Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
He was still alive when they wrote them. It is all about the political agendas of the Essenes until it eventually branched off. It had to happen that way, and with two Messiahs. Do you know why?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ridiculous statement of Jesus?
- Thread starter kalyan
- Start date
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
I respect people who respect me. You do not go to a lecturer and tell him he is wrong, do you? This is my subject. Do you know why?
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Then I applaud you that you do believe! Now I ask, do you believe in his son? How do you describe yourself, for it seems strange to be that you side with a atheist rather than a theist. Do you not consider family first?
I know of Karen Armstrong, she is a former nun.
You are Christian?
Have you read B Thierings work?
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Right, I recall, a deist. I have no problem with deism, but there is more to it than that. Now I understand why your comments are somewhat abrasive.
my point is trinity doctrine is not exist in Judaism and they don't believe in two holy persons (father and holy spirit) before Jesus (pbuh) .Huh? The ''trinity doctrine'', or triune theory/idea, is merely describing three aspects of Deity, found in Scripture. You don't need the trinity doctrine, or even a ''three'' concept, to believe that Jesus is the son of G-d, or G-d. In Genesis, /the first book of the Jewish ''Torah'', mankind is created in ''their'' image, THAT'S ALREADY MORE THAN ONE ASPECT OF GODHEAD!, yet no one seems to be having trouble with that. But that is beside the point, because in traditional Xian beliefs, Jesus is an aspect of God, even when referred to in the man form. //Ie son of Mary, etc
Look, the religion is older than islam, and paralells Judaic belief without Jesu, and is before Rabbinical Judaism.
//
Judaism teach on ONE God , not TWO Gods ,before Jesus (pbuh), do you get the point ?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
I'm not sure what your point is. Xianity is a different religion from Judaism, in the first place. What meaning does your statement have? Why do you think Xianity is wrong?
Last edited:
McBell
Unbound
For all the whining you do about others posting as you do in the above.....
it's not about wrong or right
you said :
Christianity is a different religion from Judaism , then why early Christians adopt Torah , in the first place?
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Meaning what?
Etritonakin
Well-Known Member
Furthermore, I do not know if all may be corrected by it.
Gehenna may BE one thing -or potentially be one thing -but that is not to say that it will be employed to its full potential.
As it is a fire -at least of sorts, and perhaps in some ways literally -we can liken it to actual fire. Fire has the potential to completely destroy. Fire can also be an unpleasant experience. However, it is also employed in many ways to create -to make workable -to change characteristics -though it is not necessary where it is not necessary and would not produce good. It is necessary when it is necessary and would produce good.
We can read the following to mean that God is going to toast everybody for eternity, but that's not to say we know what it actually says -and certainly not the full explanation -which is to be found by referencing all else.
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burnish with fire and brimstone: which is the second death
0But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
Last edited:
McBell
Unbound
You are not on the higher ground you think you are.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
All things are relative
Or the infamous kiss of Judas. Matthew 26; 48-50 says he did while John 18; 3-12 states he never got close enough to kiss him, so which is it?
[/QUOTE]
Two Messiahs.[/QUOTE]
You have brought her up before and as I said then, most credible theologians reject her opinions as lacking any proof whatsoever. Stating that Jesus had four children, for one thing, would be the antithesis of what Christians believe. The Pesher technique is itself intriguing, insofar as it posits two levels of interpretation. That seems to intimate that most people have no real understanding of their own religion and I believe you would find that most would strongly disagree with you on that mark. And two messiahs? Really? Who do you posit are these two?
I see. So you claim to be the end all be all of knowledge on this subject? A bit arrogant, that.
1. No, I don't believe Jesus was the son of God. I think someone like him or maybe him, was a good teacher and nothing more than that.
2. As I have said numerous times, I am Buddhist. And I don't side with anyone but rather believe that all peoples opinions have value and the ability to teach.
3. Yes, I consider my family before anything.
4. No, as I said, once again, I am Buddhist.
5. I have read her work. I strongly disagree with her on most of her points, as do most theologians.
First: the title 'son of God' was a term recognized by the Jews and reserved for the Messiah . Yeshua's Jewish audience knew exactly what he was saying when he claimed HaShem as his father. It had nothing to do with physical parenthood. Second, Hell, as presented in most Christian understanding does not exists. People do not burn forever in a fiery hell. That is an invention of the Roman religion that has been passed erroneously passed down through the generations.
Useless2015
Active Member
Saying that God has a son is polytheism. No true Jew would give God partners. Jesus pbuh himself told the Jews that the most important commandment of all is: Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one'.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Two Messiahs.[/QUOTE]
You have brought her up before and as I said then, most credible theologians reject her opinions as lacking any proof whatsoever. Stating that Jesus had four children, for one thing, would be the antithesis of what Christians believe. The Pesher technique is itself intriguing, insofar as it posits two levels of interpretation. That seems to intimate that most people have no real understanding of their own religion and I believe you would find that most would strongly disagree with you on that mark. And two messiahs? Really? Who do you posit are these two?[/QUOTE]
Who do I posit? Do you mean a scholar? If so, it is nice to be backed up by a scholar, but I do not set at naught what the lord has done for me. Yet the Essenes did look for two, lay and priestly.
They would be the same in name.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
1Co 1- For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
Etritonakin
Well-Known Member
Matthew 26 and John 18 do not actually contradict -and only contradict if certain things are assumed -such as whether John 18 is a complete account of every last thing that happened -which may actually be an impossibility in any situation.
The kiss was not mentioned, but that does not mean the writer believed it did not happen -or it could be that the writer saw other things, but not the kiss, because he was simply looking at something else if he was present but otherwise focused at that very time.
He may have seen one thing -turned away -saw another -missed the kiss, etc...
It's not as if -in a commotion -every person is focused on one point of the commotion the whole time -which is pretty much the whole thing with a commotion.
He may not have deemed it important to specify that he kissed him -but merely wrote that Judas betrayed him.
It does not -in any way -state that he did not ever get close enough to kiss him -even if the writer describes two instances in the commotion where he was not close enough to kiss him.
Last edited: