Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2014 23:52:29 GMT -5
As far as I can see, Jesus never spoke of a particular group or religion and probably wouldn't even recognize what has been done and said 'in his name'. If he related to any religion it was Judaism, not Christianity. i was just joshin
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 16, 2014 0:02:32 GMT -5
?? you wrote But then, Christians don't like is to be told something by non-Christians, I have noticed. I answered and i know to be for those who know it all as well But I have not a clue what your answer means. I don't know where the "is" came from in my response.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 16, 2014 0:04:03 GMT -5
That's a snarky thing to say, isn't it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 0:49:50 GMT -5
you wrote But then, Christians don't like is to be told something by non-Christians, I have noticed. I answered and i know to be for those who know it all as well But I have not a clue what your answer means. I don't know where the "is" came from in my response. well if i add a two letter word it may help u and i know it to be for those who know it all as well the "is" is there because you put it there
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 0:50:41 GMT -5
That's a snarky thing to say, isn't it? i don't think so but you are telling the story
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 16, 2014 7:21:37 GMT -5
Not to disparage your belief in Jesus, but he is not the only Master that made an impact on the world. The Buddha was before Christ and Christ used a lot of what Buddha had already said. So, while I can imagine Jesus might have had an impact on people, he was not the first one to do so in history and he won't be the last. This is the post I was responding to: Looking at the only Greek text I have I don't see Judas being Jesus. The question was "Who made the change and when? What original text is available to show this?
|
|
|
Post by xna on Jul 16, 2014 7:55:59 GMT -5
I agree with this church message. God doesn't hate anyone and neither do i That contradicts what I read.
Proverbs 6:16-19"There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue,hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out liesand a person who stirs up conflict in the community." Psalm 5:5"The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity."
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 16, 2014 15:36:57 GMT -5
This is the post I was responding to: Looking at the only Greek text I have I don't see Judas being Jesus. The question was "Who made the change and when? What original text is available to show this? Rational -- drop it. In the Aramaic Language at the time, according to linguistics experts, both Jesus and Judas (and Jude and some other versions of the name) were all the same name -- and I have reason to believe that the Aramaic name didn't even start with the letter "J". I'm not an expert in Aramaic, and obviously you aren't either. So what bug have you up your derriere that you can't accept that I have reason to trust an actual expert -- or do you just think I make up things to impress people? Since any Biblical original text about these people was written in a language that none of those characters spoke -- what do you expect from me? If you want to know the name of the expert I heard it from, I can give you his name and you can take the matter up with him.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 16, 2014 17:16:27 GMT -5
Yes, Sir. Sorry to have raised the question. I found it odd that there are apocrypha that contain the names Judas/Jesus from different sources. I also doubt that there is a letter "J" in Aramaic. I think "L" might be a close replacement.An explanation of the claim you made. Sorry to have troubled you. No, I will look for other sources. Or I may just make up a story and then plant that story and support for it on the internet to impress people!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 21:58:59 GMT -5
Quote - "Which do you prefer? the mystery or the explanation? One thing is for certain, "Jesus" was not "Jesus" in the original text no matter what language it was written in, so all the appearances of "Jesus" were translated to something in all the other languages. But then, Christians don't like is to be told something by non-Christians, I have noticed."
Nor do the Jews, now and back then. Jesus is well documented in the Old Testament. Everything from his virgin birth to his rejection by the children of his own mother. From him as a boy through to his agony on the cross. From his triumph over his human nature to his rejection by those who despised his simplicity and lowliness.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 16, 2014 22:25:48 GMT -5
Quote - "Which do you prefer? the mystery or the explanation? One thing is for certain, "Jesus" was not "Jesus" in the original text no matter what language it was written in, so all the appearances of "Jesus" were translated to something in all the other languages. But then, Christians don't like is to be told something by non-Christians, I have noticed." Nor do the Jews, now and back then. Jesus is well documented in the Old Testament. Everything from his virgin birth to his rejection by the children of his own mother. From him as a boy through to his agony on the cross. From his triumph over his human nature to his rejection by those who despised his simplicity and lowliness.
What you find "documented" is a series of writers searching the OT & writing in an attempt to verify what they are writing about Jesus.
It is obvious that the writers of the gospels wrote of Jesus foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem but were actually writing the that after it had happened!
If they would write that, what makes anyone think that everything else they wrote was the absolute truth?
It isn't a matter of rejecting anyone's "simplicity and lowliness."
It is a matter of the realization of how the NT was written.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 22:33:37 GMT -5
So in that case, WHO is the author of Isaiah 53 writing of?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 16, 2014 22:58:51 GMT -5
So in that case, WHO is the author of Isaiah 53 writing of? Well since virgin just means a young woman, it would apply to everyone born wouldn't it? also, many believe that Isaiah was someone who inspired Jesus to make Isaiah's words his destiny. A man of suffering who would bear the sins of many for example. Anyone who knew the Jewish writings could try to imitate as much as possible in order to be the Messiah they were looking for. However, the Messiah the Jewish people were looking for was someone that would free them from captivity. They spent much of their time in captivity to one strong nation after another. God/Yahweh had promised to deliver them from this. It wasn't a spiritual kingdom they were referring to it was a literal freeing of the Jews from captivity once and for all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 23:06:14 GMT -5
Uh huh... so why didn't Jesus try to free the Jews, instead of dismissing their expectations, and telling them they and their children would face literal extermination? Why did Jesus tell the Jews to give under Caesar what belonged to Caesar? And was the New Testament written after 1967? That is the date of of Jesus' prophecy concerning Jerusalem once again being in Jewish hands transpired.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 16, 2014 23:20:50 GMT -5
Uh huh... so why didn't Jesus try to free the Jews, instead of dismissing their expectations, and telling them they and their children would face literal extermination? Why did Jesus tell the Jews to give under Caesar what belonged to Caesar? And was the New Testament written after 1967? That is the date of of Jesus' prophecy concerning Jerusalem once again being in Jewish hands transpired. From some of the things I have read, Jesus never meant to get crucified. You have to remember that the gospels were written after his death and after the destruction of Jerusalem. Since he was obviously not going to lead them to victory, they needed to make him out to be a spiritual liberator. Since they did see the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of many lives, the scattering of the Jews it would make sense to say that Jesus foresaw this and said it. But we have nothing that was written by Jesus, only heresay after the fact by others that had never even met him. We all know what word of mouth can be like as far as accuracy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 23:28:54 GMT -5
This is one version of Christian thought. It is one of many. Some versions say that Jesus didn't even exist. Like lots of J.F.Kennedy stories - they focus upon some aspects at the expense of others.
Lots want to be famous, or wise, martyrs or great warriors - but I don't know of any great men who wanted to lay down their lives the way Jesus did.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 16, 2014 23:53:17 GMT -5
This is one version of Christian thought. It is one of many. Some versions say that Jesus didn't even exist. Like lots of J.F.Kennedy stories - they focus upon some aspects at the expense of others. Lots want to be famous, or wise, martyrs or great warriors - but I don't know of any great men who wanted to lay down their lives the way Jesus did. We are only told by others that this is what he wanted. After the fact, after his crucifixion. What else would you say if you were saying this man was the Messiah then he goes and gets himself killed? I do know that some do not feel Jesus existed as an actual man, but rather as a Christ consciousness. This is mostly because his story resembles so many of the older religions with their dying/rising God/man. It's not a new story, the one told about Jesus.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 23:57:57 GMT -5
Yes, it's not an "original" story because some cultures also have the son of God narratives. But what is compelling here is that Christianity itself is not "original" in that it derrives from the Old Testament. Even Moses the Law Giver, who "gave us the Old Testament" spoke of a time when there would be no more law and the Messiah would come who would be "like me." Best of all I love Jacob's prophecy of his son Judah - from Judah would come a nation, a monarchy, a law --- until the Messiah comes. ie no more nation, no more monarchy, no more law.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 17, 2014 0:02:33 GMT -5
Yes, it's not an "original" story because some cultures also have the son of God narratives. But what is compelling here is that Christianity itself is not "original" in that it derrives from the Old Testament. Even Moses the Law Giver, who "gave us the Old Testament" spoke of a time when there would be no more law and the Messiah would come who would be "like me." Best of all I love Jacob's prophecy of his son Judah - from Judah would come a nation, a monarchy, a law --- until the Messiah comes. ie no more nation, no more monarchy, no more law. It is a fascinating history, I'll give you that. I don't know what the Jews think of the scripture that says they will convert to Christianity in the end times. Probably don't view it in a real favorable light, I would think.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2014 0:21:55 GMT -5
No, the scripture says the Jews would not recognize their Messiah. "Despised the rejected of men, a man of sorrows and aquainted with grief" as it is written. Says also that the Messiah would come while the temple "still stands." Interesting. That implies even in Babylonian days some understood the temple, THEN IN RUINS, would fall, again. And as Jacob put it to Judah - the Messiah would be "he to whom the nations obey" Meaning it's no longer a Jewish thing.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 17, 2014 1:41:02 GMT -5
This is one version of Christian thought. It is one of many. Some versions say that Jesus didn't even exist. Like lots of J.F.Kennedy stories - they focus upon some aspects at the expense of others. Lots want to be famous, or wise, martyrs or great warriors - but I don't know of any great men who wanted to lay down their lives the way Jesus did. Perhaps that is the reason you need to read a lot more history, bert..
Many people wanted to and did lay down their lives to save their fellow men.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 17, 2014 1:47:06 GMT -5
But did they rise again as Jesus did?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2014 9:20:03 GMT -5
Quote - "Perhaps that is the reason you need to read a lot more history, bert.. Many people wanted to and did lay down their lives to save their fellow men."
That's fundamentally Different to how Jesus gave his life.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 17, 2014 10:22:27 GMT -5
So in that case, WHO is the author of Isaiah 53 writing of? authors. The Nation of Israel.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 17, 2014 10:26:07 GMT -5
Quote - "Perhaps that is the reason you need to read a lot more history, bert.. Many people wanted to and did lay down their lives to save their fellow men." That's fundamentally Different to how Jesus gave his life.
How is that fundamentally different to how Jesus gave his life?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 17, 2014 10:58:58 GMT -5
But did they rise again as Jesus did? Maybe it was a Near Death Experience... They did give him something on a cloth and very soon after that he passed out.
|
|