity was gaining a foothold. There was also the "istaqa" cult of self-sufficency developing from Mecca, wherein, personal weath threatened the cohensiveness of the tribe. Muhammad the early 600s would have seen frighting between tribes, the internal disintergration of the tribe, and, the lack of an ideology sactioned by prophetic endorsement. Inside and out Muruwah, an independent Arab character [indepedent to others] was treatened. So, M. developed a new unifying ideology, Islam.

Room does not permit a"contrast" between Christianity and Islam, so I this brief "compare" is helpful

Is Mise,
Why would the author want to open a thread on the prophet? If you look at the strands on this site, you will observe that there is considerable discussion regarding the Muslim culture and its founder. Secondly, no one here is mocking the historic Joshua; in fact quite the opposite.

I argue from a viewpoint that the myth of Joshua found in christian teachings is a mockery of a courageous Jewish scholar / teacher come nationalist, who lost his life attempting to rid his homeland of a brutal occupying power. The ultimate blasphemy of the memory of this man, is to paint him as some form of gentile saviour and then use that mythical construction to persecute the people of his culture over the ages. The fact that in his teachings (that one fifth or so that haven't been revised or altered for various idealogical reasons)there are moral lessons that are powerful regardless of cultural context or time, is a testimony to the wisdom of this man; however it does not justify the manipulation of his memory for essentially, political reasons.

If your christianity is faith based, then this type of discussion will be of passing interest only and should not disturb. If however, you believe that the historic account of Joshua as defined in the New Testament is beyond question, then please put your case.

"I argue from a viewpoint that the myth of Joshua found in christian teachings is a mockery of a courageous Jewish scholar / teacher come nationalist, who lost his life attempting to rid his homeland of a brutal occupying power." Netab

And your historical source for that is...?

Jesus always maintained that his kingdom is not of an earthly (political) nature - so why do you try to distort who he said he is?

The reason why Christians do not need history (like most pagans would) to trust the events surrounding our Lord and Saviour Jesus is that He lives in us today... and that is all the proof we need.

P.S. You don't seem to deny Jesus' death on the cross - Also you call Him Joshua and not Isa like in the Qur'an - that makes you not a muslim.

So if you are not an anti-infidels muslim what is your "real" agenda here?