Is There Anyway to Stop the Great Deception

[oldbadger]

Personally i don't think it is fair, most people haven't recognized the Gospel of John is made up, the writings of Paul contradict Yeshua, and Simon being called the stone (petros), was meant to warn people he would mislead them...............

This particular Great Deception is now 2000 years old.
It was clever, taking the name of Yeshua, Hellenising it into Jesus, then filling in all around it with Paul's (and other's) perceptions and calling it all 'God's Word'. Paul had no interest in Yeshua or his real mission, nor did Paul ever bother to write a single account of anything that Yeshua did in his short mission, apart from repeating about his death and resurrection.

There are Christians out there even now who consider that any criticism of Paul is Intentional Blasphemy!

But then, nothing about life has ever been fair, or equal, so I think it's best to just accept that bad things do happen in the World, and to keep ducking! Your God probably knows that you've figured it out. Maybe you'll get points for all, at the end.......

 

[Brickjectivity]

This particular Great Deception is now 2000 years old.
It was clever, taking the name of Yeshua, Hellenising it into Jesus, then filling in all around it with Paul's (and other's) perceptions and calling it all 'God's Word'. Paul had no interest in Yeshua or his real mission, nor did Paul ever bother to write a single account of anything that Yeshua did in his short mission, apart from repeating about his death and resurrection.

There are Christians out there even now who consider that any criticism of Paul is Intentional Blasphemy!

But then, nothing about life has ever been fair, or equal, so I think it's best to just accept that bad things do happen in the World, and to keep ducking! Your God probably knows that you've figured it out. Maybe you'll get points for all, at the end.......

Ever since you read the Bible you've become a huge pain. Not saying I agree with you though. You are on your own.

 

[meghanwaterlillies]

This particular Great Deception is now 2000 years old.
It was clever, taking the name of Yeshua, Hellenising it into Jesus, then filling in all around it with Paul's (and other's) perceptions and calling it all 'God's Word'. Paul had no interest in Yeshua or his real mission, nor did Paul ever bother to write a single account of anything that Yeshua did in his short mission, apart from repeating about his death and resurrection.

There are Christians out there even now who consider that any criticism of Paul is Intentional Blasphemy!

But then, nothing about life has ever been fair, or equal, so I think it's best to just accept that bad things do happen in the World, and to keep ducking! Your God probably knows that you've figured it out. Maybe you'll get points for all, at the end.......

I think it has to do with circumcision thingy and its marriage as well and the law which is why.. I see it in islam and Judaism. (the Canaan and Jerusalem)talmuds.. They get be debtors of the law. Wow. No matter what. 3For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh— 4though I myself (this is paul the "prophet" who is up and down back and forth everything said don't do he did) could have such confidence. If anyone else thinks he has grounds for confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin; a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee;… He makes it spirit thing but still does it physically, Then he tells galations not too.... Then he does a circumcision to timothy. Like what the crap?? Up and down much? Wolfing and goating. Yes... I see..Sometimes they get person who doesn't or didn't want that; and they are not nice about it.

 

[oldbadger]

Ever since you read the Bible you've become a huge pain. Not saying I agree with you though. You are on your own.

Oh, I was a huge pain long before I read any bible!

 

[ronandcarol]

Is There Anyway to Stop the Great Deception
Read and study the God inspired Bible and pray!

ronandcarol

 

[oldbadger]

Ever since you read the Bible you've become a huge pain.

I just know that you wanted a more serious reply!
That is exactly what Church leaders thought about those who translated the bible, hundreds of years ago.
The translators, and the subsequent readers risked and often lost their lives because of what they saw.
How Catherine Parr survived Henry's Bishops is a really exciting tale!
There are many people who think that the bible should not be available to the masses, but I'm not one of them.

Not saying I agree with you though.

Obviously.

You are on your own.

That's no surprise, at all.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I just know that you wanted a more serious reply!
That is exactly what Church leaders thought about those who translated the bible, hundreds of years ago.
The translators, and the subsequent readers risked and often lost their lives because of what they saw.
How Catherine Parr survived Henry's Bishops is a really exciting tale!
There are many people who think that the bible should not be available to the masses, but I'm not one of them.

Leaving the gospel of John out of the question we still have gospels full of non-literal fulfillments. I have personally looked at and backtracked each place where the gospel of Matthew says that a prophecy is fulfilled, and none of them are predictions of anything. Matthew is not unaware of this. He simply doesn't mean 'Fulfill' like the preachers say he means it. Johns gospel fits right in.

The Christian canon authors appear to have believed in a completely different concept of eternal life than afterlife. Paul says in Galations 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." James 1:10 says "But the rich should take pride in their humiliation—since they will pass away like a wild flower." All of the lifting of hands and choir robes are shown to be but gaudy decorations when James says plainly "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." What world is James talking about? Aren't we born into the world? Yes, but James says we are born from above by the word of truth - a different world. Its an entirely different cosmos. The thing we call life isn't eternal to James. Paul chimes in that in him dwells no good thing.

 

[wizanda]

I have personally looked at and backtracked each place where the gospel of Matthew says that a prophecy is fulfilled, and none of them are predictions of anything.

Just the same as when you read a news paper, the author of the article doesn't necessarily always know what they're talking about....

Where as the source does; Yeshua's parables and prophecies align with the Tanakh, so succinctly it is like interlinking computer code across time.

James. Paul

These are two separate people, with totally opposite ideologies in lots of places; they both tell the story of Abraham offering Issac, yet contradicting each other.

The Christian canon authors appear to have believed in a completely different concept of eternal life than afterlife.

Because everyone from a Jewish perspective is expecting the coming of a Messianic age; where there is no longer death, war, ravenous beings, accusers (satan), slanderers (devil), and everyone globally shall know God.

 

[oldbadger]

Leaving the gospel of John out of the question we still have gospels full of non-literal fulfillments. .................................... Johns gospel fits right in.

I don't think that John's Gospel fits in, unless the agenda was to raise up the name of Yeshua BarYosef to Lord, Christ, etc. I notice that John reduces Yeshua's demon-casting to a mere nothing, because such activity was (by then) considered as demeaning, but miracles by John's time need to be BIG, such as raising up long dead persons like Lazarus. John's Gospel changed the name (title), the powers, the vocation and the whole agenda of Yeshua.
Geza Vermes shows this in startling clarity.

.......................I have personally looked at and backtracked each place where the gospel of Matthew says that a prophecy is fulfilled, and none of them are predictions of anything. Matthew is not unaware of this. He simply doesn't mean 'Fulfill' like the preachers say he means it..................

Whoa! Just a sec......... How do you know that Matthew's claims of prophetic fulfilment didn't actually mean that?
Apart from G-Mark, I see again-and-again how the authors constantly assure us that one anecdote after another has fulfilled prophecy. And I notice that in some places the actions have to be so manipulated and twisted to fit, as to seem extraordinary (ridiculous) now.

The Christian canon authors appear to have believed in a completely different concept of eternal life than afterlife.

Well, there are thousands of varying Creeds, Denominations and Churches, and their concepts vary massively. The JW are most zealous about interpretation of the bible and they believe that all will rise again to be judged, and from judgement either go to the 'flames' or to everlasting physical life. That may not align with many others, nor may it's Unitarian Faith, but it seems Christian to me. How Christians have changed their Faith over time does not seem to be anything to do with Yeshua, his life or his vocation.

Paul says in Galations 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me.

Well, clearly Yeshua/Jesus did not live in him, because his ideas and rules and laws and values varied considerably with those of the Galilean Handworker who initiated a mission not long before.

The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." James 1:10 says "But the rich should take pride in their humiliation—since they will pass away like a wild flower." All of the lifting of hands and choir robes are shown to be but gaudy decorations when James says plainly "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." What world is James talking about? Aren't we born into the world? Yes, but James says we are born from above by the word of truth - a different world. Its an entirely different cosmos. The thing we call life isn't eternal to James. Paul chimes in that in him dwells no good thing.

Look at that!
Just read it....... James 1:10. Amazing! And yet, for all their piety and wit, how many Christians tke ANY NOTICE of that sentence? James is talking (imo) about the world of Mammon, Greed, etc....... but Christians will divert me when it suits?

I cannot acknowledge writers who ranted on self-righteously about (say) Homosexuality, or Polyamory etc, including the old laws in their 'new-covenant', whilst receiving visions when it suited which allowed them to discard others, as with Cephas's vision about food laws, dumping all into old covenant. None of this came from Jesus/Yeshua. None of it..

I have read Wizandra's response but need to study it more closely, because he has books that I've never seen, nor understand.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I don't think that John's Gospel fits in, unless the agenda was to raise up the name of Yeshua BarYosef to Lord, Christ, etc. I notice that John reduces Yeshua's demon-casting to a mere nothing, because such activity was (by then) considered as demeaning, but miracles by John's time need to be BIG, such as raising up long dead persons like Lazarus. John's Gospel changed the name (title), the powers, the vocation and the whole agenda of Yeshua.
Geza Vermes shows this in startling clarity.

We can't start with assumptions about Jesus and have to start with the texts. If you are going to take a Historical approach don't start with assuming that there is a man named Jesus who starts a small movement in Judaism which then Paul alters. That is not an explanation which neatly excludes John and or Paul while retaining the cute story about a baby in a manger. It obliterates the story.

I cannot acknowledge writers who ranted on self-righteously about (say) Homosexuality, or Polyamory etc, including the old laws in their 'new-covenant', whilst receiving visions when it suited which allowed them to discard others, as with Cephas's vision about food laws, dumping all into old covenant. None of this came from Jesus/Yeshua. None of it..

From Luke: "Glory to God in the Highest, Peace on Earth, good will toward men." The emphasis is peace on Earth, glory to God and goodwill toward people, but how is this any different from Judaism? Its no different from Judaism up until the point that the angels say "Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord." Jesus is where Christianity departs from Judaism, not Paul or John. Jesus the dead messiah and then resurrected. Jesus who tells his disciples to eat his flesh. These are atrocious in Judaism, unlawful in heaven according to Moses. Christianity at this point enters a realm that is so dissonant from Judaism that it is like a time traveler has forked time itself. We cannot lay this wild change at Paul's feet and think that makes it compatible with Judaism without Paul. You can of course object to self righteousness on Paul's part or of various people. All NT books are pie in the sky incompatible on a literal basis with Judaism. We are talking about a situation so very impossible in Judaism that it has to be some kind of alternate world, and John alone does the job of explaining how that is. Without John none of it makes sense, neither communion nor the resurrection. Christians are instantly illegitimate. None of Judaisms predictions about a messiah are literally fulfilled but we call them fulfilled. Without John its all just miasma. No John = No Jesus.

Whoa! Just a sec......... How do you know that Matthew's claims of prophetic fulfilment didn't actually mean that?
Apart from G-Mark, I see again-and-again how the authors constantly assure us that one anecdote after another has fulfilled prophecy. And I notice that in some places the actions have to be so manipulated and twisted to fit, as to seem extraordinary (ridiculous) now.

I look each one up and found out what they actually are. All of Matthew's 'Fulfillments' do have a purpose but not to fulfill predictions. Each one addresses a situation or a topic that Matthew wants to address, not a prognostication. Instead they are lessons, and Matthew refers you to them. They complete the gospel of Matthew and help him make his point, so they have a completely different function than prediction-proofs.

Well, there are thousands of varying Creeds, Denominations and Churches, and their concepts vary massively. The JW are most zealous about interpretation of the bible and they believe that all will rise again to be judged, and from judgement either go to the 'flames' or to everlasting physical life. That may not align with many others, nor may it's Unitarian Faith, but it seems Christian to me. How Christians have changed their Faith over time does not seem to be anything to do with Yeshua, his life or his vocation.

I'm saying the gospel of John fits in. I'm not determining who may or may not be a Christian although several of those creeds you mention area quite exclusive and wouldn't recognize anyone who didn't accept their tutelage.

Well, clearly Yeshua/Jesus did not live in him, because his ideas and rules and laws and values varied considerably with those of the Galilean Handworker who initiated a mission not long before.

It is sometimes difficult to make Paul agree with himself about the law, as if he were multiple authors some writing at various dates. I'm sure that there are ways both to defend and to trounce him. Use Jesus and the Law as a guide, and you will find the Paul who agrees with both. Paul is tricky, but he introduces us to scriptural debate and provides a partially distorted lens into the Law. Of course nobody should read Paul before they have a working understanding of the Law, and that is 9/10 of the problem with Paul that people read him first and that they view the law as evil.

Look at that!
Just read it....... James 1:10. Amazing! And yet, for all their piety and wit, how many Christians tke ANY NOTICE of that sentence? James is talking (imo) about the world of Mammon, Greed, etc....... but Christians will divert me when it suits?

Are we getting a little off topic? Look at the time fly!

 

[Brickjectivity]

Just the same as when you read a news paper, the author of the article doesn't necessarily always know what they're talking about....

Where as the source does; Yeshua's parables and prophecies align with the Tanakh, so succinctly it is like interlinking computer code across time.

This is like claiming that Buddhists believe in souls. They don't. Similarly Jesus literally has not fulfilled messianic prophecies. All you have to do is look and nope they still aren't accomplished yet, unless we accept John's idea of a new creation or something else happens that completely aligns yes with no.

These are two separate people, with totally opposite ideologies in lots of places; they both tell the story of Abraham offering Issac, yet contradicting each other.

These two are canon. We need them. You are trying to coorce completely different religions to look like they're the same -- your stated purpose and often part of your profile is to unify the religions or to see them as one. You make no secret of it, so please don't be coy. You know this and do it perhaps hoping to stop wars and make everybody get along on the basis of common doctrine. I see you try it with all the religions trying to squish them together, cutting corners and mashing them into common shapes, but I don't think it works. Christianity isn't Jewish. Hinduism isn't Buddhism. You can try but it doesn't work, because the people just do not agree. Getting rid of John is destroying Christianity and simply putting it into Judaism's camp complete with Torah practice 100%. Sure they're the same religion then but only because Christianity is gone. In the process you simply leave all the Christians behind with no truck no trailer.

Because everyone from a Jewish perspective is expecting the coming of a Messianic age; where there is no longer death, war, ravenous beings, accusers (satan), slanderers (devil), and everyone globally shall know God.

You would like it to be so, and it would help you fit all religions together like a jigsaw, which is a nice sentiment. I think if its ever going to work you will need John in it.

 

[wizanda]

Jesus who tells his disciples to eat his flesh.

That stems from only the false gospel of John.

No John = No Jesus.

Which just shows you're not understanding Yeshua (red letters - Synoptic Gospels); John's misrepresentation creates much of the false ideology

This is like claiming that Buddhists believe in souls.

Said, 'Buddhist have a soul', as we all do... Not interested in challenging different people's beliefs, as they always contain a lie.

It is the faulty definitions i was more interested in, and the lack of understanding that when Buddha refers to the heart, it can easily be swapped with the soul, as a much better contextual word.

Buddha denied the word atman meaning self, soul, life, and thus created a more comprehensive anatta belief...

Which has also misled people into thinking there is no soul, as it is an opposite of atman.... Which would also then mean there is no life.

Similarly Jesus literally has not fulfilled messianic prophecies.

If you're dealing with other people's beliefs again, then yes from Rabbinic Judaism's perspective he didn't...

Yet Messianic fulfillment according to the Tanakh is to take a very long time, and then the final judgement based upon it...

Which this topic is about its final part, which doesn't even exist without Yeshua establishing it.

John's idea of a new creation

I guess you're referring to Revelations, which isn't by the same author as the gospel of John, who was adept at Greek, Revelations isn't.

Then if the new earth and heaven is what you're referring to, that is repeated within Isaiah, etc.

your stated purpose and often part of your profile is to unify the religions or to see them as one.

Oneness is the name of Heaven, within a NDE, and from an early age, always known what it is...

Each individual text is unique, and should be understood in its own contexts...

Yet within so many beliefs, it is like the knights of the round table all sitting around discussing their own perspective of the whole.

Each is a totally different angle, yet they join in the central focal point; which just happens to be Oneness....

So my observations are do the religions fit with what i remember of Oneness....If they don't I'm more inclined to just contradict them, and state this is the way it is...

Think a few people on here have assumed I'm reiterating their religion, which isn't the case.

Getting rid of John is destroying Christianity

That is right, Christianity is established on John, Paul and Simon; not on the teachings of Yeshua, thus the deception is easily seen.

You would like it to be so

It isn't a question of liking pre-new age apocalyptic prophecy, would much rather educate people about Oneness before it.

Please ask instead of making so many faulty assumptions.

 

[oldbadger]

We can't start with assumptions about Jesus and have to start with the texts. If you are going to take a Historical approach don't start with assuming that there is a man named Jesus who starts a small movement in Judaism which then Paul alters. That is not an explanation which neatly excludes John and or Paul while retaining the cute story about a baby in a manger. It obliterates the story.

That's exactly where I start, on the ballance of possibility that G-Mark is based upon tghe memoirs of Cephas, and that Paul massively altered all into what many today recognise as Christianity.
And there is no cute story about any baby in G-Mark.

From Luke: "Glory to God in the Highest, Peace on Earth, good will toward men." The emphasis is peace on Earth, glory to God and goodwill toward people, but how is this any different from Judaism? Its no different from Judaism up until the point that the angels say "Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord." Jesus is where Christianity departs from Judaism, not Paul or John. Jesus the dead messiah and then resurrected. Jesus who tells his disciples to eat his flesh. These are atrocious in Judaism, unlawful in heaven according to Moses. Christianity at this point enters a realm that is so dissonant from Judaism that it is like a time traveler has forked time itself. We cannot lay this wild change at Paul's feet and think that makes it compatible with Judaism without Paul. You can of course object to self righteousness on Paul's part or of various people. All NT books are pie in the sky incompatible on a literal basis with Judaism. We are talking about a situation so very impossible in Judaism that it has to be some kind of alternate world, and John alone does the job of explaining how that is. Without John none of it makes sense, neither communion nor the resurrection. Christians are instantly illegitimate. None of Judaisms predictions about a messiah are literally fulfilled but we call them fulfilled. Without John its all just miasma. No John = No Jesus.

No John = No Jesus. No Problem there, in which case we would be left with an outline of a 2nd order peasant handworker called Yeshua BarYosef who intiated a movement amongst the peasant classes to bring back God's rules and Laws to them, discared by a quisling hellenised upper class.
Luke was Paul's friend, methinks. John was a person or persons who wrote that Gospel about 70-90 years after Yeshua had died. I am always sad when extreme atheists talk about (or around) the 'myth' of Christ, but by separating Yeshua from Christ I find that I can cope with such mindsets.

I look each one up and found out what they actually are. All of Matthew's 'Fulfillments' do have a purpose but not to fulfill predictions. Each one addresses a situation or a topic that Matthew wants to address, not a prognostication. Instead they are lessons, and Matthew refers you to them. They complete the gospel of Matthew and help him make his point, so they have a completely different function than prediction-proofs.

So you found that Matthew's claims of predictions fulfilled are not predictions fulfilled. OK.

I'm saying the gospel of John fits in. I'm not determining who may or may not be a Christian although several of those creeds you mention area quite exclusive and wouldn't recognize anyone who didn't accept their tutelage.

The Gospel of John is claimed (by specialists) to have been written decades after Jesus, Paul and many others.
If you think it fits in, fine. I think it was inserted, or 'fitted' in.

It is sometimes difficult to make Paul agree with himself about the law, as if he were multiple authors some writing at various dates. I'm sure that there are ways both to defend and to trounce him. Use Jesus and the Law as a guide, and you will find the Paul who agrees with both. Paul is tricky, but he introduces us to scriptural debate and provides a partially distorted lens into the Law. Of course nobody should read Paul before they have a working understanding of the Law, and that is 9/10 of the problem with Paul that people read him first and that they view the law as evil.

That really does read like indoctrination to me. Some Christian Churches have now decided to Ordain Female priests and Bishops, to marry same-sex couples, to further true understanding and love into their communities. These I applaud. It's the Churches that separate races, or subjugate females, or condemn (say) homosexuals in heated self-righteousness and much more..... that I see as Pauline dominated, because they quote Paul's letters to show their points! A HUGE PAIN that I hope people will turn away from.

Are we getting a little off topic? Look at the time fly!

Well, most of the writing is yours. The topic was that since I had read the bible I had becomre a huge pain, and that I stand alone. I don't.

 

[Brickjectivity]

That's exactly where I start, on the ballance of possibility that G-Mark is based upon tghe memoirs of Cephas, and that Paul massively altered all into what many today recognise as Christianity.
And there is no cute story about any baby in G-Mark.

That shouldn't surprise me. You begin with the assumption that Christianity begins as a conspiracy. A lot of people do. Maybe it did? We all work with models of History.

No John = No Jesus. No Problem there, in which case we would be left with an outline of a 2nd order peasant handworker called Yeshua BarYosef who intiated a movement amongst the peasant classes to bring back God's rules and Laws to them, discared by a quisling hellenised upper class.
Luke was Paul's friend, methinks. John was a person or persons who wrote that Gospel about 70-90 years after Yeshua had died. I am always sad when extreme atheists talk about (or around) the 'myth' of Christ, but by separating Yeshua from Christ I find that I can cope with such mindsets.

That is less conspiratorial and less of a 'Great deception' than the OP and perhaps results in a more nuanced view.

The Gospel of John is claimed (by specialists) to have been written decades after Jesus, Paul and many others.
If you think it fits in, fine. I think it was inserted, or 'fitted' in.

I don't have a problem with John being written decades afterwards, but are these specialists etymologists, penmanship experts, cheese tasters or what?

That really does read like indoctrination to me. Some Christian Churches have now decided to Ordain Female priests and Bishops, to marry same-sex couples, to further true understanding and love into their communities. These I applaud. It's the Churches that separate races, or subjugate females, or condemn (say) homosexuals in heated self-righteousness and much more..... that I see as Pauline dominated, because they quote Paul's letters to show their points! A HUGE PAIN that I hope people will turn away from.

Its based on assumptions that early Christians would have been Jewish and that Paul didn't create Christianity. He seems at odds with himself, so that indicates to me more than one author. My guess is development and perhaps political influence rather than conspiracy.

Well, most of the writing is yours. The topic was that since I had read the bible I had becomre a huge pain, and that I stand alone. I don't.

I have missed you. I think you left the forums for a while.

 

[RabbiO]

...the Canaan and Jerusalem)Talmuds.. .

The what??

There are two Talmuds. The Jerusalem/Palestinian Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. There is no Canaan Talmud.

 

[meghanwaterlillies]

The what??

There are two Talmuds. The Jerusalem/Palestinian Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. There is no Canaan Talmud.

it was thrown out there as such Palestinian/Canaan and as Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmud. Just the coin that was expressed it was a little redundant. Thanks though the expression as been more defined finely tuned.