Why Jesus must be the Messiah | Hellenist Christ v Jewish Messiah* (earthly, political, delivers from oppression) v Israelite Messiah , all different concepts?
“Hellenistic Judaism was a form of Judaism in classical antiquity that combined Jewish religious tradition with elements of Greek culture. Until the early Muslim conquests of the eastern Mediterranean, the main centers of Hellenistic Judaism were Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria (now in southern Turkey), the two main Greek urban settlements of the Middle East and North Africa region, both founded in the end of the fourth century BCE in the wake of the conquests of Alexander the Great. Hellenistic Judaism also existed in Jerusalem during the Second Temple Period, where there was a conflict between Hellenizers and traditionalists.” “The Hebrews were Jewish Christians who spoke almost exclusively Aramaic, and the Hellenists were also Jewish Christians whose mother tongue was Greek. They were Greek-speaking Jews of the Diaspora, who returned to settle in Jerusalem. To identify them, Luke uses the term Hellenistai.”
Hellenisation of Christianity is described as the emergence of “dogmas,” i.e., imperious (high handed) teachings promulgated by the church as the condition for salvation.
If you replace the name Jesus with Attis (the Phrygian-Greek god of vegetation), and you’ll have a strikingly familiar savior story similar to that of Jesus, except the Greek myths about Attis are dated 1250 BCE, which predates the Bible and Christianity (see here). Furthermore, you could replace the name Jesus with any of the other gods described in the following articles linked below, and you’ll have more strikingly familiar stories that not only parallel the stories of his alleged crucifixion, death, and resurrection but also parallel other stories that have been written in the Bible about his supposed life on Earth.
And, like the myths about Attis, these other stories about Christ-like figures from Greek mythology and other pagan religions predate both the Bible and Christianity. I recommend learning more about Jesus in comparative mythology. You can start here: Jesus in comparative mythology. In my opinion, these other accounts of Christlike figures demonstrate that paganism had a significant influence on the stories about Jesus and that Christianity’s beliefs are not unique. In other words, the savior story of Jesus isn’t the first of its kind and, in my opinion, isn’t any more believable than all the other savior stories that predate it. I know that Christians like to claim that the Bible was divinely inspired by God and that Christianity is the only true religion, but I don’t believe that is true based on the information provided in these articles and in other similar ones. Christianity, in my opinion, is a cheap imitation of other religions.
Based on the information I’ve read, if a religious leader named Yehoshua (also called Yeshua or Jesus) existed in biblical times, he was most likely just an ordinary man and popular religious teacher whose devoted followers embellished the stories about him, and more embellishment and folklore were later added to these stories to make him appear to be more than he actually was. I believe that it’s probable that he was simply a well-liked religious teacher whose loyal followers spread false stories about him to make him appear godlike. I also think that it’s likely that a few stories about him were copied and adapted from Greek mythology and other ancient pagan religions, which predate Christianity and the Bible. In my opinion, it’s plagiarized pagan myths.
I agree with friend @Sxt. Pxxxxr , the portion I have colored (in aqua) in his post above. Jesus/Yeshua- son of Mary did exist only as a man and he was the truthful Israelite Messiah. It is Paul- the false Apostle , I understand, who through a fake vision made Yeshua a myth as pointed by our friend @Sxt. Pxxxxr. Paul failed to kill Yeshua and when Yeshua , survived death on the Cross and went out of Judea and out of the Romans hands, he invented such stories to deviate Yeshua’s followers from the teachings and deeds of the truthful Israelite Messiah, as I understand. Right?
That has never happened. Christian scholars are very much in agreement that the two cannot be reconciled. Please do not conflate Christian apologists with Christian scholars. They make very very weak excuses for those differences. The odds are that in reality that Jesus was born where his name indicates that he was born. In Nazareth. The authors of both Luke and Matthew looked for a way to get him born there just because one of the clear messianic prophecies has him born in Bethlehem. We know when Herod died, And Matthews was based upon Herod. We know when the Census of Quirinius was, and we know why it could not have happened while Herod was alive. That was ten years later.
I’ll have to look into it further if I have time. From what I understand it’s most likely that Quirinius ruled on two separate occasions, and there were two censuses taken. The first census mentioned in Luke 2:2 took place during Quirinius’ first term as governor, then another during his second term. It was during the first one that Jesus was born.
No, that is a claim of apologists. professional Liars For Jesus. Actual scholars know where Quirinius was and when
Judea was not part of Rome under Herod the Great. It was a client state. Its own laws applied and censuses were illegal then There was even an uprising when the Romans forced the first census on Judea during the time of Quirinius. That was long after Herod had died and his son had failed so badly that Rome felt that they had to take over. Once they took over they needed a census, and that was in the year 6 CE. There really is no doubt about this.
Also, is the Christian claim that Joseph and Mary had to go to Bethlehem to register for the census, because people had to go back to their hometown? And then one gospel has the family going to Egypt until Herod is dead and the other has them going to Jerusalem to the temple and then on to Nazareth.
Of course, literalist Christians have to have the story exactly true, even if there is evidence that goes against it.
Strange of the Pauline-Christianity people, they just believe queer things out of their blindfaith (in NT Bible), would that have been done by Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, please? Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah would have never done such things, right?
“The Gospel of John, written approximately 15 to 20 years after that of Mark, also does not associate Jesus with Bethlehem. Galilee is Jesus’ hometown. “
It is most essential that one should pray to G-d for one’s mental/physical, moral and spiritual ailments and adopting authentic measures toward that end.
I am a senior of about 80 years of age, I have found following body exercises, of about 45 minutes , very useful for me:
One can benefit from it, but one should consult a doctor before doing it, right?
1.Why does the first gospel identify the tax collector as the disciple Matthew (Matthew 10:3) when the other gospels do not? Some in the ancient church believed that this was a clue that the first gospel had been written by the tax collector disciple himself. After all, surely the author would know his own name and record it correctly.
2.There were also other traditions circulating that stated that Matthew had written the first gospel in Hebrew and that it served as the basis for the Greek gospels. Because of these beliefs, Matthew’s gospel was placed first in the New Testament—and because it was everyone’s favorite.
There’s only one problem with this theory: it all falls apart if it should turn out that Matthew’s gospel was not the first one written.
4. If the Gospel of Matthew was written by an eyewitness, a disciple of Jesus’, then why does he rely so heavily on the writings of Mark, who was not an eyewitness?
5. Indeed, his reliance on Mark and the Q source, along with his clear fluency in Greek (better than Mark’s), make it extremely unlikely that the gospel was written by a Galilean eyewitness to the life of Jesus.
3. The overwhelming consensus of scholars is that Mark was the first gospel to be written and that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a literary source alongside a source of sayings and teachings called “Q” (from the German Quelle “source”). This raises a real problem.
No, Paul wrote all the gospels, except maybe John. The names of the gospels are the names of people the work was dedicated TO. Paul dedicated his first manuscript to Marcus Julius Agrippa II. He dedicated his re-write to a Matthew who is harder to identify. Possibly Matthew was a church leader at the Jewish wing of the Serapeum in Alexandria. Or Matthew is a dedication to Mattius, father of Judas the Galilean who was the real Jesus. Luke is a dedication to Paul’s old travel companion from his days as an evangelist for the zealot cause. By the time Paul wrote John, he had probably changed his name to John and retired in Ephesus. So John was Paul’s way of writing himself into the story.
I agree with you here that praying to Jesus was a waste of time as Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah himself prayed to G-d the father and never claimed to be god in first person.
There is nothing from Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah ( in first person) in one’s post, why don’t you follow him (the Israelite Messiah instead of following anonymous* narrators out of blind-faith and superstition)? Right?
Jesus also wanted His disciples to pray to Him. John* 14:13And I will do whatever you ask in My name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 Ifyou askMefor anythinginMyname,Iwill do it.
paarsurrey :#111 * “The author of the book containing this chapter is anonymous,” en.wikipedia.org Why doesn’t one pray to “G-d”-the-Father whom Yeshua- the truthful Israelite himself prayed to even when he was on the Cross, and thus saved his life, please?? Right?
So when you get a quote from the New Testament about what early Christians used to do, pray to Jesus, that is not a quote from Jesus and do you say it is no good. Then I give you a quote from Jesus in the gospels and you say that the author is anonymous and so the quote from Jesus is no good. And really since all the gospels are anonymous you don’t accept anything from any of them. So when we add it all up, you don’t accept anything from the New Testament, not even what you make the most noise about, the things that Jesus said.
” since all the gospels are anonymous “, said @Bxxxx2#112 paarsurrey: #116 Third person narratives by anonymous narrators, as one agrees to, to the utmost, are mere hearsay, right? It is building a house on sand, right? It can’t be the house of Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, right?
So the gospels are hearsay and not acceptable in a court of law, and even if the author wrote his name on then, that would be no guarantee of anything. It all comes down to faith in God and in what He prophesied that the Messiah would do and who He would be. But all that is hearsay and unacceptable in a court of law. But having faith is not a matter of acceptability in a court of Law.
paarsurrey #134 Faith is a positive thing if it is supported by reason, otherwise, it is simply a blind-faith and is akin to having no faith in other words it is building a house on sand, that can’t be the house of Israelite Messiah, please, right?
I agree with you here that praying to Jesus was a waste of time as Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah himself prayed to G-d the father and never claimed to be god in first person.
There is nothing from Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah ( in first person) in one’s post, why don’t you follow him (the Israelite Messiah instead of following anonymous* narrators out of blind-faith and superstition)? Right?
Jesus also wanted His disciples to pray to Him. John 14:13And I will do whatever you ask in My name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14Ifyou askMefor anythinginMyname,Iwill do it.
* “The author of the book containing this chapter is anonymous,”
Why doesn’t one pray to “G-d”-the-Father whom Yeshua- the truthful Israelite himself prayed to even when he was on the Cross, and thus saved his life, please?? Right?
Paul says his Jesus was descended from David (Romans 1: 3), but gives no other detail, not even the names of his earthly parents.
Mark says his Jesus was not descended from David (Mark 12:35-37).
The Jesuses of Matthew (Matthew 1:2-16 for Joesph) and of Luke (Luke 3:23+ for Joseph) are in the absurd position of being claimed to be descended from David, but that’s supported by two fake and incompatible genealogies which anyway are expressly for Joseph, who out loud and proud is NOT Jesus’ father.
John’s Jesus (John 7:42) is said to be descended from David, but as with Paul, no other details are given.
So if we put it to a vote, three (Mark, Matthew, Luke) are not descended from David, and two (Paul, John) are said to be, but by bare assertion since we’re not told how.
The numbers are against you.
And I can’t see any reason at all why any mainstream Jew in Galilee or Judea should or would recognize Jesus as the Messiah, since he was neither a civil leader, a military leader, or a religious leader of the Jews.
Quote ,“And I can’t see any reason at all why any mainstream Jew in Galilee or Judea should or would recognize Jesus as the Messiah, since he was neither a civil leader, a military leader, or a religious leader of the Jews.“ Unquote
My view is a little different.
The Jews have/had two choices, either :
they would have accepted him as a truthful prophet as they had accepted Moses (right?), and or
as it was incumbent on them to kill a false prophet (right), to kill Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, if he was a false prophet in terms of Deuteronomy.
They failed to kill him as per (2)above, right? So, the only alternative for them, as I understand, is to revert to becoming a true Israelite instead of remaining a Jew as per (1) above, right?
Post #173 IxxxoCxxx5559 claimed the words “Hebrews”, “Israelites” and “Jews” were interchangeable.
Post #174 Cxxr disagreed, saying historically, “Israelite” referred to the 12 tribes while “Jews” referred first to the tribe of Judah and later to members of the kingdom of JUDAH. All tribes at that time were “isaelites” but not all were jews.
Post #175 IxxxoCxxx5559 Claimed that because some of the 10 “lost tribes” of the north fled to Judah, they then were “Jews” because some of them fled to and then lived in Judah.
Post #179 xxxr claimed that living among Jews did not make anyone a “Jew”, neither another tribe nor a non-Jew.
This is the original issue. Did simply living among Jews make one a “Jew”. This is important because in the last two posts, Rosends will say in a bizarre twist that my claim that a non-Jew could be called an “Israelite” or a “Jew”.
Post #183 : Rxxxxxs admits there were mityahadin (non-Jews who either adopted Judaism or “professed” Judaism without necessarily adopting it)
After admitting there were Mityahadin among the Jews, Rxxxs asked if I had evidence of non-Jews (pagans) who lived among Jews in Judah. However, the Mityahadin WERE, by definition, non-jews before they professed Judaism.
(Ester 8:17 says “ And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them.” (NIV).
Many, but NOT ALL professed to believe in Judaism. Thus, some remained non-Jews.
Roxxxxxs said regarding the term “Jew” : This was a catch-all term for people who lived among the children of Israel.
This is important because my point was that despite using the “Catch-all” term “Jew” for those who lived among the children of Israel, were not, in fact, “Jews” just as not all individuals who live in Russia are Russian. For example, I lived in Germany for years but was not german and living there did not make me a german.
Post #186 Cxxxr responds Many individuals lived in the Kingdom of Judah that were not Jews, such as the mityahadim (Before they were Jews) may have been called “Jews” but in fact, were not “Jews”. It was, as you said, a “catch-all” term.
Post #187 Rxxxxxs says : if they were mityahadim, becoming Jews then you can’t say that they lived among but were not Jews.”
I’m not sure what historical inquisitions you have in mind in which Jews killed people for not becoming Jews. Can you provide some sources for this?
I will look up the atrocities the Jews committed against non-Jews for details and references since Rxxxs requested them. – Cxxxr
Post #188 Cxxxr responded regarding the Mityahadin and Ester 8:17 And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them.” (NIV :
The point is that pagan, non-Jews were almost always in the mix in Jewish states and many did NOT adopt either the prophetic religion (nor the later Judaic religions). Simply living among Jews does not make one a Jew.
THE DEFINITION OF MITYAHADIN
Rabbi Shaye J.D. Cohen of Harvard and also professor at the Jewish Theological Seminary New York (professor/rabbi/Jew who taught Jewish history as well as Hebrew literature and philosophy) tells us that the Hebrew term “mityahadim” reflects a particular violent expression of Jewish power.
He relates that ’Professed to be Jews’ is the meaning of the Hebrew mityahadim.
He tells us that historically “The simple meaning of the Hebrew…is not that many non-Jews converted to Judaism but that they pretended to be Jews: they professed themselves to be something they were not. They did so because they feared for their lives; the Jews had just been given carte blanche by the king to kill their enemies, and therefore many gentiles pretended to be Jews in order to protect themselves” ( from the book “The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties”. Location 2022 of 6465).
The Jewish Journal itself (April 2016 – cut and past below) also describes the Mityahadim as Gentiles “who professed to be Jews”. This does not mean they actually converted or lived their lives as Jews. It also describes the meaning of the word “Jew” just as I claimed. It originally meant a member of the tribe of Judah, later it was used to designate those of the kingdom of Judah.
Post #189 xxxxs admits : “There is no question that non-Jews lived among Jews in many places.”
This is what I have been claiming all along. If you are now admitting this, then we are in agreement.
Rxxxxs said : You have yet to show any proof that the people in Israel were called “Israelites” if they were not Jewish.
The Other eleven were children of Israel their Father, but they were not originally “Jews” or of Judah. It is only in later history that the term “Jew” becomes, (as you, yourself said), a “catch-all” term.
RxxxxxD MAKES TWO CONFLICTING STATEMENTS IN THIS SINGLE POST. THE FIRST SAYS “JEW” (YEHUDI) WAS APPLIED TO THOSE WHO LIVE AMONGST THE JEWS AND THE SECOND FOLLOWING STATEMENT CLAIMS THEY WERE NEVER CALLED JEWS :
FIRST Rxxxxs said : The Ohr Chadash says that they (specifically, the weak commoners) affiliated themselves with Jews, not necessarily converted. But this would mean that the word “Yehudi” would be applied to allies who live amongst the Jewish people without converting, thus undercutting your statement that one doesn’t become a “Jew” just by living among them.
My claim remains confirmed by your own statement. You need to read what you wrote. In the case you relate, the non-jew is simply being “called” a Jew but in fact is not a “Jew”. One does not become a “Jew” simply by living among jews.
When I lived in Germany, I was called a German. I remained American regardless of what I was called. If someone calls me a “cat” or a “horse”, the name does not change the reality.
However, your claim above that one can become a “Jew” because the name “Yehudi” (“Jew”) was applied to them is the opposite of your claim below.
THEN Rxxxxxs said : yes, there were non-Jews among Jews, but they were never called Israelites, Judeans or Jews.
So, which is it. Were the non-jews “never called Israelites, Judeans or Jews” as you claimed or was “the word ‘Yehudi” …applied to non-jewish allies who lived among the people without converting.
Rxxxxs said : Is there some reason that you want to insist that those who were not Jews were called by the same national name?
You are either not reading my posts or you do not understand English or for some other reason you are confused. My claim has ALWAYS BEEN that non-jews are NOT Jews and cannot BECOME Jews by simply living among Jews and it is historically incorrect to call them Jews. Your reversal of my claim is bizarre.
Rxxxxxs said : Yes, it does, because that is the essence of your claim: that there were people called Israelites who were not Jews.
This sort of response is why we are told NOT to drink and drive. See my response above regarding your very bizarre reversal of my position.
Post #193 Cxxxr said : I STRONGLY AGREE WITH YOUR STATEMENT ADMITTING THAT THERE WERE MITAYAHADIM (NON-JEWS WHO CONVERTED) AMONG ISRAEL. I STRONGLY AGREE WITH YOUR STATEMENT ADMITTING THAT THERE WERE NON-JEWISH ALLIES WHO LIVED AMONGST THE JEWISH PEOPLE WITHOUT CONVERTING.
Post #196 xxxxxs said : What I said is that there is no textual proof that the non-Jews living in Judea were called either Israelites or Judeans.
We have always been in agreement on this point. My claim was that one did not become a “Jew” simply by living among the Jews.
If one is not a Jew, they should not be called a Jew.
However, historically, originally, if they were from another tribe in the Kingdom of Israel such as Benjamin, or Asher, or Ephraim, etc, then they were certainly one of the children of Israel and thus an “Israelite”, but they would not be a “Jew” (i.e. from the tribe of Judah).
Post #196 xxxxx said : “Mityahadim” does not mean “non-Jews.” It means “becoming Jews”. If you don’t know what a word means, you shouldn’t use that word.
I agree that you should not use a word if you do not know what it means. Here is the meaning of Mityahadim that I already gave you in post #188.
Post #196 rxxxxxs said : And yet none of this means that non-Jews were called Jews, Judeans or Israelites, which was your claim.
Your flipped conclusion is very bizarre for me and readers both.
My claim has always been that one is not a Jew simply by living among Jews. You and I agree on this point. Are you not reading my posts? Non Jews should not be called Jews. If you are not going to read my posts or cannot understand my claims, ask me for clarification. What did I say that allowed you to come to this bizarre conclusion?
Post #196 xxxxxs said : You have yet to say anything that would, even remotely, support your claim that there were non-Jews/Judeans living among the Jews/Judeans or non-Israelites living among “Israelites” who were called by those names.
Again, this is simply a restatement of a very, very bizarre claim. Non-Jews should not be called a “Jew” despite your admission that “Jew” was a “catch-all” term. You need to read your own posts. In post #183 YOU admitted “This was a catch-all term for people who lived among the children of Israel.”
Whether it is a “catch-all” term or not, It is improper to call a non-Jew a Jew and no one is a Jew simply by living among Jews.
Your change in position and sudden mischaracterization of my position is bizarre and strange.
“The ancient term “Hebrews” and “Israelites” does NOT simply mean “Jews”. A “Jew” is, historically, from the single tribe of Judah and it came to signify the kingdom of Judah. A “Jew” may also be an adherent to the “Jewish” religion. These are two different things.“
The promises of G-d with Abraham, one comes up with, were spiritual for the verities Abraham had achieved by worshiping One G-d alone , by obeying G-d’s commandments and his resolve to train his offspring with them, these were not racial traits but moral and spiritual, as one gets to know, right?
later when Abraham’s offspring hitherto associated with the term Israelite- a spiritual* title , as long as they remained attached/focused on the spiritual aspects they got G-d’s blessings, when they themselves got focused on the worldly aspects and changed/distanced/overwhelmed as denoted by the new name (Jew/Yehuda) , they got deprived from the blessings, one gets it. Right?
Regards _________________
~* Israel-meaning G-d’s wrestler ~*”Israel was understood to mean “a man seeing God”: from ʾyš (man) rʾh (to see) ʾel (God).[8]“ The Old Testament pseudepigrapha, Volume 2. Charlesworth, James H. London: Darton, Longman & Todd. 1983–1985. p. 703. ISBN0232516278. OCLC14814462.
~*”Jacob was the son of Isaac and the grandson of Abraham. Like them, Jacob had righteous desires and sought the Lord’s blessings. At a crucial moment in his life, “Jacob wrestled with a serious challenge. His agency was tested. Through this wrestle, Jacob proved what was most important to him. He demonstrated that he was willing to let God prevail in his life. In response, God changed Jacob’s name to Israel, meaning ‘let God prevail.’ God then promised Israel that all the blessings that had been pronounced upon Abraham’s head would also be his” (Russell M. Nelson, “Let God Prevail,” Oct. 2020 general conference [Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2020, 92]). Taking this new name was a sign of receiving the covenant his father and grandfather had received.”
This silly claim that the term “Israelite” (which refers to 12 tribes or Kingdoms) and “Jews” (which refers to the kingdom of JUDAH) has already been debunked here at the following link : (click on the blue text and it will take you to the thread where you first lost this same debate) The Didache
Repeating a debunked personal theory simply wastes credibility.
So @paarsurrey you are correct that the Messiah was not simply a Messiah for only the kingdom of Judah, but was a Messiah for ALL of Israel.
1) Regarding IxxxxoCxxx5559s’ personal theory that Hebrew=Israelite=Jews IxxxxoCxxxd5559 said : “I don’t give a flying leap what the Didache says. I care what the Tanakh says. (post #175)
You are confused. No one referred to the Didache. That is simply the name of the link where you introduced your personal theory where you claimed : Hebrews=Israelite=Jews. (IxxxxoCxxxd5559 in post #32)
We are talking about your personal interpretation of what you read. The point is that your interpretation is, historically, incorrect.
2) The ancient term “Hebrews” and “Israelites” does NOT simply mean “Jews”.
A “Jew” is, historically, from the single tribe of Judah and it came to signify the kingdom of Judah. A “Jew” may also be an adherent to the “Jewish” religion. These are two different things.
While there was always a mixture of tribes and nations, this mixing of nations and kingdoms did not magically create a monolithic group of “Jews”.
For example, greeks and pagans also lived in the area inhabited by the Kingdom of Judah. However, simply living among Jews did not make the the greeks and pagans “Jews” just as it did not make a person born into ephraim, or Asher, (i.e. an “Ephraimite” or an “Asherite”) into someone born into Judah (i.e. a Jew).
If I simply move to Israel and live among the Jews the rest of my life (perhaps I take a job in Israel…), this does not and will not make me a “Jew” just as an ephraimite does not become a Jew simply by living among them.
Many different family names may be represented at a family reunion, still, this does not turn the “Johnsons” into “Smiths” at a Smith family reunion.
3) The “Ten lost tribes” (i.e. the “Kingdom of Israel”) are not “Jews” but are yet “Israelites”
As you become more familiar with the Tanakh and Jewish history, you will notice that the ten “lost” tribes that made up the Kingdom of Israel were not part of the kingdom of Judah (Jews), yet they are of Israel.
Their descendants can certainly be from any other of the twelve tribes (and thus be an “israelite” and be a Christian, or Hindu, or athiest, etc. Thus, the majority of “Israelites” nowadays (if one can still be from one of the other eleven tribes….) may not be “Jewish” at all. Yet they remain an “Israelite” in origin. Without more data, one simply cannot know.
The pictures below are simply one version of the distribution of tribes and kingdoms
4) Mis-labeling or stereotyping does not create factual change of the nature of persons or things
You are mis-using the term “Jew” in this case.
For example, when the Kingdom of Judah was taken captive into Babylon, The Jews, the Ephraimites, Asherites, Gadites, Manasseh-ites, the greeks and pagans and other individuals taken captive with them may have all been referred to as “Jews” but Historically, this is incorrect. The pagans and Greek prisoners still remained pagans and greeks and not Jews.
While generalizations or improper use of cultural and racial terms happens all the time such as referring to all individuals living in Russian as “Russians” or referring to all individuals with brown skin as “Mexicans”, still, this does not make a German living in russia, a “russian” nor does it make a Guatemalan, a “Mexican” simply by calling him one. Even derogatory usage of terms such as calling a “cheap” person a “Jew” simply because they are careful with their money is still as incorrect as it is improper.
I can call my Cat a “Jew” or a “Goldfish”, but it still doesn’t make cat a “jew” or a “Goldfish” simply by using incorrect terms.
5) Personal interpretations of the Old Testament (Tanakh) do not create historical realities While you may interpret the Old Testament (Tanakh) any way you want, your interpretation must remain in the world of personal dogma and it cannot survive in the religious historians world. You will simply have to accept that religious historians disagree with your theorY and use words differently than you do.
Creating new historical theories is difficult and requires logic and supporting data (which your personal theory lacks). Because your theory lacks logic and supporting data, I can’t imagine religious historians or linguists will ever have any interest in your theory or your personal interpretation on this specific point.
Re-defining historical definitions is difficult and fraught with problems when the theory underlying your redefinition lacks logic and sufficient historical data to support it.
Lxxt Cxxxt said:#8 Because people don’t come back alive after being dead for days, as a rule. It’s a one way trip. Any claim of some miracle explanation for a phenomenon that violates everything we know about how the world works is going to have automatically very low plausibility. Axxxxxxs said:#10 We know that people don’t rise from the dead on their own, true, but here we are talking about God raising someone from the dead. This isn’t going against how the world works as its not the laws of nature that are raising the dead but an act of God. On what basis would you assign a low plausibility to God choosing to raise Jesus from the dead a priori? paarsurrey said:#421 Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah rising from the physical dead is against Sign of Jonah, I (therefore) must say (Jesus did not resurrect at all), as I understand? Right?
paarsurrey said:#430 Jonah did not die in the belly of the fish so Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah could not and did not die on the Cross or in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, please, right?
paarsurrey said: #449 Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah pegged the Sign of Jonah to be shown to the Jews and the Jews knew as per Book of Jonah that (1) Jonah entered the belly of fish alive, (2)remained alive in the belly of the fish and (3)came out alive from the belly of the fish, so if the Sign was for the Jews then Yeshua had to remain alive and he did remain alive (1) on the Cross, (2) in the tomb where he was laid and (3) afterwards as he was seen by many, please, right?
paarsurrey adds:#476 Since Jonah was a truthful prophet of G-d so applying the same criteria Jesus/Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah was also a truthful prophet, please, right?
There are many clues in the Gospels itself that Yeshua- the truthful truthful Messiah did not die on the Cross in the firs place so there is no question of his being resurrected from the dead, please, right?
Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah prayed in the garden of Gethsemane most fervently to G-d (whom he used to call God-the-Father) that his life may be saved:
Matthew 36-40 36 Then Jesus went with them to a place called Gethsemane; and he said to his disciples, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.” 37 He took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be grieved and agitated. 38 Then he said to them, “I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and stay awake with me.” 39 And going a little farther, he threw himself on the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not what I want but what you want.” 40
So G-d willed and accepted Yeshua’s prayer to the astonishment of Pauline-Christianity people and saved the life of Yeshua against all the odds, please, right?
So, G-d made it possible to let the cup pass from him. Yeshua’s prayer was accepted by G-d. Right?
Regards
And Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah did not die on the Cross/Pole and G-d willed and made it possible to save Yeshua’s life like G-d made it possible for Jonah against all odds, right?
Why do Christians primarily follow Jesus instead of god? While god may be in the house, most prayers and worship services praise the good news of Jesus from the new testament. During my days at church I felt praying to Jesus was a waste of time there praying to god made better sense to me.
People repeat word for word scripture from the bible if it say pray this in my name and god will hear you. At the end prayer it is said, “in Jesus name” because the bible told me so.
Christians are charged to live life as Jesus did. The bible states Jesus was a perfect man, without sin. How is that relevant today, knowing according to the. bible everyone has sinned and come short of god’s glory?
Church and religions are in the business of providing godly services, prayer, support, worship and other activities. These things cost money so tithing is made by attendees and supporters to ensure the longevity and prosperity of the church and religion.
Church leaders are ordinary men and women. They are not any different than you or me, so they do not deserve to be set on a pedestal, even though they may consider themselves better, holier etc.
I agree with you here that praying to Jesus was a waste of time as Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah himself prayed to G-d the father and never claimed to be god in first person.
I’m not sure that’s universally true, is it? Though it may be the official church doctrine, in Orthodox and Catholic theology. How about the many Protestant sects? I honestly don’t know, but I think the question of the divine nature of Christ is unresolved in the hearts of many Christians, especially those who wear their faith loosely.
Trinitarianism implies a distinction between the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; and Christ prayed to the Father in the garden, and called out to Him in despair on the cross. The Jesus of the Gospels was no ordinary man, but he undoubtedly was a man, and as a man he prayed to God in his darkest moments.
Personally I do pray to Jesus, but then I also pray to the Virgin Mary, and I’m not entirely sure why. When I pray to God, that’s like reaching out directly toward the source.
And Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah never claimed to be god, the Israelites were never waiting for a God to come, never ever, please, right?
I pointed out that if Jesus “came back to life”, out here in reality that must mean he was never dead; and that extraordinary claims require evidence of extraordinary quality, whereas the evidence for the resurrection is of extremely poor quality ─ a routine kind of miracle to attribute to a religious hero in that culture, no eyewitness account, no contemporary account within 20 years and none with any details within 45 years, no independent account.
Then we have Paul’s mention, the four descriptions in the gospels, and the mention in Acts 1 ─ as I said, none by an eyewitness, none contemporary, none independent AND each of the 6 contradicting the other 5 in major ways.
Here are some of the contradictions I’m talking about. (I posted it once before but neglected to note the page.)
As I said earlier, you couldn’t renew a dog license on evidence of that quality, ‘
1. Who went to the tomb?
Paul: – Mark: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome Matthew: MM, MmJ Luke: MM, MmJ, Joanna John: MM
2. What did they see?
Paul: – Mark: Open tomb Matthew: An earthquake. An angel descending who rolled away the stone and sat on it. He looked like lightning, his raiment white as snow Luke: Open tomb John: Open tomb
3. Were any guards there?
Paul: – Mark: No. Matthew: The guards trembled. Luke: No John: No
4. What did they do?
Paul: – Mark: Went in. Matthew: – Luke: Went in John: Ran to fetch Peter and the Beloved Disciple who ran to the tomb and saw the linen
5. Did they see anyone in or at the tomb?
Paul: – Mark: Saw one young man in a white robe. Told Jesus had risen, and would meet the disciples at Galilee Matthew: Addressed by an angel. Told Jesus had risen, and would meet the disciples at Galilee. Luke: Saw two men in dazzling apparel. Told Jesus was risen. John: No.
6. What did they do next?
Paul: – Mark: They fled in fear. Matthew: They left. Luke: They went and told the eleven but weren’t believed. John: Peter and the Beloved Disciple went home.
7. To whom did Jesus first appear?
Paul: Peter Mark: MM Matthew: MM and MmJ Luke: ‘Cleopas’ (= Cephas/Peter?) and Simon John: MM
8. How?
Paul: – Mark: As MM fled. Matthew: As MM and MmJ were going home. He told them he’d meet the disciples at Galilee. Luke: As Cleopas and Simon walked to Emmaus. They didn’t recognize him. That night at dinner he broke the bread and they realized who he was. John: At the tomb. MM mistook him for the gardener. Then she recognized him. He said, ‘Inform my brethren’.
9. What did the guards do?
Paul: – Mark: – Matthew: Told the chief priests. Were paid to say, Disciples stole the body. Luke: – John: –
10. What did the others do?
Paul: – Mark: – Matthew: The eleven went to Galilee. Luke: Went to Jerusalem, told the disciples &c. John: MM told the disciples.
11. To whom did Jesus second appear?
Paul: The twelve [sic]. Mark: ‘two of them’. Matthew: The eleven. Luke: The eleven and others. John: The disciples and others
12. Where?
Paul: – Mark: – Matthew: At Galilee Luke: While MM, MmJ and Joanna were reporting to the eleven. John: At table, with doors shut
13. With what result?
Paul: – Mark: The two told the others but weren’t believed. Matthew: They worshiped him but some doubted. He told them to preach to all nations. Luke: They thought he was a ghost. He reassured them. He led them to Bethany. He was carried up to heaven. John: They were glad. He gave them the Holy Spirit and power to forgive.
14. To whom did Jesus third appear?
Paul: The five hundred. Mark: The eleven at table. He upbraided them for their disbelief. He told them signs – demons, tongues, serpents, poisons. He went up to heaven. Matthew: * Luke: * John: At the same house as before, with the doors locked. He reassured Thomas.
15. To whom did Jesus fourth appear?
Paul: James Mark: * Matthew: * Luke: * John: Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the BD and another disciple. They didn’t recognize him at first. They caught lots of fish. They recognized him at breakfast. They argued over the Beloved Disciple waiting till Jesus returned.
16. To whom did Jesus fifth appear?
Paul: All the apostles.
17. Where did Jesus ascend to heaven?
Galilee (Mark 16:7, 16:19; Matt 28:16)
Bethany / Jerusalem Luke 24:50, John, unclear, Acts 1:4+1:9
paarsurrey comments:
A marvelous post of our friend @bxx 2 , exposing the quality of witnessing of the 4 Gospels on the event of Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah’s Crucifixion.
These are some of the problems with the resurrection as an historical event ─
The story is truly, madly, deeply not believable, just on the face of it. There is no way that a person whose body’s life support functions have irreversibly ceased ─ which is what death is ─ can come back to life. If they can they never satisfied the definition of death. • The story is a common one in ancient times, the sort of thing all sorts of people in all sorts of stories did because it was expected. Just in the bible alone ─ * Samuel came back after his death and spoke with Saul (though arguably he was a ghost, not a resurrected body.) * Elijah raised the Zarephath woman’s son (1 Kings 17:17+). * Elisha raised the Shunammite woman’s son (2 Kings 4:32+). * The man whose dead body touched Elisha’s bones was resurrected (2 Kings 4:32+) * Jesus raised the Nain widow’s son (Luke 7:12+). * Jesus raised Lazarus (John 11:41-44). * Peter raised Tabitha / Dorcas (Acts 9:36-40). * Matthew describes the faithful dead at large in the streets of Jerusalem (Matthew 27:52-53). (And excepting Tabitha alone, notice how nobody raises dead women. Even Orpheus couldn’t do it.) • There is no eyewitness account of it. • There is no contemporary account of it. • There is no independent account of it. • There are four ‘accounts’ in the gospels, a mention by Paul and a mention in Acts 1. Each of those ‘accounts’ contradicts the other five in major ways. You couldn’t renew a dog license with evidence of that quality ─ it’s abysmal.
Protestants are “Bible only.” They don’t really care about books that are not the bible, to their detriment, as they therefore know very little about how the early church worked or how their own doctrines like trinitarianism came to be mainstream. They also falsely imagine that the early church was like evangelical churches, when in fact the historical evidence indicates the early church was more of a proto catholic/orthodox variety that believed in Real Presence, infant baptism, salvific baptism, the authority of the bishops, and much much more.
paarsurrey wrote:
So neither the Catholics nor the Protestants have anything from Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, right?
When the Antichrist comes, no one will believe it is the Antichrist. People will never believe, no matter how many seals the Antichrist puts on their foreheads. Because people seriously did not believe the “fairy tales of the Bible.” Even Christians.
There are always excuses on the road to hell:
Christine: “give me proof of your god existing” The god with small “g” does not exist (the satan is god with small g). The God with big “G” does exist.
Quote from friend @qxxxxxxxxxxh ” When the Antichrist comes, no one will believe it is the Antichrist. People will never believe, no matter how many seals the Antichrist puts on their foreheads. ” Unquote
Isn’t it exactly, it transpires, what happened when the Hellenist-Paul – the seed of the Anti-Christ faked a vision and blatantly opposed the acts and Way of (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah and his teachings, please? Right? And thus Hellenist-Paul deviated the simple and frustrated followers of Yeshua- the (truthful) Israelite Messiah to Hellenist concepts and creeds (like dying, rising, atoning, ascending deity), one gets to know, please, right?
One may like to view paarsurrey post #36 and #90 in the thread ” Vatican Removes Anti-Abortion Activist From the Priesthood” on RF:
paarsurrey said: ↑#36 Is there anything from (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah on the matter, please? Right? What if Mary would have aborted, please? Right?
Does Jesus specifically mention abortion, not that I know of, but that would be making an argument from silence. You seem to get very wrapped up in the ‘exact’ words of Jesus. This is the food, the nectar of scholars. What you read in the Gospels are from the next generation, the sub-apostolic. With the realization that the promised second coming had not yet happened, the need to write for future generations was their purpose.
” the need to write for future generations was their ( the gospel’s) purpose .”
Dark Energy got Nobel Prize. So, in Universe are these three: Dark Energy, Dark Matter, and matter. Therefore, if a person is religious, he places God as Dark Energy, Paradise as Dark Matter, and matter as matter. If a person is not religious, he invents new essences (new particles, new universes, modified Newton Gravity), which go against the Ockham Razor.
The mathematical formula Lambda*g_{mu nu} =T_{mu nu} of Dark Energy shows all properties of Omnipresent and Unchangeable God. And God is not matter, but energy, due to dogmas of Church.
I wrote “It is God for a religious person only.” I did not write “It is God for any religious person.”
qxxxxxxxxxxxh of “Religion: Eastern Orthodox Christianity“
One’s premise to consider god in terms of physical, material and or science terms is totally erroneous, one gets to know, the truthful G-d is neither material or physical nor a spirit; all material, physical and spirits are G-d’s creation, and that is why He claims to be the Creator of everything, please, right?
Is this why it is hard to tell the difference between the Christian right and fascism?
Many experts agree that fascism is a mass political movement that emphasizes extreme nationalism, militarism, and the supremacy of both the nation and the single, powerful leader over the individual citizen. This model of government stands in contrast to liberal democracies, which support individual rights, competitive elections, and political dissent.
Isn’t it a wrong question, G-d is the same for every religion and or no-religion , it is the Hellenist- Pauline aka ” Christian” concept of god that is wrong and is discussed/debated in this thread , one gets to know, please? Right?
So, it is the “Christian” concept of god that is faulty, they need to correct their thoughts, (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah never had any such concepts, please, right?
When the Antichrist comes, no one will believe it is the Antichrist. People will never believe, no matter how many seals the Antichrist puts on their foreheads. Because people seriously did not believe the “fairy tales of the Bible.” Even Christians.
There are always excuses on the road to hell:
Christine: “give me proof of your god existing” The god with small “g” does not exist (the satan is god with small g). The God with big “G” does exist.
Quote from friend @qxxxxxxxxxxxh ” When the Antichrist comes, no one will believe it is the Antichrist. People will never believe, no matter how many seals the Antichrist puts on their foreheads. ” Unquote
Isn’t it exactly, it transpires, what happened when the Hellenist-Paul – the seed of the Anti-Christ faked a vision and blatantly opposed the acts and Way of (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah and his teachings, please? Right? And thus Hellenist-Paul deviated the simple and frustrated followers of Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah to Hellenist concepts and creeds (like dying, rising, atoning, ascending deit), one gets to know, please, right?
When I put the above question into my preferred search engine, I got answers ranging from 300 to 45,000+. This may be in part because of a difference in the definition of “denomination”. The high numbers usually result from counting churches (e.g. churches of different countries or even states as different denominations) which have no differences in their dogma. The low numbers otoh lump denominations together which have doctrinal difference but share a common name.
So this will be the counter thread to my recently opened
What makes a Christian?. Here I focus on the doctrinal differences. I expect that we will find that the number of denominations is much higher than 300 but lower than 45,000. The simple fact that with every question that gets answered differently, the number doubles (for binary answerable questions). What are the differences in the denominations you know of? (Simply think of why you are a not a Catholic/Baptist/Quaker/JW/…)
I think the disagreement comes from that people don’t like the truth. They like their own doctrines more. Maybe they have even read the whole Bible, but they just don’t like everything it says, that is why they make own interpretation and doctrine and twist straight to crooked.
“Religion: Disciple of Jesus”!
paarsurrey #31 Can one name even one disciple of (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah who wrote any of the four Gospels, please? Right?
Regards ________________ Note for the “Religion: Christian or Christianity”, please: “(Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah did not and could not die a cursed death on the Cross”, to atone the sins of anybody, one gets to know from many clues in the Gospels itself, please. Right?
Further, how could a ” Methodist Christian” base concepts ignoring Yeshua’s warning that those who do not follow Him build their lives as houses on sand, liable to be washed away by the elements, one understand, please? Right?
In the wake of the above, it transpires, the site is not reliable for taking guidance, please, right?
How could a Catholic base the concepts/creeds of his religion on what is not from (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, please? Do the Catholics deem themselves greater than (Jesus) Yeshua that they do like this, please? Right? Isn’t it a disrespect to (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, please? Right?
Regards _____________ *“It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds”. The above quote is not from (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, it is from Fourth Lateran Council, (1215), the 12th ecumenicalcouncil, generally considered the greatest council before Trent. The council was years in preparation as Pope Innocent III desired the widest possible representation. More than 400 bishops, 800 abbots and priors, envoys of many European kings, and personal representatives of Frederick II (confirmed by the council as emperor of the West) took part.” Fourth Lateran Council | Description, History, & Facts
Philosophically and religiously I believe that Europe as a whole, has been losing the minimum of spirituality that was highly praised by the Enlightenment of the XVIII century. Back then philosophers like Voltaire or Kant still had the awareness of the necessity of a moral and philosophical order…that Deists used to call God.Kant used to say: Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe, the more often and steadily we reflect upon them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me. As in nowadays I believe that Europe has lost that decency and that desire to implement the moral law, and universal justice. Why? Because science and medicine have convinced us that we are all eternal. And that is why you see so many old people who are terrified of getting ill. Because they are not prepared to death, neither philosophically, nor religiously. The awareness (or rather the delusion) of being eternal (that is what Heidegger would have called the non-existence because we are mortals, we are not immortals) pushes people to become a-religious. Or atheists.
I really dislike whenever someone tells my country is a very religious country. Some sort of Catholiland. No…it is not. It is made up of nominal Catholics who go to Church just to show off and to brag about their latest fashionable dress, or just to meet people.They have no idea what God is. The great majority of the youngest generations are atheists. But some blame the school which pushes students to be rationalists, for school is supposed secular. But religious education is entrusted to households not to the secular State and its apparatuses. So I do think mine is an atheistic country. De facto atheistic and nominally religious. The fear of God has disappeared…which is supposed to be the seventh gift of the Holy Spirit.
#1 “ They (the Europeans) have no idea what God is. The great majority of the youngest generations are atheists. But some blame the school which pushes students to be rationalists, for school is supposed secular. But religious education is entrusted to households not to the secular State and its apparatuses. So I do think mine is an atheistic country. De facto atheistic and nominally religious. The fear of God has disappeared…which is supposed to be the seventh gift of the Holy Spirit. “
It is the fault of the Hellenist-Paulian religion aka ” Christianity” itself whatever its denomination, one gets to know, please.
This (Christianity) religion was and is so mythical, irrational and far from reality that people opted to become ” Nones” (and or any of its denomination”, one imagines, please, right?
I really am not trying to be mean here but honestly…what you are doing is a bit problematic and might not be the best approach to this question… A large number of Jews are clearly still waiting for their Messiah and of course this would seem to mean the New Testament Gospel has no relevance to them. Having said that, I am not sure its a good idea to engage in a Christian discussion on this topic in that manner. Messianic Jews are far better equipped to deal with this [New Testament inspiration] issue.
It appears to me that perhaps you are of the Jewish faith and not Messianic. Would it not be better for you to simply stick with the facts that are relevant to your faith and not argue points you cannot make a case for or against (such as denying New Testament authenticity). Whether Jews choose to accept reality or not, documented religious history of God’s people has moved on from the 5 books of the Tora and the 24 books of the Tanakh…we have just a wee bit more of the story now, and what he have in the New Testament has strangely enough, remained consistent with those early writings/books you claim as authoritative!
If you wish to argue the councils of Nicea (325), Rome (382), Trent (1546), and the Westminster Confession of faith in 1647…perhaps start another thread I do not need to argue those points here.
We know for a fact he [Jesus] really existed. Even well known atheist scholars admit and indeed even advocate that historical truth. We know on the balance of probabilities he was killed on a cross by order of Roman regional governor Pontius Pilate, at the demand of the Jews, during the reign of Herod Antipas. Given that and the above information, it is simply pointless to go down this rabbit warren with the argument “did God inspire/write Revelation 21”.
Click to expand…
” A large number of Jews are clearly still waiting for their Messiah “
Yes, the Israelites aka Jews were waiting and still wait for their Moshiach, a human being, not a Hellenist-Paulian (dying, rising, atoning, ascending) deity, which is , it transpires, a creation of Hellenist-Paul via a fake vision and has nothing to do with (Jesus) Yeshua*- the Israelite Messiah, please, right?
Regards I am an Ahmadiyya peaceful Muslim _____________________ * who did not die a cursed death on the Cross as per many clues very much in the Gospels itself, please, right?
There is only one way to approach the Bible, and that is how we approach any other issue as intellectual beings: rationally* and via facts. This means to drop all cultural assumptions,
I am not sure if this has been discussed before or not, however, I have had this idea lingering in the back of my mind for some time. I do not have a logical order for what I have written below, they are all just randoms thoughts banging around in my head that I am putting down. Its a developing story…eventually some order will be made of it all I’m sure.
Ok, so on to the question…
We know that prior to the fall, God created the heavens and the earth and he saw that it was good. Now theological discussions centre on what is meant by the term good, however for now lets just accept that something created without sin must have been awesome enough that the world was not tarnished in any way and things lived forever.
Now there is the catch phrase that interests me…things lived forever.
If one considers the current bio cycle on this planet, we have seasons, we have trees that regularly loose their leaves (even outside of the seasonal changes), animals deficate on the ground, insects and various other forms of life feed on that stuff and convert it etc etc.
In the bicycle we see today, its not just the plant life that has to contribute to the bicycle…animals also form part of the process. So they live and die as well.
Are only things with a concscious mind able to be considered as dying…so plants don’t count theologically (I can think of stories when plants are claimed to have died in the Bible…so this is problematic obviously)
The point is, when talking about plants, how does one define what is happening in the cycle when a leaf falls from a tree? Has that leaf died? Do termites feasting on trees actually cause the death of the tree or did termites not eat trees in the past?
the Bible I believe says lions ate grass…is a lion or cow eatings grass causing the death of grass?
Did mankind and even animals poop? If food was perfect, was the any waste produced before the fall?
The bible says God placed Adam in the garden to “tend to it”…what would that have meant/looked like in a sinless world?
If no waste produced, did plants remove nutrients from the soil such that it needed replacing?
Before sin entered this world, could any of the life>death>life bicycle as we know it today have actually existed or did this all come as a result of sin?
God says in the book of Revelation chapter 21
there will be no more night.
There wont be any sun or moon,
all of the light that sines on the New Earth will shine from the glory of God radiating out from the New Jerusalem from the Lamp of the Lamb
a for the first heaven and earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.
5And the One seated on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.”
10And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the holy city of Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God,
11shining with the glory of God. Its radiance was like a most precious jewel
23And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, because the glory of God illuminates the city, and the Lamb is its lamp.
24By its light the nations will walk, and into it the kings of the earth will bring their glory.
How might all of the above and any other biblical statements that do not appear to align well with our current model of the life-death cycle providing nutrients to the earth, affect a Biocycle in the Biblical model of the future?
This I think would require us to try to reconcile the book of Revelation with the first 3 chapters of Genesis…and indeed I believe that even the story of the flood and what the earth looked like after it may also need to be references (even though we are living in the result of that change on this earth)
sorry for the mess above…its all just thoughts at present. I hope where Im going with this makes sense to people as it presents some very deep theological and scientific issues that could very well be almost impossible to reconcile, however, I would like to try to find a solution that is a compromise between biblical theology and inerrancy, and our modern understanding of the science.
Isn’t the Hellenist Paulians’- Bible aka “Christian-Bible/Gospels/NT” an accusation on/against (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah that it is from him, as it sounds loudly from its internal contents, please, right?
paarsurrey added ( #1,192 ) : ↑ There is nothing in the Christian-Bible/Gospels that is from ( Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, one gets to know, please, right? If yes, then kindly quote a single verse, repeat a single verse that is from Yeshua in the first person, please. Right?
And it makes it clear ,beyond doubt that, the verse John 14:2 is a third person narrative, please, right?
Didn’t one fail miserably to quote even a single verse from Jesus in first person, please? Right? One is a friend so one can try another time, please, right?
From a Biblical point of view, there are scriptures that point to the end of this system. The events described have been going on for a number of years (Matt. 24:7,8; Luke 21:11; 2 Tim. 3: 1-5). It is good to keep things in perspective though and remember that in Matthew 24:42-44 it clearly says “Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. But know one thing: If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it.”
From a financial point of view, we are indeed at the end of a cycle. How is this one going to end, after years of corruption, financial “magic” and endless currency creation… it’s very hard to say. Every time I think the financial system is finally going to collapse, central banks come up with another trick and kick the can down the road some more. I don’t know if they have any tricks left, but even if they do, this madness can only go so far. I just hope it doesn’t end with WWIII and millions of innocent people dead.
Regards ____________ * Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah never claimed to be dying, rising, atoning, ascending deity (as did the Hellenists), did he ever, please?
Aren’t we already very much in the End Times*, and that is why the advent of Second Coming* (1835-1908) – the End Times reformer of all revealed religions has taken place, one gets to know, please? Right? It must ,however, be kept in mind that the End of Times is also the Beginning of Times when things take a new shape as if man has entered into New Earth and New Sky , evolved and or created for him, please, right?
Regards ___________ N.B.
*NT is a mix of falsehood of Hellenist-Paul’s epistles etc. one gets to know, please
with the *Gospels-
anonymous third person narrative said to contain some events of (Jesus’ life)/
Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, could be truthful if it is in the first person,
doesn’t it make, it transpires, an item of “handle with care”, meaning one has to thrash truth from falsehood from within the NT, if possible, please, right??!
Originally a Christian meant a disciple of Jesus. Obviously Jesus is not his own disciple.
….The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch. Acts 11:26
And in Biblical point of view Christians are actually Jews:
If therefore the uncircumcised keep the ordinances of the law, won’t his uncircumcision be accounted as circumcision? Won’t the uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfills the law, judge you, who with the letter and circumcision are a transgressor of the law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter; whose praise is not from men, but from God. Romans 2:26-29
But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them, and became partaker with them of the root and of the richness of the olive tree; don’t boast over the branches. But if you boast, it is not you who support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, “Branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.” True; by their unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by your faith. Don’t be conceited, but fear; for if God didn’t spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Romans 11:17-21
Obeying God is not heavy if person loves God.
For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. His commandments are not grievous. 1 John 5:3
And the source of one’s argument of the above, please? Must be certainly incorrect, as reasons doesn’t support it , please, right?
“Christ, Christian, Jesus” are not words of Aramaic, so one’s argument is flawed, Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah spoke Aramaic, please. Right?
Regards
OOO
Did Jesus know Latin or Greek?
As Jonathan Katz, a Classics lecturer at Oxford University, told BBC News, Jesus probably didn’t know more than a few words in Latin. He probably knew more Greek, but it was not a common language among the people he spoke to regularly, and he was likely not too proficient.Mar 30, 2020
But was (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah ever a ” Christian” and or he could ever be as such, one gets to know, please? Right? Wasn’t Yeshua an Israelite and was sent to the Israelites as a Messiah, it transpires, please? Right? “Christianity” was invented by the Hellenist Paul via a fake vision that blinded Paul, one understands, isn’t it a disrespect to Yeshua, therefore, to say that Yeshua was a ” Christian” meaning a follower of the Hellenist-Paul, reason says, please? Same way it would be futile for one to become a “Paulian-Christian”, one imagines, even if it is the easiest, please, right?
Regards
paarsurrey added ( #20 ) :And the easiest does not have to be truthful also, please, right?
paarsurrey post #7, in the thread “ Is Christianity the easiest religion? “ on RF:
Is Christianity the easiest religion?
But was (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah ever a ” Christian” and or he could ever be as such, one gets to know, please? Right? Wasn’t Yeshua an Israelite and was sent to the Israelites as a Messiah, it transpires, please? Right? “Christianity” was invented by the Hellenist Paul via a fake vision that blinded Paul, one understands, isn’t it a disrespect to Yeshua, therefore, to say that Yeshua was a ” Christian” meaning a follower of the Hellenist-Paul, reason says, please? Same way it would be futile for one to become a “Paulian-Christian”, one imagines, even if it is the easiest, please, right?
There is no anger, but simple frustration with someone who completely ignores the purpose of producing the Gospels in the first place, to hand on the faith of the 1st Christians for future generations, which was by word of mouth only. There is absolutely nothing remaining of the initial stage, Jesus and the Apostles. Since the Gospels are written not for the purpose of producing any accurate chronological history nor a complete biography of the life of Jesus, why criticize on those very grounds? The Gospels state only that ‘Jesus grew in stature and wisdom’ through the ‘missing’ years. Your personal problem accepting Christian authors’ portrayal of who Jesus is/was is irrelevant.
” purpose of producing the Gospels “
paarsurrey said ( #131 ) :Who set the purpose of the Gospels, please, if (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah set the purpose, then kindly quote from Yeshua in this connection in first person in an unambiguous, unequivocal and straightforward manner, please?? Right?
If Yeshua had not produced the Gospels, as one admits, one gets to know, please, then why read the Gospels in the first place, please? Right?
I am happy to know that one is not angry, please. It is just a friendly ” Religious Debate”, right?
I am done with any dialogue with you concerning the historical Jesus since you have absolutely no knowledge of the compilation, nor the theology of the written Christian Testament.
Is there a need of being frustrated and angry, please? Just be reasonable and follow (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, in deeds and the teachings, who never:
died a cursed death on the Cross in the first place, many clues in the Bible itself, one must know
never rose from the dead as he was seen by many people
who was never, therefore, a god, it transpires
and therefore atoned no sins of the sinful Paulian-“Christians”
who travelled to Galilee, secretly, met with his friends
and went out of Judea, out the hands of Jews (and Romans) , his persecutors
Wrong, the highest holy days are the Easter Triduum, the three days of the Easter Triduum are from dusk on Holy Thursday to dusk on Good Friday (day one), dusk on Good Friday to dusk on Holy Saturday (day two), and dusk on Holy Saturday to dusk on Easter Sunday (day three).
Paarsurrey said :
Hi friend Pxxxl!
Did (Jesus) the Israelite Messiah celebrate it (Easter Triduum) and or give any commandment to celebrate it, please? Right?
How could Yeshua celebrate it or give commandments/teachings to do so, one understands,
as he never died on the Cross in the first place, never rose from the factual dead, one imagines,
for the atonement of sins of the sinful “Christians”
as “Christians”, it transpires, cannot leave sinning,
and Yeshua never ascended to skies, please, right??
It has most certainly no origin in Yeshua, one could say, right? Right?
For the run up to Chr-stmas, I have been debating with various people regarding the pagan nature of Chr-stmas, how it isn’t Biblical and how Yahweh is deeply displeased with those who engage in it.I was pleasantly surprised to hear how some people on RF know about the Saturnalia, Bacchanalia and Paganalia that existed before the birth of the Messiah, yet were celebrated around December 25th with the same symbols and practices that are kept at Chr-stmas. Only someone with a very limited thinking process would think that these things are merely coincidence. But Chr-stmas is over, however, I wanted to mention the fact that deadly blizzards have been raging across the U.S.A and in Canada with a special concentration on Chr-stmas day. Perhaps you were one of the people that were affected by this. So I’m going to ask the question that people on RF seem to be avoiding. Is this judgment from Yahweh? I don’t think it is mere coincidence that on Chr-stmas day this should take place. Now I want to start by saying I’m not gloating that many people have died during Xmas. Let me say that whenever they are deaths involved, I’m not happy about it, regardless if people were engaging in sinful practices. My attitude echoes Yahweh in Ezekiel 33:11 “Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Yahweh, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, people of Israel?’ Proverbs 24 says:
“Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, And let not thy heart be glad when he is overthrown; 18 Lest Yahweh see it, and it displease him, And he turn away his wrath from him.”
The Buffalo storms have been classed as “a crisis of epic proportion” and “the worst of the worst” by the New York Governor Kathy Hochul, a native of Buffalo, where 2.4-metre (8-foot) snow drifts against front doors and power outages in freezing temperatures have created life-threatening conditions.
More than 200,000 people across several eastern states woke up without power on Christmas morning, and many more had their holiday travel plans upended although the five-day-long storm featuring blizzard conditions and ferocious winds showed signs of easing. The two dozen weather-related deaths were confirmed across eight states, but some US media reported as many as 30 storm-linked fatalities, including four people in Colorado who likely died of exposure and at least seven in western New York.
In Canada, hundreds of thousands of people were left without power in Ontario and Quebec, many flights were canceled in major cities and train passenger service between Toronto and Ottawa was suspended.
Much of the US experienced some sort of winter weather during the large storm, which was generated by a bomb cyclone, a meteorological phenomenon when the atmospheric pressure quickly drops in a strong storm.
What does anger me is that people, I know, are blaming Yahweh for not allowing them to see their loved ones, or friends during this time. For ruining their Xmas, which according to the Chr-stian faith is the holiest day of the year, yet has no basis in the Bible. Yahshua was not even born on December 25, and further, Yahweh doesn’t command we remember his birth but his death at the Passover on the correct day set by the lunar calendar. I know some people are even blaming Yahweh because people have died, at least 60. Instead of blaming Yahweh, why don’t people start asking themselves the question, What am I doing wrong?
“ For the run up to Chr-stmas, I have been debating with various people regarding the pagan nature of Chr-stmas, how it isn’t Biblical and how Yahweh is deeply displeased with those who engage in it. “
paarsurrey said:
I agree, “Christmas” has no origin in (Jesus) Yeshua – the Israelite Messiah, please. Right? Did (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah and or Moses whom Yeshua followed, they ever said to celebrate their birth days or their death days, please, right? If yes, then anybody to quote from them in this connection, please. Right? Yeshua and or Moses also never celebrated anybody else’s birth days and or death day, please. Right?
Greeting, did not the Lord Jesus from his own Lips stated that he is God? let’s check the record.
John 2:18 “Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?” John 2:19 “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” John 2:20 “Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?”John 2:21 “But he spake of the temple of his body.” John 2:22 “When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.”
note verse 19. the Lord Jesus said that he would raise up his body after three days.
Note verse 22. “his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.”
if his disciples REMEMBERED what he and the what the SCRIPTURES said, why then did Peter say, on the Day of Pentecost, “God”, raised up Jesus body? ….. unless he KNEW that Jesus is God?
Sorry, didn’t one fail miserably to quote from Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah in first person in an unambiguous, unequivocal and straightforward manner, please? Right?
Greeting in the Name of the Lord Jesus, John 2:19 “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” are you saying that the Lord Jesus did not say this? look, I can careless if it was blue letters. the scripture states he “SAID” that, and the word SAID itself is not in red letters, so that excuse want work, nor the excuse, “Holy Bible King James Version (Red Letter Edition)”…… so?
what’s wrong, you have a problem seeing RED?
as with personal opinions, EXCUSES, moves me not either. so, you can try something else than that.
KIND regards in Christ Jesus,
101G.
Click to expand…
” John 2:19 “Jesus answered and said“
paarsurrey said: Didn’t one fail terribly a second time to quote from Yeshua in the first person, the above verse ” John 2:19 ” is a third person narrative from anonymous gospels named ” John” (most certainly) deceptively, as one understands please? Right?
Never mind , one is a friend, one can try a third time, if one likes to, please. Right?
John 1:1 :In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, andthe Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.
John 1:14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.
jxxxxxs Jesus is God/Man! Billions of people today will tell you, never mind the billions that have died in the past 2000 years!
The thing is i believe Jesus Christ is God. For God to be perfectly just, He would have to come into creation and demonstrate a sinless nature and be outside of time in His message and being.
These are all one’s Hellenist-Paulian tinted perceptions, as one gets to know, not at all from Yeshua, it transpires, please, right?
One is a good human being and one needs to quote from Yeshua for all these claims in first person in an unambiguous, unequivocal and straightforward manner, please. Right?
No Jesus/Yeshua the truthful Israelite Messiah never claimed as such in first person in a straightforward, unequivocal and unambiguous manner, please, right?
If yes, then anybody kindly quote from him in this connection, please. Right?
paarsurrey post #13, in the thread “ Is Jesus Christ the True God? On RF:
Friend @qxxxxxxxxxxh , who belongs to “Eastern Orthodox”! paarsurrey said: The truthful G-d exists irrespective and independent of whether humans believe him and or deny Him, and even if all the people vote (contra) that He does not exist, He needs no votes, please. Right?
Can islam truly justify the september 11th attacks on america? If so, how?
Did Islam/Quran mention it, please, right?
Regards ______________ #2Vxxxr, “Islam never justified the attacks. Only a widely rejected minority rationalized and justified the brazen acts of mass murder.” #3Rxxxl Rxxxxx, “Muslims throughout the world don’t justify the Sept. 11th attacks. These Muslims (see link below) certainly don’t justify it: “Those People Are Not Me” # 4Sxxxt Fxxxxxxxn, “It’s all a scam.” #7sxn rxxe, “The true answer is totally and absolutely NO.”
No, it confirms what Jesus told us in various places. Example John 14:23 Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.
paarsurrey said : Isn’t the said to be “John 14;23” a third person narrative of an anonymous narrator named after “John” for credulity purposes, please, right??
Humanity is facing enormous problems these days. Climate change will likely displace a BILLION people from their homes in the next few decades. We’re running out of fresh water and topsoil. We’re likely to face huge crop failures and food shortages.
We need to work together, if we’re to survive.
Religion is fundamentally divisive, not inclusive. Sure, there are exceptions. But mostly religion is divisive. Either you’re a Muslim, or you’re not. Either you’re a Christian or you’re not. This “us vs. them” worldview is exactly what we DO NOT NEED at this critical juncture.
We need inclusive, critical thinking. We do not need divisive, magical thinking.
And while I’m at it, most identity politics these days shares a lot in common with religion. The most important / destructive way in which this is true is in the establishment and defense of DOGMA. We need new dogma like we need a hole in the head.
Back in the 60s and 70s we used to say “question authority”. It’s still good advice, but I’d amend it a bit and say:
“Question authority and question dogma”. Unquote
paarsurrey said: ” Religion is fundamentally divisive, not inclusive. “ I don’t agree with one here, the truthful religion is basically uniting, isn’t it the non-belief in the truthful G-d that is divisive, please? Right? Regards
So 2 billion people that believe Jesus physically rose from the grave are wrong? Wow! That’s a lot of gullible people! Haha.
paarsurrey said:
Sure they are wrong as : Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah never died on the Cross, right? Never rose from the grave, right? He died a natural death later ,right? Never ascended to the skies, therefore, right? He is never to return physically, right?
Aren’t all these indications of gullibility, thrown down their throats, by the Hellenist-Pauline-Church, right? Isn’t it a “haux”, please, right?
What does Jesus’ physical resurrection mean to you?
paarsurrey: Physical resurrection or Ascension of Jesus- the truthful Israelite Messiah, never took place, isn’t it a misconception of the Christians people who have been mislead by the Hellenist Paul, please?
That is the “mystery”. In human understanding one can’t be 3 and 3 can’t be one.
paarsurrey said: Isn’t this “mystery” a fabrication of the Hellenist-Pauline-Church to deviate the simple followers of Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, from his teachings and his deeds, please, right?? The word trinity , and or the weird notion ” ONE IN THREE AND THREE IN ONE” , is not mentioned even once in the Bible by Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, is it mentioned, please? Right? Mxxn said: What does Jesus’ physical resurrection mean to you?
I doubt if the resurrection was entirely physical because the physical body had been badly beaten and mutilated. But since there were several witnesses, I am sure it occurred in some way that it appeared to be physical. So Jesus probably appeared in some other body that looked just like his original body but probably was an apparition.
” But since there were several witnesses, “ paarsurrey wrote: Jesus did not die on the Cross in the first place, so there was no and could not be any eye-witness of the event, please, right?
None of the BIBLE was written by man. Though men penned the texts, ALL THE WORDING WAS HIVEN THESE MEN COMES FROM THE HOLY SPIRIT making it INFALLIABLE. WHY is it that the greatest minds in U.S. HISTORY, John Quincy Adamd and John Marshall had no problems with it?
Did Holy Spirit claim to have authored Bible, please? Right? If yes, then kindly quote from the Holy Spirit, please. Right? or Is it only one’s accusation against the Holy Spirit, please? Right?
accusing Holy Spirit for writing Gospels, Holy Spirit never claimed having written the Christian Bible. Holy Spirit, Fallibility of the Christian Bible is obvious,
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
Which denomination from the 45000+ denominations of the Hellenist Pauline Christianity including LDS and JWs do follow it, please? Right? Is it just for the ears to enjoy it , please? Right?
#564 thread “Paul – An Apostle?” paarsurrey said: ↑ ” Jesus when he was in the flesh “
Didn’t Jesus have any bones and was made of only flesh during his three years ministry, please? Right? Kindly quote from Jesus for such a claim and the reason given by Jesus in this connection, please. Right? cxxxx said↑ Yes, Jesus was both human and divine in one miraculous personality. That means he had all the things a man would have, bones, teeth, hair, toenails etc. Paarsurrey wrote:
One could not quote a claim from (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah’s words that he was just a lump of flesh with no bones, please. Right? Similarly, one could not quote a claim from (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah’s word in a straightforward and unequivocal manner that he was Almighty God, please. Right? The reasons given, if any, are also to be from Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah not from anybody else, please. Right?
Sorry, but your question reads to me like, “Why pray to Jesus in a church when Jesus did not pray to Jesus?”
Paarsurrey says:
Jesus was never a Christian, he was a Jew, please? Do Jews worship in the synagogue? Synagogue, also spelled synagog, in Judaism, a community house of worship that serves as a place not only for liturgical (public worship) services but also for assembly and study. synagogue | Definition, History, & Facts Didn’t Jesus used to go to the Synagogue to worship, please? Right?
While the anti-Zionist Jewish man was protesting Israel and supporting the Palestinian people, he was surrounded by Zionists who support Israel, and the Zionists began to harass and insult the Jewish man.
Jesus/Yeshua – the truthful Israelite Messiah was an Israelite (aka Jew) and he followed in the Word of G-d given to Moses (aka Torah), right? He is reported to have claimed to be “Son of God” (not by him in first person but by anonymous narrators in third person) in the sense it was usually used in the Torah ( aka OT), right? Which, therefore, only meant:
being loved by “G-d”-(‘the-father’)/Allah/YHVH or
a chosen one (Messenger/Prophet)of Him, right?
It is ,therefore, wrong to take “son of god” in physical and literal terms, right? It is out of context that the Christianity people, all 45000+ denominations (including JWs and LDS ), if they take it in physical and or literal terms , right? Isn’t it an accusation against Yeshua that he was “son of god”, right??
paarsurrey 
You must be logged in to post a comment.