Who is Jesus?

blü 2 · Dec 8, 2019

PruePhillip said:
When the law is in your heart, and you live by the two laws of Jesus (to love God and your fellow man) then this is the change within - not shown with your foreskin (!) but the indwelling of Christ's spirit.

You're yet again pretending the Tanakh is a Christian document.

PruePhillip said:
We have no dates for the Gospels. Again, I suspect John's was first. The earliest datable reference is Paul to the Corinthians, about 20 years after Jesus.

The traditional date of Jesus' crucifixion is 30 CE.

Paul's letters, according to my sources, start in 51 CE with 1 Thessalonians, and end not later than 58 CE with Romans.
The Temple is destroyed in 70 CE.
Mark, the first gospel, is written not before 75 CE, but possibly not much later. After that it gets more guessy.
Matthew is later than Mark, and is second, with an upper date around the mid-80s.
Luke is third, mid-80s or even early 90s.
John is fourth, around 100.
Acts is somewhere between the mid-90s and the first couple of decades of second century.

PruePhillip · Dec 8, 2019

blü 2 said:
You're yet again pretending the Tanakh is a Christian document.
The traditional date of Jesus' crucifixion is 30 CE.

Paul's letters, according to my sources, start in 51 CE with 1 Thessalonians, and end not later than 58 CE with Romans.
The Temple is destroyed in 70 CE.
Mark, the first gospel, is written not before 75 CE, but possibly not much later. After that it gets more guessy.
Matthew is later than Mark, and is second, with an upper date around the mid-80s.
Luke is third, mid-80s or even early 90s.
John is fourth, around 100.
Acts is somewhere between the mid-90s and the first couple of decades of second century.

Really? These are not your own dates of course.
No deep and personal reflection is obvious here.

There's not a shred of evidence for the dating of John's Gospel.
There's no evidence of the fall of Israel in the New Testament. The reason is simple - it
hadn't happened yet. And it was a profound event for all these people.
Finding the earliest document and figuring this was the original document seems to be the logic here.
Luke was an eyewitness to much of Acts, and he says he was with Paul on that last journey to Rome.
And is Paul quoting Luke or visa versa when he speaks of Christ in my last quotation?

Question - some scribes date a prophecy after it happened, ie "Otherwise, how could they have
possibly known?" Yet here people want to date the NT after the fall of the temple though these
epistles and Acts never mention it. Do you find that a bit odd?

I don't, its horses for courses with skeptics.

blü 2 · Dec 9, 2019

PruePhillip said:
There's not a shred of evidence for the dating of John's Gospel.

One piece of evidence occurs to me immediately. The antisemitism of John fits the history of early Christianity as it moves away from being a Jewish sect at the end of the first century.

PruePhillip said:
There's no evidence of the fall of Israel in the New Testament. The reason is simple - it hadn't happened yet.

If you mean the siege of Jerusalem, which led to the destruction of the Temple and much of the city in 70 CE, then I've already referred you to a likely passage in Mark.

PruePhillip said:
Finding the earliest document and figuring this was the original document seems to be the logic here.

You could start with the Gabriel's Vision stone.

PruePhillip said:
Luke was an eyewitness to much of Acts, and he says he was with Paul on that last journey to Rome.

You'll be aware that the chronology of Acts is unsettled at best.

PruePhillip said:
And is Paul quoting Luke or visa versa when he speaks of Christ in my last quotation?

What last quotation?

PruePhillip said:
Question - some scribes date a prophecy after it happened, ie "Otherwise, how could they have possibly known?" Yet here people want to date the NT after the fall of the temple though these epistles and Acts never mention it. Do you find that a bit odd?

There are many problems trying to reconcile the letters of Paul with the tales in Acts. And the NT is already overflowing with fictions, so more than usual care is needed.
\

IndigoChild5559 · Dec 9, 2019

PruePhillip said:
I am sure what Jesus meant by the Gentile's time being fulfilled is there would either
be a specific time, or there would be a turning away from Judeo Christianity. I suspect
it's the latter.
IMO your land has been given back to you solely on the basis of the Gentile issue.
Most Jews returning to Israel after 1897 were secular. There is no change in the Jewish
mind concerning religion that I am aware of.
I take a lot of interest in Jews and Israel.

Secular or not, it simply doesn't happen unless Hashem allows.

Thanks for taking an interest. Any time you wanna bounce stuff around, I'm here.

PruePhillip · Dec 9, 2019

IndigoChild5559 said:
Secular or not, it simply doesn't happen unless Hashem allows.

Thanks for taking an interest. Any time you wanna bounce stuff around, I'm here.

Wots Hashem mean?
I hope to go to Israel next year.

PruePhillip · Dec 9, 2019

blü 2 said:
One piece of evidence occurs to me immediately. The antisemitism of John fits the history of early Christianity as it moves away from being a Jewish sect at the end of the first century.
If you mean the siege of Jerusalem, which led to the destruction of the Temple and much of the city in 70 CE, then I've already referred you to a likely passage in Mark.

Anti-Semitism predated Christianity.
If the Mark passage refers to the warning of Jesus then this warning saved many Christians -
the warning is not an after-the-event thing. But in the Acts and Epistles the fall of the Temple
had not happened.
Personally I believe the warning to flee without turning back for provisions could have come
about after General Gallus withdrew from Jerusalem for some inexplicable reason - and for
a few hours the city was open.
You don't warn someone of an event after it has happened.

PruePhillip · Dec 9, 2019

blü 2 said:
One piece of evidence occurs to me immediately.
You could start with the Gabriel's Vision stone.
You'll be aware that the chronology of Acts is unsettled at best.
What last quotation?
There are many problems trying to reconcile the letters of Paul with the tales in Acts. And the NT is already overflowing with fictions, so more than usual care is needed.
\

How do you know Acts is "overflowing with fiction" when you weren't there?
What you mean is, "There are things I don't believe in Acts."

Never heard of Gabriel's Vision stone until now. Can't comment.

The quotation I gave appeared to either Paul quoting Luke or visa versa
with the description of Jesus in 1 Corinthians. Written about 20 years
after Jesus died.
I hold the entire of Acts was from a single eye-witness account. Same
author as Luke's Gospel. No-one would argue for multiple authors.

Harel13 · Dec 9, 2019

PruePhillip said:
Hashem

Hashem is Hebrew for "The Name", a reference to the name of God which Jews are not allowed to say for just any reason, so we use the word "Hashem" instead.

PruePhillip · Dec 9, 2019

Harel13 said:
Hashem is Hebrew for "The Name", a reference to the name of God which Jews are not allowed to say for just any reason, so we use the word "Hashem" instead.

I thought God's name was JHWH ????

Harel13 · Dec 9, 2019

PruePhillip said:
I thought God's name was

That's one of His names, and we don't say it. It's not allowed.

blü 2 · Dec 9, 2019

PruePhillip said:
Anti-Semitism predated Christianity.

What, they were one of the lands conquered by Alexander, or trying to kill their neighbors, or whatever? That's not antisemitism, that's just what they used to do. No, for the hatred and demonization of a people for being who they are, you have to wait for the Christians.

PruePhillip said:
If the Mark passage refers to the warning of Jesus then this warning saved many Christians -the warning is not an after-the-event thing. But in the Acts and Epistles the fall of the Temple had not happened.

Or wasn't mentioned, because it was some 30 years in the author's past and not relevant to his yarn.

PruePhillip said:
You don't warn someone of an event after it has happened.

But after the event you write a tale in which the hero displays supernatural foreknowledge, to make him look powerful.

PruePhillip said:
How do you know Acts is "overflowing with fiction" when you weren't there?

I already told you: Acts may rightly be suspected of being full of fictions because it's in an anthology full of fictions.

PruePhillip said:
What you mean is, "There are things I don't believe in Acts."

No, what I mean is what I said.

PruePhillip said:
The quotation I gave appeared to either Paul quoting Luke or visa versa
with the description of Jesus in 1 Corinthians. Written about 20 years after Jesus died.

F'cryin' out loud, where about in 1 Corinthians?

PruePhillip said:
I hold the entire of Acts was from a single eye-witness account. Same
author as Luke's Gospel. No-one would argue for multiple authors.

For best results, remember to sprinkle it liberally with pixie dust.

PruePhillip · Dec 9, 2019

blü 2 said:
F'cryin' out loud, where about in 1 Corinthians?
For best results, remember to sprinkle it liberally with pixie dust.

Pixie dust began quite early. Documents from that age, for any culture, are rare. The earliest document
demonstrably early is 1 Corinthians 25. This could have been less than 20 years after Jesus, and written
to people who were familiar with the account.

"The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and
said, “This is my body which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took
the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood: do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of
me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes."

I wonder if Paul didn't copy this from the Gospel according to Luke.

Love what David wrote too in Psalm 22.
"Posterity will serve him; future generations will be told about the Lord. They will proclaim his righteousness,
declaring to a people yet unborn He has done it!"

And this isn't Israel, it isn't David, it is "the Lord."
In Psalm 110 David speaks of a Messiah the Jews know little about.
"The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool’”
"The Lord" is God. "My Lord" is the Son of God. "Until" means a time must elapse before all can be
fulfilled. And it's marvelous in our sight when we open our eyes.

j1i · Dec 9, 2019

rrobs said:
I am trying to see what people who have not read the Bible, or who have read it only a little, understand about the nature of Jesus. I don't care if you believe it or not, just trying to get an idea of what people think it says.

Do people already "know" that Jesus is God before ever cracking the book. In other words, if and when they do open the book for the first time, do they have preconceived ideas about Jesus?

Thanks!

My friend, Since you grew up in a Christian environment and learned from a young age Jesus is God

It will be shocking to see people or nations who do not share your thoughts or faith

You took the data as realistic and it is real while others took other data and believe in it with the strength of the power you believe in Jesus.

And belief in any belive depend on due to your social situation, your needs and interests

There are peoples who are not stongly religious and subject to change if they obtain economic interests or benefits in life

But there are people who, if hungry, will not change their faith

Faith is the principle that a person (honor) prepares and cannot give up

blü 2 · Dec 9, 2019

PruePhillip said:
Pixie dust began quite early. Documents from that age, for any culture, are rare. The earliest document
demonstrably early is 1 Corinthians 25. This could have been less than 20 years after Jesus, and written
to people who were familiar with the account.

"The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and
said, “This is my body which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took
the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood: do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of
me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes."

I wonder if Paul didn't copy this from the Gospel according to Luke.

Love what David wrote too in Psalm 22.
"Posterity will serve him; future generations will be told about the Lord. They will proclaim his righteousness,
declaring to a people yet unborn He has done it!"

And this isn't Israel, it isn't David, it is "the Lord."
In Psalm 110 David speaks of a Messiah the Jews know little about.
"The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool’”
"The Lord" is God. "My Lord" is the Son of God. "Until" means a time must elapse before all can be
fulfilled. And it's marvelous in our sight when we open our eyes.

Whatever.

rrobs · Dec 9, 2019

j1i said:
My friend, Since you grew up in a Christian environment and learned from a young age Jesus is God

It will be shocking to see people or nations who do not share your thoughts or faith

You took the data as realistic and it is real while others took other data and believe in it with the strength of the power you believe in Jesus.

And belief in any belive depend on due to your social situation, your needs and interests

There are peoples who are not stongly religious and subject to change if they obtain economic interests or benefits in life

But there are people who, if hungry, will not change their faith

Faith is the principle that a person (honor) prepares and cannot give up

Thanks for the reply. You may not have noticed, but I didn't state my belief as to the nature of Jesus, whether he is God or man.

It is true that I did learn at an early age that Jesus is God, but it wasn't from my personal study of the Bible. I just believed what the priest told me. I think that is the prevailing attitude, even among those who don't believe in Jesus. I think they take that preconceived idea with them if and when they begin to read the Bible for themselves. In other words, they already "know" what the Bible says before they ever read it for themselves. The bias is so strong that the many clear verses that plainly call Jesus a man, while none directly call him God, is lost to them.

I was just trying to get a feel for how people think. As I said to someone else here, I don't think I did a very good job. Apparently I'm not a very good pollster! Oh well, I'm not a brain surgeon either.

Take care.

IndigoChild5559 · Dec 9, 2019

PruePhillip said:
Wots Hashem mean?
I hope to go to Israel next year.

Hashem or Ha Shem means The Name. It is a way of referring to God extremely respectfully very common among Jews.

Lucky you!! Some day when I get my inheritance, the first thing I will do is visit Israel. There are so many places and people I wish to see.

PruePhillip · Dec 9, 2019

IndigoChild5559 said:
Hashem or Ha Shem means The Name. It is a way of referring to God extremely respectfully very common among Jews.

Lucky you!! Some day when I get my inheritance, the first thing I will do is visit Israel. There are so many places and people I wish to see.

I was thinking of flying direct to Cairo, having a few days there,
then getting a bus to Jerusalem. That way I can see the pyramids,
Cairo Museum and a bit of Egypt for a few hundred dollars. Hope.
Want to see Israel for myself - it's in the news and in my bible, so
gotta' go!!!!

idea · Dec 9, 2019

Harel13 said:
That's one of His names, and we don't say it. It's not allowed.

I have heard that Jesus' name was not Jesus - that the "us" ending was added by the Romans to make it more masculine? Is Jehovah closer? What name would Jewish people use for him?

If you are waiting for a messiah to come still, what name do you give to your messiah?

Sorry, hope not to offend, I'm horribly out of the loop here but curious.

idea · Dec 9, 2019

rrobs said:
Thanks for the reply. You may not have noticed, but I didn't state my belief as to the nature of Jesus, whether he is God or man.

.

I was raised in a non-trinitarian tradition (JW offshoot, followed by a time in Mormonism) I am now non-denominational, and will have to say I like the idea of God quite a bit more if God is the same as Jesus. The God of the OT seems illogical, temperamental, just not a very nice person... Jehovah/Jesus does seem to be loving, merciful, fair, etc. though. I also like the idea of the light of Christ within all people - the idea that God resides in everyone. "Know ye not that ye are Gods?" - the idea that we are all united, all from the same source, all eternal with a piece of God in all of us.

PruePhillip · Dec 9, 2019

idea said:
I have heard that Jesus' name was not Jesus - that the "us" ending was added by the Romans to make it more masculine? Is Jehovah closer? What name would Jewish people use for him?

If you are waiting for a messiah to come still, what name do you give to your messiah?

Sorry, hope not to offend, I'm horribly out of the loop here but curious.

It's actually not important. Every nation has different names for God and the Messiah.
ie Vietnamese called Him Jeezoo. It means the same thing.
But it's possible Jesus' name was pronounced "Yish - you - uh"

Who is Jesus?

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Am Yisrael Chai

Well-Known Member

Am Yisrael Chai

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Smiling is charity without giving money

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Well-Known Member

Question Everything

Question Everything

Well-Known Member