Jesus Debate 2008

[herushura]

If Jesus was born in Bethleham, why didnt any israel's at the time spread the messages of his words thus creating a christian Israel, Instead the word of christ started in Greaco-Roman and not his birth place.

From what i have read many jews 1000 years ago was discomforted by jesus and rejected him. Reasons

Was Jesus a Roman-Greaco creation, New testements have many Roman influences like
Virgin-Births, water to wine, trinity, Water walking, mary Magdeline, dec25th,twelve companions,baptism,crucifiction ascention and anointing.

The new testement was writtin in koine greek, why wasnt the new testements written in the language of jesus.

Jesus's spoke Aramaic, and i guess his disciples would of aswell. How did the romans who occopied israel could understand what jesus's was saying.

Jesus's disciples were Aramaic, then the only people his disciples would spread the word of christ to were the native speakers.

The Greeks guessed the word jesus from the old testements from book of moses, Why did they pick the word from the old testements. and not from the disciples or a transliteration Aramiac or by the records of the roman crucifixion,

[Muffled]

Originally Posted by herushura

If Jesus was born in Bethleham, why didnt any israel's at the time spread the messages of his words thus creating a christian Israel, Instead the word of christ started in Greaco-Roman and not his birth place.

From what i have read many jews 1000 years ago was discomforted by jesus and rejected him. Reasons

Was Jesus a Roman-Greaco creation, New testements have many Roman influences like
Virgin-Births, water to wine, trinity, Water walking, mary Magdeline, dec25th,twelve companions,baptism,crucifiction ascention and anointing.

The new testement was writtin in koine greek, why wasnt the new testements written in the language of jesus.

Jesus's spoke Aramaic, and i guess his disciples would of aswell. How did the romans who occopied israel could understand what jesus's was saying.

Jesus's disciples were Aramaic, then the only people his disciples would spread the word of christ to were the native speakers.

The Greeks guessed the word jesus from the old testements from book of moses, Why did they pick the word from the old testements. and not from the disciples or a transliteration Aramiac or by the records of the roman crucifixion,

God doesn't usually tell us why He does things the way that He does. I am willing to speculate that the Roman Empire offered Christianity the best vehicle for growth.

Romans and Greeks create a Messiah for which they had no tradition incorporating a god they did not know? How gullible are you anyway?

Duh! Jesus didn't write it of course.

This is also a matter of specultaion. I could say with tongue in cheek that Jesus spoke in tongues or take the more conservative route and say that A Roman ruler would have had to learn the lingua franca of the land he was ruling.

In those days Greek was a second language. They probably knew Greek better than they knew Hebrew. Paul on the other hand grew up in a culture where Greek would have been a major language and Latin a second language.

The Greeks didn't guess at anything; they were taught by those who knew Jesus or at least the message given by those who did know Jesus. They turned the name Jeshuah into a form that they would use in their own language just as we have turned Yahweh into Jehovah.

[tomspug]

Most of Judea, as predicted by the Old Testament, rejected the Messiah the same way they were shown to have rejected God throughout Israel's entire history. Fitting, no? The stone that the builder's rejected has become the cornerstone.

God originally intended to bring peace to the world through Israel, but Israel clearly failed. God then chose, through the Messiah, to bring about a new Israel, in spite of itself, through the Gentiles instead. This is why the New Testament was written in Greek, because the Gentiles would listen to the words of Jesus, while the Jews would not.

If you're going to use the discernment of the Jewish people as a measure for what is Godly and what is not, you might want to re-read the Torah. They are mistaken often.

Many Jews did listen to Jesus. And they chose to minister to the Gentiles and the Jews, like they were told. There are far more Gentiles than Jews, and (apparently) the Gentiles wanted the kind of Messiah Jesus was more than the Jews, which is ironic considering that Jesus did almost nothing but preach from the Torah his entire ministry.

Explain to me why the Jews still think, after 2500 years of silence from God, with no prophets since then, that the Messiah they are looking for, that has not appeared, is not the Messiah God will send? Where in the prophets does it say, specifically, that the Messiah will re-establish Israel militarily? And why would he come from Bethlehem now when it is predominantly Muslim?

And don't be silly. Most of the learned people of Israel would also know Greek. They would have to in order to conduct trade. Aramaic was merely a native language. What good would a message of Good News be if only the Jews could read it?

[ChristianBrother]

If I stood up and said I was God, would you agree with me and obey my every command. I would think not.

Jesus was born, and started to preach to the people a bit later on,so would they not naturally think of him as a fraud.

I know that, unless you could prove your worth to me, then I wouldn't worship you as a God. Jesus, later on, could do miracles, healing people. Would you not, if I did that, believe that I had some sort of divine connection with God.

It's a natural reaction, if someone starts to preach to you about something different, then you'd push them away till they gave you solid proof. The same has obviously happend in the case of Jesus in Bethlehem.

CB

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by herushura

Jesus's spoke Aramaic, and i guess his disciples would of aswell. How did the romans who occopied israel could understand what jesus's was saying.

(It is not easy to come up with questions of this quality, and we seem to have a ready source of them. Sad.)