Salvation Is From The Jews

[Ben Masada]

Not unlikely, but you want to know where I found myself between this view and the Hellenistic view? Smack dab in the middle wondering: was it the Truth that was turned into deception or was it deception that is being turned into the Truth?

I think it was the Truth being speculated into deception. The Truth cannot be turned into deception. The opposite is also true: Deception can never be turned into the Truth. Unless, individually, when one is misled into believing that his or her truth is the Truth.

This can be seen when one replaces "Jesus" (that image.. the man) with the Word of G.d (that being the Law and the prophets); in other words, allegorically speaking, Jesus represented the Word (and all the characters in the midst there represent some fraction of us personally as we try to relate to the Word of G.d).

I can relate with what you say about Jesus, albeit allegorically, but still as one of the People. The individualization was fabricated by the gospel writer, especially Paul.

So, I think the hellenistic view if turned into an allegory rather than a factual play of events could revolutionize the way we see the story of Jesus and show us the Truth about the ACTUAL Word of G.d that is so eloquently written, even more so behind the words of the Tanakh.

That's interesting and profound, Katie. I do agree with you. I think if Christians decided to project the Pauline Hellenistic views about Jesus as an allegory, they would be promoting an expression of the Truth without the fear of contradiction hunters.

All else would require blind faith and that, I just do not have in me. And to add... it is in this view that I feel confident in saying it is the Word of G.d (not man) who is the Messiah (the anointed, via tears and not an actual "ointment") and the eternal Saviour of not only Israel, but mankind in general.

That's also very interesting. No wonder Christianity requires blind faith to be absorbed. And when you say "that the Word of God rather than being a man is the Messiah, I need to get down to some research on this matter, because you do
seem to have a point in there somewhere.

Ben:

 

[Ben Masada]

Deleted for being a duplication

 

[Jeremy Mason]

That's exactly what I am saying Jeremy. The author of the fourth gospel was a Gentlle disciple of Paul. Too much unJewish stuff in that gospel. Let alone a tremendous lack of what is to be a Jew. Jesus was Jewish. Therefore, anything not Jewish about Jesus did not come from him or about him.

I don't buy any of that...

The gospels were not writen by Jewish Scribes. And everything in them was reported 50+ years after the alleged facts.

No Jewish scribes??? Not one! I highly doubt that.
I've heard that people were writting about these events much earlier than 50 years. Nevertheless, the historic texts of Alexandar the Great were written hundreds of years after his death and yet historians still teach about him and conclude that much of the texts are generally true. West Point still uses his military philosophies. So why the hub-bub over 50 years. Look at the accounts of Moses. Aren't they subjected to the same scrutiny?

First, my Jewishness and the Jewishness of Jesus.

Sorry, your version of Judaism and Jesus's are completely two different animals.

Second, the time that elapsed from that alleged fact and the time the gospel came to light.

Moses?

Last but not least, the fact that the Sect of the Nazarenes had it's headquarters in Jerusalem for about 30 years and were coexisting peacefully with the local Jews, making converts even among the Pharisees. When Paul showed up preaching about Jesus as the Messiah,
son of God, and that he had resurrected, he was nearly killed for preaching apostasy in Jerusalem. Why? What then were the Nazarenes preaching about Jesus that was so different? Obviously, the very Apostles of Jesus were as much surprised about the gospel of Paul as were the regular Jews.

Can you show me were you learned this stuff?

 

[Ben Masada]

I don't buy any of that...



No Jewish scribes??? Not one! I highly doubt that.

Ben: You have all the right to doubt or to believe whatever you please. In my opinion, and according to being Jewish, no Jew could have ever written such a thing
as the NT.

I've heard that people were writting about these events much earlier than 50 years.

Ben: Yes, Paul did his writings 30 years after Jesus had been gone. That is, at least 10 years before the gospels.

Nevertheless, the historic texts of Alexandar the Great were written hundreds of years after his death and yet historians still teach about him and conclude that much of the texts are generally true. West Point still uses his military philosophies. So why the hub-bub over 50 years.

Ben: That's different. They never claimed that the writings about Alexander had to be according to Judaism.

Look at the accounts of Moses. Aren't they subjected to the same scrutiny?

Ben: Yes, they are. But they were written by Jews and according to Judaism.


Sorry, your version of Judaism and Jesus's are completely two different animals.

Ben: I don't think so. Jesus was Jewish, and Christians do not deny that. Therefore,
if anything about him is not Jewish, didn't come from him or about him.

Can you show me were you learned this stuff?

Ben: In the Tanach and NT.

Ben: :yes: