Why do all religions ignore what Jesus said?

[ohmi]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O House of Judah, and House of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

[arnoldo]

Yes, Ohmi, during Yeshua's earthly ministry he was sent only to Israel. After the resurrection, Yeshua sent the disciples to ALL NATIONS which is why the time we are currently living in is known as the time of the gentiles.

[Salam]

I don't understand why other religions should not ignore what Jesus said.

[adren@line]

Because Jesus was a Jewish dude brought up in Jewish culture. Others care about Jesus as much as Jews cared about the Buddha.

[ohmi]

Yes, Ohmi, during Yeshua's earthly ministry he was sent only to Israel. After the resurrection, Yeshua sent the disciples to ALL NATIONS which is why the time we are currently living in is known as the time of the gentiles.

But , do you not see that Jesus did not send the disciples to all nations, but AMONGST all nations to find the lost House of Israel ,whom God had scattered there long before ... read it for yourself :-

Matt 10:5 ¶ These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go [B]rather to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.



Amos 9:9 For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.

[ohmi]

I don't understand why other religions should not ignore what Jesus said.

Some religions , such as Islam, regard Jesus as being a prophet, so they thus should take notice of his statements ...

[ohmi]

Because Jesus was a Jewish dude brought up in Jewish culture. Others care about Jesus as much as Jews cared about the Buddha.

This isn't true, since some other religions ,such as Islam, revere Jesus as a prophet .

Also, whilst Jesus is indeed a Jew, the House of Israel to whom Jesus himself said [Matt 10:5-6, above quoted] he was alone sent by God , NEVER accepted Judaism, never became Jews!

Deuteronomy 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

[Salam]

I don't understand why other religions should not ignore what Jesus said.

Some religions , such as Islam, regard Jesus as being a prophet, so they thus should take notice of his statements ...

The Quran talks about Jesus and his statements as much as Muhammad, however, the statements in the NT might not be really Jesus statements.

[apatura_iris]

In Jesus' first synagogue appearance (Lk 4) he says that he is the messiah and is well received by the crown, but then says he will be like Elijah and Elisha who helped gentiles (the widow of Zarephath, and Naaman) during times of Jewish distress. At that point the crowd becomes enraged and tries to throw him off a cliff.

So he did, in fact, explicitly say that he would eventually serve the gentile world.

As for why people ignore what Jesus says for other instances, I would guess it's because they haven't read the bible? For instance Jesus tells people to pray privately where no one can hear you, and to not make a big show about praying, but people do make a big show about praying (look at megachurches!). And he also told people not to call their leaders "father," and they do exactly that all the time. Those are just a couple examples.

Another reason it might appear that people ignore what Jesus said is that he (Jesus) seems to contradict himself a lot, so paying attention to one statement might appear to be eschewing another (as is the case with the topic of this thread).

[ohmi]

Some religions , such as Islam, regard Jesus as being a prophet, so they thus should take notice of his statements ...

The Quran talks about Jesus and his statements as much as Muhammad, however, the statements in the NT might not be really Jesus statements.

Equally the Qur'an may not have been written by Muhammed ... >:D<

[Salam]

The Quran talks about Jesus and his statements as much as Muhammad, however, the statements in the NT might not be really Jesus statements.

Equally the Qur'an may not have been written by Muhammed ... >:D<

lol. I'm sure the Quran wasn't "written" by Muhammad.:D

[Salam]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O House of Judah, and House of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Here my friend a verse from the Quran telling us what Jesus said.

[Yusufali 61:6] And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

However it doesn't say he was send ONLY to the jews. Prophet are sent to a particular people or nations, but that doesn't mean that other people are not welcome to accept the message.

[ohmi]

In Jesus' first synagogue appearance (Lk 4) he says that he is the messiah and is well received by the crowd, but then says he will be like Elijah and Elisha who helped gentiles (the widow of Zarephath, and Naaman) during times of Jewish distress. At that point the crowd becomes enraged and tries to throw him off a cliff.

So he did, in fact, explicitly say that he would eventually serve the gentile world.

:)

Yes indeed, he did say that all will acknowledge him as Lord, thus obey him and Love ... but he also said who would be first, just 144,000 firstfruuit saints taken at his return [Rev 7:3-8] , the FEW who find the narrow way in this life [Matt 7:14] , and that the many come afterward [Rev 7:9-10] ... thus salvation is not all at once as many assume, but is in stages , thus necessitating DIVISION in this world [and yet again at judgment day]:-

Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

As for why people ignore what Jesus says for other instances, I would guess it's because they haven't read the bible? For instance Jesus tells people to pray privately where no one can hear you, and to not make a big show about praying, but people do make a big show about praying (look at megachurches!). And he also told people not to call their leaders "father," and they do exactly that all the time. Those are just a couple examples.

Yes , and putting all the examples together excludes ALL creeds, every single denomination and sect, which one could work out even more simply by just noting their division [God is not divided, and undertakes to teach everyone Himself eventually ... but obviously most people died still sinners without receiving all truth of God, so God cannot teach them all things as promised (Joel 2:28 + John 16:13) until after the second resurrection (of the unjust), after the millenium and before judgment... }

Another reason it might appear that people ignore what Jesus said is that he (Jesus) seems to contradict himself a lot, so paying attention to one statement might appear to be eschewing another (as is the case with the topic of this thread).

I have found that the scripture unravels such apparent contradictions , and one thus discovers the deeper meaning , simply by taking one's misunderstandings to God in meditation with praying and yearning for His truth, so perhaps we might discuss what you have thought contradictory. if you lke ?

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

[ohmi]

However it doesn't say he was send ONLY to the jews.


:)

Interestingly , Jesus said nothing about being sent to the Jews, he said that he was not sent but to the HOUSE OF ISRAEL, and none of these was ever a Jew

Prophets are sent to a particular people or nations, but that doesn't mean that other people are not welcome to accept the message.Jesus made the point that everyone is welcome to the message, but the message is that he will return and first take only the 144,000 saints , the few who find the narrow way of ceasing from sin in this life , that the many cannot be redeemed until later once the perfect priesthood and his kingdom come upon the earth have been established.

Paul was sent to take this message to the gentiles, but as we see today, no creed has taken Jesus' message seriously , no religion embraces the written statemnet that Jesus said that he is only sent to the few for now, the renmnant of the lost paganised [non-Jewish] House of Israel

[GenesisNemesis]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O House of Judah, and House of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

They don't "ignore" what Jesus said, ohmi, because they're their own religions. Why can't you just accept that?

[arnoldo]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-


Perhaps I misunderstood the OP which I took to mean why do all christian religions/sects preach the Gospel outside of Israel? :huh:

*edit* sorry I didn't read your response below

Yes, Ohmi, during Yeshua's earthly ministry he was sent only to Israel. After the resurrection, Yeshua sent the disciples to ALL NATIONS which is why the time we are currently living in is known as the time of the gentiles.

But , do you not see that Jesus did not send the disciples to all nations, but AMONGST all nations to find the lost House of Israel ,whom God had scattered there long before ... read it for yourself :-

Matt 10:5 ¶ These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go [B]rather to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.



Amos 9:9 For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.




Yes, you make a good point about the lost tribes of Israel however after 70 AD the entire nation of Israel was scattered to all nations by the Romans. If anything your issue is indirect evidence that the gospel(autograph) was written before the diaspora of 70 AD.

[ohmi]

They don't "ignore" what Jesus said, ohmi, because they're their own religions. Why can't you just accept that?

:)

I do accept it, i have no choice but to accept it. :)

But I think the rejection of Jesus' words in scripture by the whole of Christianity is particularly worthy of comment , especially as Jesus prophesied it e.g. :-

Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

[ohmi]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-


Perhaps I misunderstood the OP which I took to mean why do all christian religions/sects preach the Gospel outside of Israel? :huh:

:)

Israel [the modern nation] is still almost exclusively Jewish, whereas the House of Israel, to whom alone Jesus said he is sent , are wholly non-Jewish, never accepted Judaism ever...

Also please read the gospel of grace [Heb 8:8-12] and note that grace is only offered to those whose fathers broke the old covenant .

[ohmi]

As there's little convincing evidence that Jesus/Yeshua/Jeebus ever existed in the first place, why shouldn't everyone ignore what he didn't say anyway?

Same thing goes for Mohammed. No proof of existence, plenty of reason to doubt that he didn't just make it up as he went along (like every other fraud hiding behind religion in order to better his lot in life). Lots of reason to just ignore it all entirely...

:D

Rejecting grossly divided religion makes obvious sense... but rejecting Love [as that which one respects most , one's 'god' ] is impossible [ultimately at least] ...

[arnoldo]

Israel is still almost exclusively Jewish, whereas the House of Israel, to whom alone Jesus said he is sent , are wholly non-Jewish, never accepted Judaism ever...


So do you have any theories on who/where the lost tribes of Israel/House of Israel are?

[ohmi]

Yes, you make a good point about the lost tribes of Israel however after 70 AD the entire nation of Israel was scattered to all nations by the Romans. If anything your issue is indirect evidence that the gospel(autograph) was written before the diaspora of 70 AD.

:)

The House of Israel was scattered amongst all nations long before Jesus came , the 'disapora' affected only the Jews.

The House of Israel ['Northern kingdom in the land of Israel] never accepted Judaism , never became Jews, and God denied them worship of Him until Jesus and the apostles were sent with the gospel [Heb 8:8-12] specifically granting grace only to the Jews [House of Judah] and the House of Israel :-

Deuteronomy 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

[ohmi]

Israel is still almost exclusively Jewish, whereas the House of Israel, to whom alone Jesus said he is sent , are wholly non-Jewish, never accepted Judaism ever...


So do you have any theories on who/where the lost tribes of Israel/House of Israel are?

:)

There are many theories about that, speculative indeed partly because of the tiescale involved... the points made in scripture are clearer :-

-1. Only a remnant 12,000 from just twelve of the tribes [excluding Dan and Ephraim] will be sealed in this life as saints and taken by Jesus at his return -Rev 7:3-8 - these then are the FEW who find the narrow way [sainthood, departing from all iniquity after spirit baptism and before death]
- the many being saved after this -Rev 7:9-10 -, not at Jesus' return because the many are not saints in this life, cannot thus be translated to spirit until they are perfected in Love by trial AFTER resurrection [thus afte the second resurrection, of the unjust]

-2. The whole of Israel [Jews and non-Jews] is destined to be a nation of priests and kings in the kingdom of God since this promise from God has never been realised in history :-

Exodus 19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

This thus can only happen after the millenium [and before judgment day] since most of Israel died sinners and cannot live again until the resurrection of the unjust, the second resurrection]

Thus even the efforts being made in modern Israel to find genetic markers to distinguish 'Israel' from 'non-Israel' are an utter waste of effort, the Messiah will take only saints and has said how many ... that the number is NOT symbolic is shown by Enoch [quoted by Jude] - note that in the Hebrew of Enoch 1 the word for 'ten thousands' is unambiguous , unlike the Greek of Jude , this really does mean only tens of thousands of saints wth Jesus at his return , or as Jesus said more exactly, 144,000 :-

Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

[Smullyan-esque]

Why do all religions ignore what Jesus said?
Because Jesus is a fictional character. Even for Christians, picking and choosing what to pay attention to in the Bible is de rigeur.

[GenesisNemesis]

Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

I don't see the relevance. :huh:

[arnoldo]

[quote=arnoldo;5341528]

So do you have any theories on who/where the lost tribes of Israel/House of Israel are?

:)

There are many theories about that, speculative indeed partly because of the tiescale involved... the points made in scripture are clearer :-

-1. Only a remnant 12,000 from just twelve of the tribes [excluding Dan and Ephraim] will be sealed in this life as saints and taken by Jesus at his return -Rev 7:3-8 - these then are the FEW who find the narrow way [sainthood, departing from all iniquity after spirit baptism and before death]
- the many being saved after this -Rev 7:9-10 -, not at Jesus' return because the many are not saints in this life, cannot thus be translated to spirit until they are perfected in Love by trial AFTER resurrection [thus afte the second resurrection, of the unjust]

-2. The whole of Israel [Jews and non-Jews] is destined to be a nation of priests and kings in the kingdom of God since this promise from God has never been realised in history :-

Exodus 19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

This thus can only happen after the millenium [and before judgment day] since most of Israel died sinners and cannot live again until the resurrection of the unjust, the second resurrection]

Thus even the efforts being made in modern Israel to find genetic markers to distinguish 'Israel' from 'non-Israel' are an utter waste of effort, the Messiah will take only saints and has said how many ... that the number is NOT symbolic is shown by Enoch - note that in the Hebrew of Enoch 1 the word for 'ten thousands' is unambiguous , unlike the Greek of Jude , this really does mean only tens of thousands of saints wth Jesus at his return , or as Jesus said more exactly, 144,000 :-

Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Basically, the Abrahamic covenant has been extended not only to include the physical descendants of Abraham (through the line of Issac, not Ishmael) to also include the gentiles believers. Much of letters of Paul discuss this issue in depth.

In reference to the "Lost Tribes of Israel/Jews" they will all eventually return to Israel/the State of Israel.

[ohmi]

Basically, the Abrahamic covenant has been extended not only to include the physical descendants of Abraham (through the line of Issac, not Ishmael) to also include the gentiles believers. Much of letters of Paul discuss this issue in depth.


Why do you not read what Paul actually says in the scripture s -Heb 8:8-12 ?

-1.- The old covenant is not in any way "extended" but ready to vanish away :-

Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.-2.- And the new covenant of grace is ONLY with those whose fathers broke the old covenant :-

Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers...



In reference to the "Lost Tribes of Israel/Jews" they will all eventually return to Israel/the State of Israel.Where do you get that from?

[ohmi]

Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

I don't see the relevance. :huh:

Read Rev 13 ... the antichrist is given power over all the religion of the world to cause all men to worship the false image of a christ figure [already with us in modern religion] ...

[Eldarion Lathria]

Why do Christians ignore what the Buddha said? Where are Christians on the Eightfold path? Is it because they don't believe the Buddha really attained enlightenment? But there are all those writings that said he did.

See, the same thing can be said about Christians. Why do you ignore what the Buddha said.

Eldarion Lathria

[adren@line]

Because Jesus was a Jewish dude brought up in Jewish culture. Others care about Jesus as much as Jews cared about the Buddha.

This isn't true, since some other religions ,such as Islam, revere Jesus as a prophet .

Also, whilst Jesus is indeed a Jew, the House of Israel to whom Jesus himself said [Matt 10:5-6, above quoted] he was alone sent by God , NEVER accepted Judaism, never became Jews!

Deuteronomy 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

Mohhamed was an Arab Semite who lived in the same area of the world from which Jesus originated. They essentially belonged to the same culture.

Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Daoists, etc have no reason to care about Jesus as Christianity offers us nothing that our religions cannot. In-fact, id say it offers less.

[arnoldo]

Why do Christians ignore what the Buddha said? Where are Christians on the Eightfold path? Is it because they don't believe the Buddha really attained enlightenment? But there are all those writings that said he did.

See, the same thing can be said about Christians. Why do you ignore what the Buddha said.

Eldarion Lathria

Buddha is a myth ;)

[Eldarion Lathria]

Why do Christians ignore what the Buddha said? Where are Christians on the Eightfold path? Is it because they don't believe the Buddha really attained enlightenment? But there are all those writings that said he did.

See, the same thing can be said about Christians. Why do you ignore what the Buddha said.

Eldarion Lathria

Buddha is a myth ;)

A Buddhist would say Buddha was real. Jesus is a myth.

Eldarion Lathria

[anders]

I think the Buddha was real.
I'm fairly certain that Muhammad existed.
I'm convinced that there never was a Jesus as described in the Gospels.

[adren@line]

Scholars unanimously agree that the Buddha existed. The same cant be said for Jesus.

[TheRealityOfMan]

Buddhists do not need Buddha to exist. This may sounds ironic but it's true.

Christians require a historic incarnation. Muslims require a blameless prophet who wrote the same Quran as we have today.

[TheRealityOfMan]

Why do all religions ignore what Jesus said?

Jesus said:

"Verily I say unto you until Samaritans dance with the Elflings and the Jebusites sway unto the molten honey of the Afrodiscoites, there shall no runcible spoon be given unto the house of fraser"

-The Book of 1Spoons

Why doesn't anyone take any notice of that saying these days? Maybe they don't believe it was divinely inspired but I DO so YOU should!!!

[arnoldo]

Buddha is a myth ;)

A Buddhist would say Buddha was real.

Eldarion Lathria
A buddhist would say if you met "buddha" on a road kill him.

[arnoldo]

Buddhists do not need Buddha to exist. This may sounds ironic but it's true.
. RAmen

[arnoldo]

Christians require a historic incarnation.

Christians require much more.. .

1. Supernatural conception
2. Blameless/Sinless earthly existence
3. Bodily resurrection
4. Bodily ascension into heaven
5. A descendant of King David
6. Of the tribe of Judah
7. fullfill innumerable OT prophecies
etc,etc. . .

[Kelly]

Read Rev 13 ... the antichrist is given power over all the religion of the world to cause all men to worship the false image of a christ figure [already with us in modern religion] ...

Revelations 13 specifically identifies the antichrist by the numeral 666. At the time the Book of Revelations was written, everybody and their uncle would have recognized that term and would have known what it stood for. The numeral is specific to the "magic squares" that were passed down to humanity by the ancient pagan gods. Magic squares were regularly carved on amulets and talismens and were thought to either ward off evil or bring one luck. As amulets, Magic squares were used by the poorest peasant as well as the wealthiest kings throughout the Middle East.

In essence, magic squares are blocks of numbers which produce the same sum whether they are added in horizontal rows, columns or diagonals. There were seven primary magic squares, one each for Mars, Venus, Mercury, Saturn, Jupiter and the sun and the moon.

The numbers that made up the magic square of the sun added up to the sum 666. It was a reference to "the sun god", the "solar deity complex" and specifically the Solar dynasties of the Anunnaki god system.

Most theologians accept that the Church of Rome which is basically the Church of Sol Invictus, became the symbolic antichrist which "caused all men to worship the false image of a christ figure." Theoretically, an antichrist is one who usurps the power of Christ.

Today the Catholic Pope still maintains that he is the divine authority of God on earth and he claims the right to "forgive sin." Basically, the Church of Rome remains an institution that not only presents a false image of Christ, that specific Church attempted to usurp the power of Christ.

666 means "the sun god." It's meant the sun god from day one. It's even in the Kabala. Just Google "666, Magic Squares." There was plenty of info on it the last time I checked. I first got turned on to it's meaning back in 1971 by reading the books written by the English author, John Michell. He tries to make out like 666 is a good number, but I think that is a questionable idea.

Never-the-less, the Masons who were responsible for designing most of the so called Chrstian Cathedrals throughout most of Europe dedicated all those buildings by the use of Magic Squares. They regularly built churches that were supposedly Christian and dedicated the geometry of those churches by redundantly using the geometry of 666 or some other magic square in their floor plans. Each of the seven primary Magic Squares stands for one of the seven major Pagan gods.

Dedicating a church or cathedral by magic squares was essentially the very ancient tradition of the practice of pagan magic. It's all very strange stuff...and spooky to say the least!

The belief was that by dedicating a building according to the geometry of a specific magic square, you were "calling down the spirit of the pagan god" that magic square stood for.

[Kelly]

Christians require much more.. .

1. Supernatural conception
2. Blameless/Sinless earthly existence
3. Bodily resurrection
4. Bodily ascension into heaven
5. A descendant of King David
6. Of the tribe of Judah
7. fullfill innumerable OT prophecies
etc,etc. . .

Hmmmm. If I were you I'd thoroughly read Revelations chapter 5. According to John's testimony, The Lamb of God trumps "the Lion of the tribe of Juda." The Lamb and the Lion are two entirely different biblical beings. The last time I heard, the Lion was still considered "the king of beasts."

As for living a "Blameless/Sinless earthly existence," no Christian is considered "sinless" accept through grace and forgiveness.

[Salam]

Read Rev 13 ... the antichrist is given power over all the religion of the world to cause all men to worship the false image of a christ figure [already with us in modern religion] ...

Revelations 13 specifically identifies the antichrist by the numeral 666. At the time the Book of Revelations was written, everybody and their uncle would have recognized that term and would have known what it stood for. The numeral is specific to the "magic squares" that were passed down to humanity by the ancient pagan gods. Magic squares were regularly carved on amulets and talismens and were thought to either ward off evil or bring one luck. As amulets, Magic squares were used by the poorest peasant as well as the wealthiest kings throughout the Middle East.

In essence, magic squares are blocks of numbers which produce the same sum whether they are added in horizontal rows, columns or diagonals. There were seven primary magic squares, one each for Mars, Venus, Mercury, Saturn, Jupiter and the sun and the moon.

The numbers that made up the magic square of the sun added up to the sum 666. It was a reference to "the sun god", the "solar deity complex" and specifically the Solar dynasties of the Anunnaki god system.

Most theologians accept that the Church of Rome which is basically the Church of Sol Invictus, became the symbolic antichrist which "caused all men to worship the false image of a christ figure." Theoretically, an antichrist is one who usurps the power of Christ.

Today the Catholic Pope still maintains that he is the divine authority of God on earth and he claims the right to "forgive sin." Basically, the Church of Rome remains an institution that not only presents a false image of Christ, that specific Church attempted to usurp the power of Christ.

666 means "the sun god." It's meant the sun god from day one. It's even in the Kabala. Just Google "666, Magic Squares." There was plenty of info on it the last time I checked. I first got turned on to it's meaning back in 1971 by reading the books written by the English author, John Michell. He tries to make out like 666 is a good number, but I think that is a questionable idea.

Never-the-less, the Masons who were responsible for designing most of the so called Chrstian Cathedrals throughout most of Europe dedicated all those buildings by the use of Magic Squares. They regularly built churches that were supposedly Christian and dedicated the geometry of those churches by redundantly using the geometry of 666 or some other magic square in their floor plans. Each of the seven primary Magic Squares stands for one of the seven major Pagan gods.

Dedicating a church or cathedral by magic squares was essentially the very ancient tradition of the practice of pagan magic. It's all very strange stuff...and spooky to say the least!

The belief was that by dedicating a building according to the geometry of a specific magic square, you were "calling down the spirit of the pagan god" that magic square stood for.

Wow (http://www.tv-timewarp.co.uk/x-files/X-Files_Extended.mid)

[ohmi]

Why do Christians ignore what the Buddha said? Where are Christians on the Eightfold path? Is it because they don't believe the Buddha really attained enlightenment? But there are all those writings that said he did.

See, the same thing can be said about Christians. Why do you ignore what the Buddha said.

Eldarion Lathria

:)

... almost all 'Christians' ignore what Jesus said, never mind about ignoring what Buddha said ! :huh:

[ohmi]

Read Rev 13 ... the antichrist is given power over all the religion of the world to cause all men to worship the false image of a christ figure [already with us in modern religion] ...Revelations 13 specifically identifies the antichrist by the numeral 666. At the time the Book of Revelations was written, everybody and their uncle would have recognized that term and would have known what it stood for. The numeral is specific to the "magic squares" that were passed down to humanity by the ancient pagan gods. Magic squares were regularly carved on amulets and talismens and were thought to either ward off evil or bring one luck. As amulets, Magic squares were used by the poorest peasant as well as the wealthiest kings throughout the Middle East.

In essence, magic squares are blocks of numbers which produce the same sum whether they are added in horizontal rows, columns or diagonals. There were seven primary magic squares, one each for Mars, Venus, Mercury, Saturn, Jupiter and the sun and the moon.

The numbers that made up the magic square of the sun added up to the sum 666. It was a reference to "the sun god", the "solar deity complex" and specifically the Solar dynasties of the Anunnaki god system.

Most theologians accept that the Church of Rome which is basically the Church of Sol Invictus, became the symbolic antichrist which "caused all men to worship the false image of a christ figure." Theoretically, an antichrist is one who usurps the power of Christ.

Today the Catholic Pope still maintains that he is the divine authority of God on earth and he claims the right to "forgive sin." Basically, the Church of Rome remains an institution that not only presents a false image of Christ, that specific Church attempted to usurp the power of Christ.

666 means "the sun god." It's meant the sun god from day one. It's even in the Kabala. Just Google "666, Magic Squares." There was plenty of info on it the last time I checked. I first got turned on to it's meaning back in 1971 by reading the books written by the English author, John Michell. He tries to make out like 666 is a good number, but I think that is a questionable idea.

Never-the-less, the Masons who were responsible for designing most of the so called Chrstian Cathedrals throughout most of Europe dedicated all those buildings by the use of Magic Squares. They regularly built churches that were supposedly Christian and dedicated the geometry of those churches by redundantly using the geometry of 666 or some other magic square in their floor plans. Each of the seven primary Magic Squares stands for one of the seven major Pagan gods.

Dedicating a church or cathedral by magic squares was essentially the very ancient tradition of the practice of pagan magic. It's all very strange stuff...and spooky to say the least!

The belief was that by dedicating a building according to the geometry of a specific magic square, you were "calling down the spirit of the pagan god" that magic square stood for.

:)

Sum of he title 'Vicarius Filii Dei' = 666 in Latin and its meaning is literally 'in place of the son of God' which is what 'antichristos' means in Greek :-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarius_Filii_Dei

The Catholic Encyclopedia New Advent, states that "many of the recent critical students of the document, (Donation of Constantine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine)), locate its composition at Rome and attribute the forgery to an ecclesiastic, their chief argument being an intrinsic one: this false document was composed in favour of the popes and of the Roman Church, therefore Rome itself must have had the chief interest in a forgery executed for a purpose so clearly expressed" [6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarius_Filii_Dei#cite_note-NACE-5).
During the Middle Ages, the Donation of Constantine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine) was widely accepted as genuine for about 800 years [6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarius_Filii_Dei#cite_note-NACE-5) and was used by medieval Popes to bolster territorial and secular claims to power. The document was acknowledged by the church as fraudulent about the time Andreas Helwig published Antichristus Romanus (1612) which identifies Vicarius Dei Filli with the number of the beast (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast). However, some Catholic publications continued to refer to the title until well into the 19th century [7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarius_Filii_Dei#cite_note-6).

[bleubird]

Please color me stupid,but who witnessed what this guy said?
Who did Paul talk to?
John?
We just do not know.
Have faith,brother.


bleu

ETA:How many pinheads can dance on the head of an angel?circa 1542

[Wolfie]

ETA:How many pinheads can dance on the head of an angel?circa 1542

The answer is either 616 or 1611. Depends on whether it is an African angel...

[WVIncagold]

why yes an african angel would makje a diffrence wouldn't it? Mass carrrying load differs in the african angel over is cousin the european angel.:D

[Wolfie]

why yes an african angel would makje a diffrence wouldn't it? Mass carrrying load differs in the african angel over is cousin the european angel.:D


You got it... ;)

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O House of Judah, and House of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

The House of Israel is the name of God's people. According to the story logic, Israel was YHWH's "base" (like a candidate has a certain population that's his "base"), then he (God) would bring everyone to him (God), "And I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse; and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.' (Genesis 12:3)". It is true he came to the "House of Israel", but then again he issued his so-called "great commission": "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

[ohmi]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O House of Judah, and House of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

The House of Israel is the name of God's people. According to the story logic, Israel was YHWH's "base" (like a candidate has a certain population that's his "base"), then he (God) would bring everyone to him (God), "And I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse; and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.' (Genesis 12:3)".


God went further than that, He said that He would make them a nation of priests in His kingdom come , and one needs the priests ready to minister at the beginning of redemption of the gentiles, so Israel are the first...

Exodus 19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

Revelation 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

It is true he came to the "House of Israel", but then again he issued his so-called "great commission": "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

Again, the House of Israel was scattered amongst all the nations long before Jesus came , the 'great commission' is only to first find the House of Israel, he said so :-

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

and in Rev 7:3-8 Jesus lists the 144,000 firstfruit saints by tribe of Israel, proving the point .

The many of all nations do NOT find the narrow way in this life, only FEW do this, the 144,000 ... the many go by the broad way to Jesus through destruction in death [and the end of this world]

The many die sinners, so cannot take part in the first resurrection [at Jesus' return] , no one who is sinner still by his death can be resurrected until the resurrection of the unjust in the new earth [after the millenium]

[Will.L]

It's perfectly fine to cite scripture if it is relevant to the topic at hand, but use of this thread for the purposes of preaching/promoting your personal worldview is a violation of GRD's forum guidelines. (http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=234859)

GRD's rule on preaching states...

While believers are not prohibited from sharing their faith, preaching as a replacement for discussion is disruptive and as such is not allowed. Such behavior may result in posts being edited or deleted.

[ohmi]

I am simply stating my current point of view... I have no creed, no religion, no fixed beliefs , nothing to 'preach', much to discuss ...

[Bullmoose Too]

Simple: Ethnocentrism.

[joemailman]

The title of this thread should have been....Why do human beings continue to beat dead horses?

The jesus story is a myth or is that not obvious?

[Lógos Sokratikós]

The title of this thread should have been....Why do human beings continue to beat dead horses?

The jesus story is a myth or is that not obvious?

According to a small faction supporting the Jesus Myth. Most historians recognize some (varying) levels of historicity.

And no, in my experience I've found nearly anything at all is obvious, and most things require a considerable degree of working out.

[joemailman]

I know of no historian that gives any credibility to the jesus story except maybe those who use the bible as their only source. Do you know of any?...or of a credible source of info regarding the story?

[Kelly]

"The House of Israel" does not necessarily mean "Jewish." All twelve tribes of the nation of Israel were considered "Hebrews" and "Semites," but "Semite" was a word that basically included just about all people of Arabic descent, and the word originally included the Arabic people who are Islamic today. The Islamic people consider themselves the descendants of Ishmael rather than Jacob, but theoretically they are as "Semitic" as the Jews and Hebrew races are. It's only been in the last couple of hundred years that Semitic people are primarily referred to as Jewish, and that concept is not necessarily correct.

In the nation of Israel, only two of the twelve tribes, that of Judah and Benjamin, were considered "Jewish" while the other ten tribes were "Hebrews" (also called "gentiles" in the Bible) who were not necessarily into the worship of the Jewish God. Many members of the Hebrew nation worshipped the Baal-El pantheon, and there is evidence that a good many others subscribed to Egyptian religious beliefs as well.

The Islamic nations today carry the flag consisting of the crescent moon and five-sided star. Though Islam is not really all that old of a religion, their symbol of the crescent moon and star is absolutely ancient. This same symbolism was used in antiquity by the worshippers of Nanner Sin (sometimes also spelled "Suen") who was the eldest son of the Sumerian god, Enlil (Ellil in the Babylonian tongue and El to the Canaanites). The worship of Sin was very widespread throughout Sumer and the city of Ur; where Abraham originally lived, was primarily didicated to the worship of the god Sin. The Hittite nation also worshipped Nanner Sin, and the Sinai Peninsula is still identified with this ancient god.

It's really a mistake to assume that "the House of Israel" necessarily means Jewish or people into the worship of the Jewish god. The people of Israel actually worshipped several different gods besides Yahweh, including the worship of the Baal-El-Ashtoreth pantheon, the Egyptian pantheon, Nanner Sin, Ishtar-Inanna and several other deities.

The priesthoods of all of these different systems were adamant that they represented "the one God", but under the one god concept of Egyptian Atenism, all these different gods were thought to represent different aspects of the "one god" Aten. The concepts behind Atenism seem to be very similar to the concepts behind Hinduism, where all the many Hindu gods and goddesses are seen as aspects of Brahma. Atenism is defined as the belief in "one god" (i.e. monotheism) and Atenism is probably where the monotheistic concepts of the Middle East first originated. Certainly the Middle East has a very long history of worshipping many different gods. Atenism, however, is not "monotheism" in the way most people traditionally think of it today. Atenism might be more accurately defined as "henotheism."

Wikipedia tells us that "Henotheism (Greek εἷς θεός heis theos "one god") is a term coined by Max Müller, to mean devotion to a single primary god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities. Müller stated that henotheism means "monotheism in principle and polytheism in fact."

This is probably the reason why Yahweh of the Old Testament appears to possess so many conflicting personality traits. Like Atenism, the "one god" concepts behind Israel's national god, Yahweh, seem to be based upon henotheistic principals. Even the name "Israel" suggests henotheism. "Is-Ra-El." Ra and El were essentially each the leading gods of Anunnaki polytheism.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

The Islamic nations today carry the flag consisting of the crescent moon and five-sided star.

Geometrically a pentagram is a 10 sided, 10 angled star. It just has 5 points.

[Kelly]

Geometrically a pentagram is a 10 sided, 10 angled star. It just has 5 points.

Yup. And an upside down pentagram represents the occult symbol of the Goat of Mendes.

http://www.postpositive.org/?page_id=103

[ohmi]

"The House of Israel" does not necessarily mean "Jewish."


Hi Kelly, :)

None of the House of Israel are or ever were Jewish , they never accepted Judaism ... and lived with a separate House [line] of kings in Northern Israel before God scattered them worldwide amongst all gentile nations and even before Jesus came their name was lost [wholly unlike the Jews]

Deuteronomy 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

All twelve tribes of the nation of Israel were considered "Hebrews" and "Semites," but "Semite" was a word that basically included just about all people of Arabic descent, and the word originally included the Arabic people who are Islamic today. The Islamic people consider themselves the descendants of Ishmael rather than Jacob, but theoretically they are as "Semitic" as the Jews and Hebrew races are. It's only been in the last couple of hundred years that Semitic people are primarily referred to as Jewish, and that concept is not necessarily correct.

Most Semitic peoples are indeed not Jewish, but some do belong to the lost House of Israel , despite now living as gentioles amongst gentile nations [which is where Jesus sent his disciples to find them , with the gospel of their new covenant , unconditional forgiveness of both Jews and the House of Israel -Heb 8:8-12] :-

Acts 7:42 Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness?

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:5 ¶ These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

In the nation of Israel, only two of the twelve tribes, that of Judah and Benjamin, were considered "Jewish"

The House of Judah [southern kingdom in Israel] alos included half the tribe of Levi [as priests under the old covenant] and small numbers from all the other tribes excepting only Ephraim ... no modern Jew is descended from Ephraim , none of Ephraim ever accepted Judaism.

while the other ten tribes were "Hebrews" (also called "gentiles" in the Bible) who were not necessarily into the worship of the Jewish God.

There are fourteen tribes of Israel named in the scripture [named after Jacob's twelve own sons and his two first grandsons by Joseph, whom he adopted as full sons and who thus became full tribes , Ephraim and Mannaseh.
Joseph had other offspring ,but lived in the borders of the land assigned to Manasseh, not ever becoming a large enough tribe to get a separate partition of land like Manasseh and Ephraim did.

Many members of the Hebrew nation worshipped the Baal-El pantheon, and there is evidence that a good many others subscribed to Egyptian religious beliefs as well.

The House of Judah alone continued to worship God, no matter how badly , all the House of Israel worship pagan gods :-

Deuteronomy 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

The Islamic nations today carry the flag consisting of the crescent moon and five-sided star. Though Islam is not really all that old of a religion, their symbol of the crescent moon and star is absolutely ancient. This same symbolism was used in antiquity by the worshippers of Nanner Sin (sometimes also spelled "Suen") who was the eldest son of the Sumerian god, Enlil (Ellil in the Babylonian tongue and El to the Canaanites). The worship of Sin was very widespread throughout Sumer and the city of Ur; where Abraham originally lived, was primarily dedicated to the worship of the god Sin. The Hittite nation also worshipped Nanner Sin, and the Sinai Peninsula is still identified with this ancient god.

Islam is very anxious to ditch the three daughters of their god, but remnants of the past still haunt them in hard facts .

It's really a mistake to assume that "the House of Israel" necessarily means Jewish or people into the worship of the Jewish god. The people of Israel actually worshipped several different gods besides Yahweh, including the worship of the Baal-El-Ashtoreth pantheon, the Egyptian pantheon, Nanner Sin, Ishtar-Inanna and several other deities.

Since the House of Israel lost its land before captivity in Babylon , they were scattered worldwide seeking nations that would take them in afte their release... they simply adopted the pagan gods wherever they were accepted amongst all nations , thus the list of pagan gods worshipped by them is much longer than this ... what they never accepted is Judaism , and the Jews never accepted them either ... the religious disagreement still exists today, to the extent that Jews simply will not discuss Ephraim and the House of Israel [because the House fo Israel are ALL descended from Jacob and so may carry the birthright promise just as likely as any Jew]

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Geometrically a pentagram is a 10 sided, 10 angled star. It just has 5 points.

Yup. And an upside down pentagram represents the occult symbol of the Goat of Mendes.

http://www.postpositive.org/?page_id=103

Are you proposing it's more than a coincidence?

[ohmi]

I know of no historian that gives any credibility to the jesus story except maybe those who use the bible as their only source. Do you know of any?...or of a credible source of info regarding the story?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

"The authors whose works are contained in the New Testament sometimes quote from creeds, or confessions of faith, that obviously predate their writings. Scholars suppose that some of these creeds date to within a few years of Jesus' death, and were developed within the Christian community in Jerusalem.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-21) Though embedded within the texts of the New Testament, these creeds are a distinct source for early Christianity.
1Corinthians 15:3-4 (http://php.ug.cs.usyd.edu.au/%7Ejnot4610/bibref.php?book=%201Corinthians&verse=15:3-4&src=%21) reads: "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." This contains a Christian creed of pre-Pauline origin.[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-22) The antiquity of the creed has been located by many Biblical scholars to less than a decade after Jesus' death, originating from the Jerusalem apostolic community.[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-23) Concerning this creed, Campenhausen wrote, "This account meets all the demands of historical reliability that could possibly be made of such a text,"[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-24) whilst A. M. Hunter said, "The passage therefore preserves uniquely early and verifiable testimony. It meets every reasonable demand of historical reliability."[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-25)
Other relevant creeds which predate the texts wherein they are found[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] that have been identified are 1John 4:2 (http://php.ug.cs.usyd.edu.au/%7Ejnot4610/bibref.php?book=%201John&verse=4:2&src=%21): "This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God",[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-26) 2Timothy 2:8 (http://php.ug.cs.usyd.edu.au/%7Ejnot4610/bibref.php?book=%202Timothy&verse=2:8&src=%21): "Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, this is my Gospel",[28] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-27) Romans 1:3-4 (http://php.ug.cs.usyd.edu.au/%7Ejnot4610/bibref.php?book=%20Romans&verse=1:3-4&src=%21): "regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_God) by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.",[29] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-28) and 1Timothy 3:16 (http://php.ug.cs.usyd.edu.au/%7Ejnot4610/bibref.php?book=%201Timothy&verse=3:16&src=%21): "He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory," an early creedal hymn.[30] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-29)
"
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-29)


Early Christian sources outside the New Testament also mention Jesus and details of his life. Important texts from the Apostolic Fathers are, to name just the most significant and ancient, Clement of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Clement_I) (c. 100),[35] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-34) Ignatius of Antioch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignatius_of_Antioch) (c. 107-110),[36] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-35) and Justin Martyr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr).[37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-36)
Perhaps the most significant Patristic sources are the early references of Papias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papias) and Quadratus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratus_of_Athens) (d. 124), mostly reported by Eusebius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius_of_Caesarea) in the fourth century, which both mention eyewitnesses of Jesus’ ministry and healings who were still alive in their own time (the late first century). Papias, in giving his sources for the information contained in his (largely lost) commentaries, stated (according to Eusebius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius_of_Caesarea)):
…if by chance anyone who had been in attendance on the elders should come my way, I inquired about the words of the elders — that is, what according to the elders Andrew or Peter said, or Philip, or Thomas or James, or John or Matthew or any other of the Lord’s disciples, and whatever Aristion and the elder John, the Lord’s disciples, were saying.[38] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-37) Thus, while Papias was collecting his information (c. 90), Aristion and the elder John (who were Jesus’ disciples) were still alive and teaching in Asia minor, and Papias gathered information from people who had known them.[39] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-38) Another Father, Quadratus, who wrote an apology to the emperor Hadrian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrian), was reported by Eusebius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius_of_Caesarea) to have stated:
The words of our Savior were always present, for they were true: those who were healed, those who rose from the dead, those who were not only seen in the act of being healed or raised, but were also always present, not merely when the Savior was living on earth, but also for a considerable time after his departure, so that some of them survived even to our own times.[40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-39) By “our Savior” Quadratus means Jesus, and by “our times” it has been argued that he may refer to his early life, rather than when he wrote (117-124), which would be a reference contemporary with Papias.[41] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-40)


There are passages relevant to Christianity in the works of four major non-Christian writers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries – Josephus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus), Tacitus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus), Suetonius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suetonius), and Pliny the Younger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pliny_the_Younger). However, these are generally references to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus. Of the four, Josephus' writings, which document John the Baptist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_the_Baptist), James the Just (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just), and possibly also Jesus, are of the most interest to scholars dealing with the historicity of Jesus (see below). Tacitus, in his Annals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annals_%28Tacitus%29) written c. 115, mentions popular opinion about Christus, without historical details (see also: Tacitus on Jesus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Jesus)). There is an obscure reference to a Jewish leader called "Chrestus" in Suetonius. Pliny condemned Christians as easily-led fools.

Flavius Josephus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavius_Josephus) (c. 37 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/37)–c. 100 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100)), a Jew and Roman citizen who worked under the patronage of the Flavians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavian_dynasty), wrote the Antiquities of the Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquities_of_the_Jews) in 93 C.E.. In these works, Jesus is mentioned twice. The one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus#Testimonium_Flavianum).
The Testimonium's authenticity has attracted much scholarly discussion and controversy of interpolation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation_%28manuscripts%29). Louis H. Feldman (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Louis_H._Feldman&action=edit&redlink=1) counts 87 articles published during the period of 1937-1980, "the overwhelming majority of which question its authenticity in whole or in part".[42] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-41)
In the second, very brief mentioning, Josephus calls James "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ".[43] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-42) For this shorter passage, most scholars consider it to be substantially authentic,[44] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-43) while others raise doubts.[45] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-44)
More notably, in the Testimonium Flavianum, it is written:
About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease to follow him, for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.[46] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-45)


Pliny the Younger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pliny_the_Younger), the provincial governor of Pontus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus) and Bithynia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bithynia), wrote to Emperor Trajan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajan) c. 112 concerning how to deal with Christians, who refused to worship the emperor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_cult_%28Ancient_Rome%29), and instead worshiped "Christus".
Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ — none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do — these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.[54] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-53)


Tacitus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus) (c. 56–c. 117), writing c. 116 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/116), included in his Annals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annals_%28Tacitus%29) a mention of Christianity and "Christus", the Latinized Greek translation of the Hebrew word "Messiah". In describing Nero's persecution of Christians following the Great Fire of Rome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_Rome) c. 64, he wrote:
Nero fastened the guilt of starting the blaze and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius) 14-37 at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iudaea_Province), the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.[55] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-54)


Gaius Suetonius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suetonius) Tranquillus (c. 69 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/69)–140 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/140)) wrote the following in his Lives of the Twelve Caesars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lives_of_the_Twelve_Caesars) about riots which broke out in the Jewish community in Rome under the emperor Claudius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudius):
"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudius)) expelled them from Rome".[60] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-59)
The event was noted in Acts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_the_Apostles) 18:2 (http://php.ug.cs.usyd.edu.au/%7Ejnot4610/bibref.php?book=%20Acts&verse=18:2&src=31). The term Chrestus also appears in some later texts applied to Jesus, and Robert Graves,[61] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-60) among others,[62] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-61) consider it a variant spelling of Christ, or at least a reasonable spelling error. On the other hand, Chrestus was itself a common name, particularly for slaves, meaning good or useful.[63] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-62) In regards to Jewish persecution around the time to which this passage refers, the Jewish Encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Encyclopedia) states: "... in 49-50, in consequence of dissensions among them regarding the advent of the Messiah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_messianism), they were forbidden to hold religious services. The leaders in the controversy, and many others of the Jewish citizens, left the city".[64] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-63)


Thallus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thallus_%28historian%29), of whom very little is known, wrote a history from the Trojan War to, according to Eusebius, 109 BC. No work of Thallus survives. There is one reference to Thallus having written about events beyond 109 BC. Julius Africanus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sextus_Julius_Africanus), writing c. 221, while writing about the crucifixion of Jesus, mentioned Thallus. Thus:
On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in his third book of History, calls (as appears to me without reason) an eclipse of the sun.[66] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-65)


Lucian, a second century Romano-Syrian satirist, who wrote in Greek, wrote:
The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account… You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_life), which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sage), and live after his laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Law_of_Christ).[67] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-66)


Celsus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsus), a late second-century critic of Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity), accused Jesus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus) of being a bastard child and a sorcerer.[68] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-67) He is quoted as saying that Jesus was a "mere man".[69] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-68)
The Acts of Pilate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Pilate) is purportedly an official document from Pilate reporting events in Judea to the Emperor Tiberius (thus, it would have been among the commentaii principis). It was mentioned by Justin Martyr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr), in his First Apology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Apology) (c. 150) to Antoninus Pius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoninus_Pius), Marcus Aurelius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aurelius), and Lucius Verus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Verus), who said that his claims concerning Jesus' crucifixion, and some miracles, could be verified by referencing the official record, the "Acts of Pontius Pilate".[70] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-69) With the exception of Tertullian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian), no other writer is known to have mentioned the work, and Tertullian's reference says that Tiberius debated the details of Jesus' life before the Roman Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Senate), an event that is almost universally considered absurd.[71] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-70) There is a later apocryphal text, undoubtedly fanciful, by the same name, and though it is generally thought to have been inspired by Justin's reference (and thus to post-date his Apology), it is possible that Justin actually mentioned this text, though that would give the work an unusually early date and therefore is not a straightforward identification.[72] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-71)


The Talmud (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud) Sanhedrin 43a, which dates to the earliest period of composition (Tannaitic period (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannaim)) contains the following:
On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. Forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried: "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.[73] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#cite_note-72)


- Rumours of his non-existence outside of the scripture seem to have been somewhat exaggerated perhaps ?

[Lógos Sokratikós]

IMO the only direct support for Jesus' existence is from the texts. The other authors talk about the christians or from what the christians said. What the talmud talks about is a Yeshu who was hanged from a tree, not crucified. It might talk about Jesus but it might not, so it's not that trustworthy.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Celsus was according to your quotes a "late second-century critic", therefore: irrelevant.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Lucian, "a second century Romano-Syrian satirist". Again, irrelevant.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Julius Africanus, "writing c. 221". Again: irrelevant.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Suetonius:

"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius) expelled them from Rome".[60]

The geographical location of the gospel story is Palestine, not Rome. He is therefore talking about the Roman Christians, which according to the NT could not have existed at the time of Jesus' earthly ministry.

Therefore: irrelevant.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Your Tacitus quote is more interesting.

Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius 14-37 at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus,
He was either (1) ignorant and a bad researcher, for just repeating the same thing the Christians said, or (2) he found that information from Roman government records.

And that's just my layman appreciation from just reading the quote.

[ohmi]

IMO the only direct support for Jesus' existence is from the texts.


There's nothing wrong with direct evidence ...or indirect evidence ... no reason perhaps to ignore either ?

The other authors talk about the christians or from what the christians said.

Evidence of those who worshipped Jesus as the Israelite Messiah is good evidence of his existence , is it not ... so why ignore it ?

What the talmud talks about is a Yeshu who was hanged from a tree, not crucified. It might talk about Jesus but it might not, so it's not that trustworthy.

Crosses are made from trees and one is certainly hung upon it in crucifixion ... the OT and NT use the same terminology :-

Deuteronomy 21:23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

Joshua 8:29 And the king of Ai he hanged on a tree until eventide: and as soon as the sun was down, Joshua commanded that they should take his carcase down from the tree, and cast it at the entering of the gate of the city, and raise thereon a great heap of stones, that remaineth unto this day.

Esther 2:23 And when inquisition was made of the matter, it was found out; therefore they were both hanged on a tree: and it was written in the book of the chronicles before the king.

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:

Galatians 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

[Lógos Sokratikós]

It's not ignoring. What Suetonius -for instance- said is important as historical information. The key word here is "support". What the Roman Chirstians did and said will not get us any closer to finding out if Jesus was real. In that case we could even say Horus and Mitra were real. So that's why I don't find Suetonius supportive at all for Jesus, although it is for the early existence of the church. That's the distinction I've been wanting to make.

And as I said before your Tacitus quote is more promising. Also, you've just convinced me that the talmud part is supportive, more than promising −of course, as I said before, from what I can surmise as a layman.

[ohmi]

Does not the witness of the apostle Thomas , who spread the original [non-Romanised] christianity to India offer some witness too ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Thomas_Christians

[Will.L]

The direction this thread has taken is making me think it belongs in BC&H more than GRD. Moving it on over...

[Kelly]

Yup. And an upside down pentagram represents the occult symbol of the Goat of Mendes.

http://www.postpositive.org/?page_id=103

Are you proposing it's more than a coincidence?

I am not sure I understand your specific question. Are you asking "Is it more than a 'coincidence' that an upside down pentagram equals the occult symbol of the Goat of Mendes?" Hmmm. I've never really thought about it before. But I do suspect it is not a coincidence in terms of the fact that a five-pointed star had significant religious symbolism to a very large group of people in the Middle East, and occult groups typically seek to turn religious symbolism into something "other."

If you are asking if I think it is a coincidence that the Goat of Mendes appears in the street layout of Washington DC, the answer would be an emphatic "no". I think the French architect of DC, a guy named "L'Enfant" encoded many occult symbols into the layout of Washington. I'm not convinced that the founding fathers, even though many of them were indeed Masons, actually realized how many symbols L'Enfant included. Washington had hired the guy, and although Washington had once been a practicing Mason, he hadn't been a practicing Mason for several years when plans were laid to build Washington DC. Thomas Jefferson was also in on the layout of DC, but he disagreed rather regularly with some of the things L'Enfant wanted to do, and every time Jefferson disagreed, L'Enfant threw a temper tantrum. So I don't think it is really correct for people to imply that Washington DC was a layout determined by American Masonic founding fathers.

It was L'Enfant who originally encoded the occult symbolism into DC's street layout. There is no solid proof that he was a Mason either that I can find, but one might reasonably conclude L'Enfant certainly belonged to one of the secret societies and was very familiar with occult magic and symbolism. Most Mason's seem to prefer Egyptian symbolism, but L'Enfant used a lot of symbolism that is more specific to Baal worship, like the Goat of Mendez. In terms of witchcraft, an upright pentagram is supposed to be a symbol protecting occultists from harm. But an upside down pentagram, particularly one with one open side like the symbol in Washington DC is, is supposed to literally "invite" evil entities, or at least that's what some of the articles I've read say.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Wicca%20&%20Witchcraft/origin_of_the_satanic_hand_sign.htm

Also the figure of the great horned owl of Molech is encoded into Washington DC's street layout, and Molech was an aspect of Baal worship that demanded child sacrifice. The elitists who attend the Bohemian Grove meetings every year also burn an owl in effigy to Molech and child sacrifice. Very creepy stuff if you ask me...

I also find it more than odd that to discover that Washington DC sits directly on a major leyline that extends across the ocean from Baalbek. Check out the second picture down. Whether you or anyone else believes there is anything to leylines or not is beside the point. The ancients believed in it big time.

http://home.hiwaay.net/~jalison/afterword.html

So, do I think any of it is merely a "coincidence?"

Hell no. I think L'Enfant knew exactly what he was doing...

[Toto]

This thread is a god-awful mess. I will split out some subthreads.

[firebug]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ?

I assume you ask two questions.

1. Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel?

Well, he was jewish, that is why. Tribal allegiance was strong then, as it is strong now.

2. Why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus?

In general, religious have no problem ignoring facts (even in the book they revere). More specifically,
a) non-christian religions ignore this (and many other) statement because they consider Jesus a prophet, at best.
b) various brands of christianity ignore it because it undermines the foundation of their religion. And so do many other things in the book (shall I remind you child abuse perpetrated by Abraham, Lot, etc.?).

[sdelsolray]

I am simply stating my current point of view... I have no creed, no religion, no fixed beliefs , nothing to 'preach', much to discuss ...

It's quite a fairy tale.

[ohmi]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ?

I assume you ask two questions.

1. Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel?

Well, he was jewish, that is why. Tribal allegiance was strong then, as it is strong now.


:)

The House of Israel is completely non-Jewish, never accepted Judaism at all, always worshipped pagan gods , and [mostly] still does ...

[firebug]

The House of Israel is completely non-Jewish, never accepted Judaism at all, always worshipped pagan gods , and [mostly] still does ...

:confused: So, correct me if I am wrong - god of old testament (judaic god?) dispatched his son to take good care of... pagans? Well, at least not pagans mc :D

[ohmi]

The House of Israel is completely non-Jewish, never accepted Judaism at all, always worshipped pagan gods , and [mostly] still does ...

:confused: So, correct me if I am wrong - god of old testament (judaic god?) dispatched his son to take good care of... pagans? Well, at least not pagans mc :D

The God of scripture is not the same as the god of judaic creeds , but certainly the House of Israel is paganised and has been for thousands of years, but are forgiven in their new covenant [Jer 31:31-34] ...

The God of scripture redeems Israel first so that they can later serve as priests and kings during the mass redemption of the gentiles...

[joemailman]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-


WELL! First of all you're assuming that this Jesus "person" was actually a real person....not just a character made up by some shamans, priests or rabbis. Secondly you're assuming that, in the face of all the evidence that this "book", which is actually and obviously a collection of stories, is an historical accounting of that which happened. Even if it were only half true, which it is obviously not, you are still assuming that it has not been altered over the years by those who would and have used it to their own advantage. Given the condition of human beings living in sh*t for over a period of thousands of years, could any sane or even reasonable person expect any publication to remain in tact? Especially if the publication were to be used for economic, political, and/or military gain? :eek:

And so the reason why civilizations and other religions have not been able to adopt and practice what was allegedly said is because these are humans beings subjected to a world of scarcity and want. Some things allegedly said were honest and socially positive. Other things were cruel and untrue and utterly negative. So the clash of religions and cultures was and still is inevitable....until human beings come into their own. Until they are able to function in an economically sound and stable culture we will continue to have barbaric behavior and continue to ignore the many positive characteristics of human beings that are so desperately needed to be practiced.

[ohmi]

[quote=ohmi;5341310]Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-


WELL! First of all you're assuming that this Jesus "person" was actually a real person....not just a character made up by some shamans, priests or rabbis. Secondly you're assuming that, in the face of all the evidence that this "book", which is actually and obviously a collection of stories, is an historical accounting of that which happened. Even if it were only half true, which it is obviously not, you are still assuming that it has not been altered over the years by those who would and have used it to their own advantage. Given the condition of human beings living in sh*t for over a period of thousands of years, could any sane or even reasonable person expect any publication to remain in tact? Especially if the publication were to be used for economic, political, and/or military gain? :eek:

Like all good communication channels, the scriptures are both coded and incorporate redundancy ,to defeat the efforts to abuse by religionists...

And so the reason why civilizations and other religions have not been able to adopt and practice what was allegedly said is because these are humans beings subjected to a world of scarcity and want. Some things allegedly said were honest and socially positive. Other things were cruel and untrue and utterly negative. So the clash of religions and cultures was and still is inevitable....until human beings come into their own. Until they are able to function in an economically sound and stable culture we will continue to have barbaric behavior and continue to ignore the many positive characteristics of human beings that are so desperately needed to be practiced.
:)

It is commonplace to confuse religion and God , but still a big mistake ...

As for sustainable civilisation, it will not happen until this one fails [worldwide], which is already apparent, imminent ... and was of course predicted by jesus , the prophets , and the saints ...

[firebug]

The God of scripture is not the same as the god of judaic creeds , but certainly the House of Israel is paganised and has been for thousands of years, but are forgiven in their new covenant [Jer 31:31-34] ...

The God of scripture redeems Israel first so that they can later serve as priests and kings during the mass redemption of the gentiles...

Have to disagree. Those two gods are the same - the same illusion (or delusion).

I begin to wonder - do you believe in all this nonsense or you are simply cataloguing it?

[ohmi]

The God of scripture is not the same as the god of judaic creeds , but certainly the House of Israel is paganised and has been for thousands of years, but are forgiven in their new covenant [Jer 31:31-34] ...

The God of scripture redeems Israel first so that they can later serve as priests and kings during the mass redemption of the gentiles...

Have to disagree. Those two gods are the same - the same illusion (or delusion).


:)

Simply study the scripture , or one's own 'heart' of desire, to find the differences, there are many...


I begin to wonder - do you believe in all this nonsense or you are simply cataloguing it?

Whatever else it may be, you have offered no evidence that it is nonsense ... and I offer it in discussion only, as my current beliefs....

[firebug]

Simply study the scripture , or one's own 'heart' of desire, to find the differences, there are many...

You are missing my point again (seems to be a habit). Of course, Thor is different from Zeus in details, but they are both non-existent. In that respect, they are the same.

Whatever else it may be, you have offered no evidence that it is nonsense ... and I offer it in discussion only, as my current beliefs....

Not really. All what you do you quote scriptures which you apparently believe to be literally true. If you want a discussion, tell me why do you think so? It's just a book, do you also believe the mormon version of imaginary reality? It's a book too :)

[Illusio]

The Quran talks about Jesus and his statements as much as Muhammad, however, the statements in the NT might not be really Jesus statements.

Coming from the conspiracy theorist Muhammed, who claims to correct the story of Jesus 600 years later, I think we can dismiss that outright. It simply makes zero sense to say that the followers of a religion would willingly forge their revelation. Their religion would have no value to them if they changed it. And especially for the Jews, who alledgedly charged into combat with "God" literally on their side, this would be insane beyond words.

Now, I don't think Christianity or Judaism have any truth to them, but compared to Islam they at least have an element of doubt about their man-madeness and can hide in obscurity somewhat. Islam falls flat on its face, among other things because of the ridiculous claims that God speaks Arabic and that this was the original language of man. This is such a sad near sighted, arab-power nationalist idea that it would kill the claims of divinity even if we didn't have linguistic evidence of the origins of Arabic and know how languages mutate to incomprehensibility in just a few 100 years. The God of the Israelites has much of the same nationalist problem of course, but at least the Jews were lucky enough to not make a big point of their alternative linguistics.

As far as "reliability of divine origin" goes, Muhammed has no authority to discredit other religions or establish his entirely new theology on the foundation of the abrahamic god. Clearly there is no trace of the pillars of Islam in earlier societies, so it must have been invented on the spot.(Sometimes, more than once even, such as which direction to pray ;)

[ohmi]

All what you do you quote scriptures which you apparently believe to be literally true. If you want a discussion, tell me why do you think so? It's just a book, do you also believe the mormon version of imaginary reality? It's a book too :)

:)

Scripture is famously poetical, the greatest literature of all time ... the intricate structure of its many modes of expression exceed the skills of human playwrights ... it never was just a book... and never will be [not least because scripture refers to many scrolls which we do not have and some which are somewhat arbitrarily not included in the so-called 'canon']

[rizdek]

Yes, you make a good point about the lost tribes of Israel however after 70 AD the entire nation of Israel was scattered to all nations by the Romans. If anything your issue is indirect evidence that the gospel(autograph) was written before the diaspora of 70 AD.

Actually, this is just evidence that the oral traditions that eventually became parts of the gospel were probably developing before 70AD. As I understand it from reading LStrobel The Case for Christ (~p25 as best I can recall from my notes, I don't have the book in hand), the gospels documented the various oral traditions that were being handed down. And so I would assume that once they became "oral tradition" they became sacred and symbolic and no longer subject to "what was really going on around" those repeating the accounts and stories. So to me, it doesn't mean even the notes and memoirs that were written down before, and from which, the gospels were compiled got "written" before 70AD and certainly does not even suggest when the document was finalized in it's entirety.

As Strobel makes clear the concept of Matthew or some other gospel writer just "waking up one morning and deciding to write down all that they saw and heard in one long narrative" is not how things got written down then. He freely admits that first there was oral tradition in which the speakers tried to paraphrase what was said. So what people think are direct quotes from the lips of Jesus are really a parphrase. It doesn't mean they didn't get the gist of the conversations and monologues, but if someone believes Strobel, it might kind of blunt the wonderful feeling one might get thinking they are quoting words from the very lips of the son of God.

[Toto]

Yes, you make a good point about the lost tribes of Israel however after 70 AD the entire nation of Israel was scattered to all nations by the Romans. If anything your issue is indirect evidence that the gospel(autograph) was written before the diaspora of 70 AD.

Actually, this is just evidence that the oral traditions that eventually became parts of the gospel were probably developing before 70AD. As I understand it from reading LStrobel The Case for Christ (~p25 as best I can recall from my notes, I don't have the book in hand), the gospels documented the various oral traditions that were being handed down. And so I would assume that once they became "oral tradition" they became sacred and symbolic and no longer subject to "what was really going on around" those repeating the accounts and stories. So to me, it doesn't mean even the notes and memoirs that were written down before, and from which, the gospels were compiled got "written" before 70AD and certainly does not even suggest when the document was finalized in it's entirety. . . .

Strobel is not a credible source in this forum. There is no evidence that the gospels were based on any oral traditions at all.

The entire nation of Isreal was not scattered by the Romans until after the Bar Kochba rebellion around 132 CE.

[rizdek]

Islam falls flat on its face, among other things because of the ridiculous claims that God speaks Arabic and that this was the original language of man. This is such a sad near sighted, arab-power nationalist idea that it would kill the claims of divinity even if we didn't have linguistic evidence of the origins of Arabic and know how languages mutate to incomprehensibility in just a few 100 years.

And yet, according to one website there are ~1 million muslims (http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_numb.htm)
So what does that tell us about peoples willingness to go along with whatever god belief they are brought up with and/or convert to when faced with "believe or...die/go hungry/be excommunicated/suffer persecution or torture etc.

[rizdek]

Strobel is not a credible source in this forum.

That's a relief, I thought his book was full of BS myself.

There is no evidence that the gospels were based on any oral traditions at all.

Well, they must've come from somewhere. Are you saying there was a scribe following Jesus around or some sort of divine webcam, even when he was alone in the wilderness? Or are you saying someone just pulled the gospels out of thin air and wrote them down? Oral tradition seemed to make some sense to me. I actually thought Strobel's case was weakened substantially by the admission of the people (supposed experts) that he interviewed that in those days, people didn't actually remember quotes and events specifically but ad libbed/paraphrased and added their own thoughts where there were gaps in the story. They had no problem taking things second/third/fourth hand and then claiming to quote the person directly, or taking third party accounts and calling them their own.

[ohmi]

Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

I don't see the relevance. :huh:

The antichrist has power over all the nations to make them worship Satan as if he were the Christ and makes war on the true saints of God ... religion of men is thus predicted by Jesus to become wholly corrupted , that is all of divided modern christian creeds worship a false image of a christ that is not Jesus bar only those very few [Matt 7:14] who are not sinners[2 Timothy 2:19 ,Matthew 7:23].

[Toto]

Strobel is not a credible source in this forum.

That's a relief, I thought his book was full of BS myself.

There is no evidence that the gospels were based on any oral traditions at all.

Well, they must've come from somewhere. Are you saying there was a scribe following Jesus around or some sort of divine webcam, even when he was alone in the wilderness?

We can pretty much rule that out.

Or are you saying someone just pulled the gospels out of thin air and wrote them down?

Nope. The gospels were literary creations that relied heavily on the Hebrew Scriptures (you will find the word midrash used, although there is some dispute as to whether they are actually midrash - but the literary borrowing is evident, and makes sense.)

Oral tradition seemed to make some sense to me. I actually thought Strobel's case was weakened substantially by the admission of the people (supposed experts) that he interviewed that in those days, people didn't actually remember quotes and events specifically but ad libbed/paraphrased and added their own thoughts where there were gaps in the story. They had no problem taking things second/third/fourth hand and then claiming to quote the person directly, or taking third party accounts and calling them their own.

Yes, and historians typically wrote speaches for historical figures and had them say what they really should have said. Claiming oral tradition does not do much for the historical accuracy of the gospels.

[ohmi]

Claiming oral tradition does not do much for the historical accuracy of the gospels.
:)

Much of the difference between the gospels seems explainable only because of usage of hearsay ['oral tradition'] that has just finally been recorded.

The difference between Matthew and John however is that in many places Matthew is relying on the old scriptures [and makes some mistakes], whereas John is showing their meaning from the spirit

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

- This passage by John also begs the question as to why the gospels were written at all ,when Jesus promised all truth would come direct from God to the saints [those who ceased all unlovingness, all sin] :-John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth:

[Toto]

Claiming oral tradition does not do much for the historical accuracy of the gospels.
:)

Much of the difference between the gospels seems explainable only because of usage of hearsay ['oral tradition'] that has just finally been recorded.

On the contrary, Matt and Luke repeat much of Mark verbatim, which is not typical of hearsay. It is an indication that the later two used Mark as a literary source. At least some of the differences can be explained as due to the differing theological stances of the authors.

[sugarhitman]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O House of Judah, and House of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Jesus also said this "I have other sheep who are not of this fold." That is none Jewish sheep. The OT is filled with testimonies of the Messiah bringing light to the Gentiles. Paul makes it clear that the Gospel was to be preached to the Jew *first* this is what Jesus meant, His testimony was to be sent to the Jews first....not Only. Those who follow Jesus and have faith in God are of the House of Israel. I know many people do not like this but I will say it anyway....Jesus died and is searching for the lost sheep people in all nations, people who truly want to know who God is, those people who know that the Creator cannot be evil and whatever belief they are currently in they will come out when presented with the Truth.....but to the rest the Gospel is nothing but a Testimony against them. All the lost sheep in all ages will be saved....this is the Mission of Jesus to save all the children of faith even if they are lost He will guide them unto Truth and reveal to them who God truly is. Some would say this is false, God died for all men...yeah? if this is so then why is faith required for salvation? Jesus died for and was sent to the lost sheep.....the children of faith.

[youngalexander]

Strobel is not a credible source in this forum.

That's a relief, I thought his book was full of BS myself.
You might try Challenging the Verdict: A Cross-Examination of Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0968925901/thesecularweb/) by Earl Doherty

[ohmi]

:)

Much of the difference between the gospels seems explainable only because of usage of hearsay ['oral tradition'] that has just finally been recorded.

On the contrary, Matt and Luke repeat much of Mark verbatim, which is not typical of hearsay. It is an indication that the later two used Mark as a literary source.


Yes, but it's still just copying of hearsay... it's a theory about the similar passages perhaps, it doesn't explain the differences [which somewhat contradict it]


At least some of the differences can be explained as due to the differing theological stances of the authors.

Again a possible theory, but some of the differences are due simply to the different traditions of the audiences being addressed [for instance the enigmatic Roman timekeeping system , completely different in every way than the Hebrew original ]

[ohmi]

Why does Jesus say explicitly that he was sent by God ONLY to the House of Israel and why does every religion in the world ignore this specific statement made by Jesus ? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

Zechariah 8:13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O House of Judah, and House of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Jesus also said this "I have other sheep who are not of this fold." That is none Jewish sheep.


The House of Israel is completely non-Jewish, always was , always will be ... and it was to them alone that Jesus was sent , why do you not believe him if you SAY you believe him? :-

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

The OT is filled with testimonies of the Messiah bringing light to the Gentiles. Paul makes it clear that the Gospel was to be preached to the Jew *first* this is what Jesus meant, His testimony was to be sent to the Jews first....not Only.

I have never suggested that the testimonies were only fr the Jews, but the few who find the narrow way [Matt 7:14] are all of Israel [Rev 7:3-8] ,named by Jesus according to tribe of Israel, whereas the MANY who go by the broad way are saved too [Rev 7:9-10], but afterward , not at Jesus' return because they are still sinners, not saints... not sealed with spirit baptism.

Those who follow Jesus and have faith in God are of the House of Israel. I know many people do not like this but I will say it anyway

The House of Israel are ALL descendants of Jacob and it is a nation which disappeared to all except God amongst the gentiles, where Jesus sent his disciples looking for them... one cannot join the House of Israel, one is born to it or not ,as the case may be.

....Jesus died and is searching for the lost sheep people in all nations, people who truly want to know who God is, those people who know that the Creator cannot be evil and whatever belief they are currently in they will come out when presented with the Truth.....but to the rest the Gospel is nothing but a Testimony against them. All the lost sheep in all ages will be saved....this is the Mission of Jesus to save all the children of faith even if they are lost He will guide them unto Truth and reveal to them who God truly is. Some would say this is false, God died for all men...yeah? if this is so then why is faith required for salvation? Jesus died for and was sent to the lost sheep.....the children of faith.

Perhaps you are forgetting that faith in Love is given by God, not taken up of oneself [Ephesians