Religion II

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

If they didn't do that you wouldn't be having so much fun here today.

Didn't Jesus basically state somewhere in the Bible that his death was predetermined and a foregone conclusion.

Haven't you told us a billion times that Christ died to save humanity? That he HAD to die? That it fulfilled a prophecy? That he KNEW it beforehand...

Thus, the Jews (or whomever else you want to blame for this, whether or not they are actually to blame) were not operating under a freedom of choice mandate here. They (or whomever actually delivered up Christ to the Romans) had no free will in the matter. Christ was going to die no matter what.

In fact, he HAD TO. Or else you wouldn't have a religion.

So in reality, you SHOULD BE THANKING THE JEWS (or whomever it was that actually "delivered Christ to the Romans.")

And by the way, how come nobody is ever pissed off at Italians or calling THEM Christ-killers?

We've had this discussion before. God sovereignly removing his restraining grace from his natural born enemies does not absolve them from their sins. After all, they still know they ARE evil-doers.

To paraphrase Jesus, he said of his betrayer that it would have been better if he had never been born! Doesn't sound like Jesus was going to give Judas a free get-out-of-jail pass after he did the dastardly deed, does it?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

I have a wager in mind but first let's clarify exactly what your claim is. Recall that I qualified my challenge with the word "verifiable". If your numbers are from Christian, or even Jewish, sources then no bet. None of this "400 people saw Christ after the resurrection" BS. What is your claim exactly?

We also need to recruit an impartial judge to decide who won the bet. That won't be easy. I might even be impossible. Got anyone in mind?

Of course, my sources are both Jewish and Christian! Who should my sources be: Muslims, Buddhists, worshipers of Zeus, the pagans religions of Greece?

My claim, which you reject, was that virtually all the FIRST Christians from the official birth (institution) of the Church, on the Feast Day of Pentecost, in Jerusalem were Jews and that they numbered in the thousands. That is my very specific claim, which I can prove this from Jewish-Christian sources. Take it or leave it.

Meanwhile, you have zero evidence to the contrary!

[boxcar]

Mr. 'cap, I found the passage in Acts that I alluded to earlier this morning.

Allow me to provide a little context so that the texts can better understood.

The apostle Paul had a custom as he traveled from city to city throughout Asia Minor to preach the gospel. The first thing he would do on every Jewish Sabbath was to go into a city's synagogue to preach Jesus as the Messiah. He always had mixed results when he did this. Some would accept his gospel message, most would not. Paul, then, would move on to preach to the Gentiles. And this cycle would continue from city to city.

But Paul reached a tipping point in Acts 18 when he was in Corinth. He must have had an unusually bad time with his fellow-countrymen one sabbath when he was in their synagogue -- but let us allow the scripture to speak for itself:

Acts 18:4-7
4 And he was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks.

5 But when Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, solemnly testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ. 6 And when they resisted and blasphemed, he shook out his garments and said to them, "Your blood be upon your own heads! I am clean. From now on I shall go to the Gentiles."
NASB

It appears that Paul had reached the end of his rope with the Jews. He sounds exacerbated to say the least. But yet...what did do? Did he do what Christ's disciples wanted to do with the angry, unbelieving Samaritans, when they asked Jesus if they should call down fire from heaven as Elijah did!? No! The very next verse tells us that Paul simply departed from the synagogue. Paul didn't exact vengeance or call on God to exact vengeance on those blasphemous Jews.

But look what happened, probably a couple of years later, as Paul moved on to Ephesus. Still in chapter 18, let's pick the story up.

Acts 18:18-19
18 And Paul, having remained many days longer, took leave of the brethren and put out to sea for Syria, and with him were Priscilla and Aquila. In Cenchrea he had his hair cut, for he was keeping a vow. 19 And they came to Ephesus, and he left them there. Now he himself entered the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews.
NASB

Oops...what happened here? Paul, after categorically rejecting the Jews in Corinth still winds up in a another synagogue in another city. As I stated earlier, God reigned Paul in. He had a little talk him. And, evidently, Paul changed his mind about Jews due to what God told him. So, what did God tell Paul? We have to back up a little in the same chapter to find out.

Acts 18:9-11
9And the Lord said to Paul in the night by a vision, "Do not be afraid any longer, but go on speaking and do not be silent; 10 for I am with you, and no man will attack you in order to harm you, for I have many people in this city. " 11 And he settled there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.
NASB

So Paul remained in Corinth for a year and half. And apparently, among the many people that God had in Corinth, Jews were among them! And Paul, being faithful to his Lord and Savior, preached as he was commanded. This is why we find Paul again preaching to Jews in Ephesus after he left Corinth.

This account harmonizes quite nicely with what Paul wrote to the church in Rome when he told the church that a partial hardening has happened to the Jews -- but at the end of the day all the elect Jews from all over the world will be saved! All the Jews who are the children of the promise (opposed to mere children according to descent) would be saved! God has not rejected all those Jews whom he has foreknown before the creation of the world.

Do not judge Christianity by the evil deeds of professing believers who have brought reproach upon the holy Name of God; but rather judge Christianity by the God who has inspired the Word of God.

[xtb]

Originally Posted by boxcar

So, tell us O, Brilliant Morning Star, how did Judas disembowel himself? Did he beat himself to death? Did he jump off of a flying donkey? Did he skydive off a steep cliff and forget his kite? How did Judas do this?

In one of the "Silence of the Lambs" movies, Hannibal Lecter ties one of his victims in such a way that when he pushes him out a window, he is disemboweled when coming to the end of the rope. Maybe it is something similar.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by xtb

In one of the "Silence of the Lambs" movies, Hannibal Lecter ties one of his victims in such a way that when he pushes him out a window, he is disemboweled when coming to the end of the rope. Maybe it is something similar.

Ha..I don't remember that scene. But maybe I didn't see that movie.

I think the solution is very simple. Judas hung himself and days later the limb or branch snapped and Judas fell to the ground.

And it could well have been due to heavy vultures picking away at Judas and perching on the limb from when hung. Those birds are big and heavy. Get two or three or those on the same limb and the extra weight could well have brought the limb down.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You can't Luther literally. He must be understood allegorically. He's talking strictly about his inner conflicts which he likens to the conflicts the Jews had with Jesus.

Really? I repeat. How can "burning synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes burned, and property and money confiscated" be understood metaphorically or as allegory?.

Can Hitler's ovens bunky?

???????????????????????????

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Really? I repeat. How can "burning synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes burned, and property and money confiscated" be understood metaphorically or as allegory?.

Can Hitler's ovens bunky?

???????????????????????????

Whoa...that's what I keep asking you about many passages in scripture! But hey...that's never stopped you from perverting the true meaning of scripture.
I bet you don't have any problem whatsoever allegorizing Christ's crucifixion, do you?

Mabe Luther's works are too deep for you, and you need to take advanced courses in Allegory.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Whoa...that's what I keep asking you about many passages in scripture! But hey...that's never stopped you from perverting the true meaning of scripture.
I bet you don't have any problem whatsoever allegorizing Christ's crucifixion, do you?

Mabe Luther's works are too deep for you, and you need to take advanced courses in Allegory.

I am back to thinking early stages of Alzheimer. Burning synagogues and schools is an allegory bunky? How? Explain.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the...r_Lies#Content
On the Jews and Their Lies

In the treatise, Luther describes Jews as a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth."[6] Luther wrote that they are "full of the devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine,"[7] and the synagogue is an "incorrigible whore and an evil slut".[8]

All I can say as a Jew, is screw you and all the half baked interpretations you rode in on

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I am back to thinking early stages of Alzheimer. Burning synagogues and schools is an allegory bunky? How? Explain.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the...r_Lies#Content
On the Jews and Their Lies

In the treatise, Luther describes Jews as a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth."[6] Luther wrote that they are "full of the devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine,"[7] and the synagogue is an "incorrigible whore and an evil slut".[8]

All I can say as a Jew, is screw you and all the half baked interpretations you rode in on

The killing of all Egypt's firstborn in the Exodus account is allegory? How? Explain that.

Apparently, what is good for the little goosey ain't so good for the gander, is it?
Translate: You're free to allegorize any scripture passage you desire when it su its your purpose, but when someone plays your dishonest game and wants to interpret Luther as allegory, you cry foul? Really?

[hcap]

Holy sh*t. I was RIGHT, senility

Luther wrote an anti-Semitic book

How is that an allegory?
Simply because you do not understand the long history of metaphor and allegorical interpretation of scripture, is no excuse to make everything an allegory

Certainly not Luther.
How's about Mein Kampf?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Holy sh*t. I was RIGHT, senility

Luther wrote an anti-Semitic book

How is that an allegory?
Simply because you do not understand the long history of metaphor and allegorical interpretation of scripture, is no excuse to make everything an allegory

Certainly not Luther.
How's about Mein Kampf?

And God inspired a Holy Book that you despise and that speaks of his great salvation for his imagers from cover to cover. How is that allegory?

Or how are the Christ-rejecting Jews delivering up the righteous man Jesus to the Romans to be crucified allegory?

And again, how is God killing all of Egypt's firstborn allegory?

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Of course, my sources are both Jewish and Christian! Who should my sources be: Muslims, Buddhists, worshipers of Zeus, the pagans religions of Greece?

Any source that's verifiable. Finding one is your problem, not mine. You are the one making the claim.

Originally Posted by boxcar

My claim, which you reject, was that virtually all the FIRST Christians from the official birth (institution) of the Church, on the Feast Day of Pentecost, in Jerusalem were Jews and that they numbered in the thousands. That is my very specific claim, which I can prove this from Jewish-Christian sources. Take it or leave it.

You have nothing. I'll leave it.

Originally Posted by boxcar

Meanwhile, you have zero evidence to the contrary!

Argumentum ad ignorantiam! Latin for argument from ignorance. Lack of evidence for one thesis does not make any opposing thesis true even if there are only two possibilities.

Luther was right. Reason never comes to the aid of religion.

[Show Me the Wire]

Is the plot of the T.V. series Dig prophetic? A red heifer, the first in 2,000 years, has been born in Israel. https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/wei...m-third-temple

Will it remain without blemish?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

And God inspired a Holy Book that you despise and that speaks of his great salvation for his imagers from cover to cover. How is that allegory?

Or how are the Christ-rejecting Jews delivering up the righteous man Jesus to the Romans to be crucified allegory?

And again, how is God killing all of Egypt's firstborn allegory?

I have explained it many times. As I said, simply because you do not understand the "psycho-spiritual" metaphor, does not allow you to pull allegory out of your butt and apply it to
Adolf Hitler and his philosophy.

As above so below is a guideline. The leaf of a tree mirrors the tree itself. Luther mirrors only antisemitism.

I know you think you need not understand all religions including Judaism(except re-defined by Christians), but contrary to your pride, metaphor and the figurative interpretation of scripture has long been a staple of Jewish midrash in the talmud

The Guide for the Perplexed..written about 1190by Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, primarily known either as Maimonides
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gu..._the_Perplexed

"Even well informed persons are bewildered if they understand these passages in their literal signification, but they are entirely relieved of their perplexity when we explain the figure, or merely suggest that the terms are figurative. For this reason I have called this book Guide for the Perplexed”.[

Again Marin Luther cannot be taken figuratively, except as a figure of hate.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Any source that's verifiable. Finding one is your problem, not mine. You are the one making the claim.

You have nothing. I'll leave it.

Argumentum ad ignorantiam! Latin for argument from ignorance. Lack of evidence for one thesis does not make any opposing thesis true even if there are only two possibilities.

Luther was right. Reason never comes to the aid of religion.

And you're one BLINDLY denying my claim based on zero evidence. But I'm the ignorant one? And you talk about reason!?

I have a document that backs up my claim. It's called the Bible. But you can't accept what is says because you're a bigot?

And what would constitute a verifiable source from the ancient world?

Would this count?

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780...ians-were-jews