The Apostle Paul was the anti-christ according to the first Christians

[Tabb]

Yes, I am. Jesus is resurrected. Have you not heard?

So if he's not dead, he didn't die for our Sins?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

So if he's not dead, he didn't die for our Sins?

 

[Tabb]

OK OK I was pulling his leg. You don't have to get all condescending. I was told you are in fact a nice guy and someone that has a lot of knowledge on the subject. I will be listening for it. You really shouldn't come down on people the way you do. It's not a contest here. If it is you're a ringer.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

OK OK I was pulling his leg.

I was pulling back. :yes:

Just a friendly nudge.

 

[Shad]

Yes, from your suggestion, I wonder if things are the other way around. If the early Gospel redactors couldn't tell John the Baptist from Jesus --- then John the Baptist assumes the historical significance of Jesus.

Therefore -- Josephus places great historical value on John the Baptist, even sympathizes with him yet barely mentions Jesus. This is precisely the opposite of the Gospels.

One wonders if Josephus could tell the difference between the two?

Just a fun thought. I don't intend for it to be serious...

Perhaps Josephus was having issues due to his own personal experience. John was seen as influential enough so that Herod thought the man could rise an army against him. Herod himself being part of the Rome system which Josephus was opposed to during the rebellion. So perhaps Josephus is drawing a parallel between a quasi-John group and his own anti-Roman group.

Pure speculation based on Book 18 chapter 5.2.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Perhaps Josephus was having issues due to his own personal experience. John was seen as influential enough so that Herod thought the man could rise an army against him. Herod himself being part of the Rome system which Josephus was opposed to during the rebellion. So perhaps Josephus is drawing a parallel between a quasi-John group and his own anti-Roman group.

Pure speculation based on Book 18 chapter 5.2.

That's certainly a possibility. I've never read Josephus from that point of view - extrapolating how Josephus's personal experience informs his writing of history. Certainly his ideology frames much of his writing and interpretation.

This thinking introduces many possibilities:
1) John doesn't need to be historical for Josephus to use him as a parallel
2) John can be historical but his thread doesn't need to be real for the parallel to work
3) If Josephus were driven by the desire to exploit John for the parallel, he could have taken great liberties to force the story to match his experience

Honestly I have little respect for ancient historians. Nothing can be taken at face value. I read their witness as
'traditions' and interpret them in light of the history of the tradition (both long before and long after) and related traditions to extract the strongest plausibility. This method can take a while but it's very rewarding -- conflicting traditions can be pinpointed at originating at a certain time -- but they can be based on new, more reliable date made available to the writer.

Anyway, in this method, Josephus's parallel has little historical value because it has no bearing on the historical reality of the event itself. And he may be the only historical witness to this tradition, so we have to shrug our shoulders and say that if there's no textual evidence for an interpolation, this is probably what Josephus thought happened, but there's no way to know for sure.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I claim this thread in the name of Twitty!

 

[outhouse]

I claim this thread in the name of Twitty!

That is a young picture of Conway

 

[sojourner]

I claim this thread in the name of Twitty!

Hello, Darlin'!

 

[Simplelogic]

Btw, I noticed that this is in 'Scriptural Debates forum, so without wasting too much time on this, when Jeshua said, "I came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it", it doesn't mean keep the exact same 'rules', He preached against them, remember? He gave 'alternative' rules. Now, armed with that knowledge, we can surmise that 'fulfill' also implies a change. Otherwise He wouldn't have given us alternative teachings. That would make no sense.

Can you give an example of Yeshua preaching "against" them, or even changing them in the slightest?

 

[sojourner]

Can you give an example of Yeshua preaching "against" them, or even changing them in the slightest?

Picking grain on the Sabbath, healing on the Sabbath, touching the funeral bier, talking to a woman, being touched by a woman... shall I continue?

 

[Pegg]

Can you give an example of Yeshua preaching "against" them, or even changing them in the slightest?

The forgiveness of sins without the mosaic sacrifices:
Mark 2:5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic: “Child, your sins are forgiven.”

A change to the mosaic adultery laws:
Matt 5:27 “You heard that it was said: ‘You must not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who keeps on looking at a woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.


Jesus also said that the worship of God would not always be based in Jerusalem via the preisthood (who were the administers of the mosaic law) or temple:
John 4:21 Jesus said to her: “Believe me, woman, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father

Matt 24:1 Now as Jesus was departing from the temple, his disciples approached to show him the buildings of the temple. 2 In response he said to them: “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, by no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.”

The worship of God through the mosaic law was coming to an end.

 

[Simplelogic]

The forgiveness of sins without the mosaic sacrifices:
Mark 2:5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic: “Child, your sins are forgiven.”

A change to the mosaic adultery laws:
Matt 5:27 “You heard that it was said: ‘You must not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who keeps on looking at a woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Lets start with Matthew. You believe that Jesus is changing the laws of Moses in this passage correct? I can prove to you that this isn't the case but before I do, lets look at what the Torah says about changing commandments:

2“You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Deut 4: 2

Duet 13 commands us not to follow any prophet who does signs and wonders that teaches us NOT to follow the law of Moses. This is the litmus test. If you are claiming that Jesus taught new laws or different laws then he is a false prophet! I don't believe he was a false prophet so lets look at the passage in Matthew that you use to make your argument:

“You heard that it was said: ‘You must not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who keeps on looking at a woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery Matt 5:27

This may be a surprise to you, but the word translated as women actually means a "married women" in greek. Jesus was reiterating the command found in the law of Moses!

"thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife" Exodus 20:17

It was always to desire (covet) or sleep with your neighbors wife. Your first argument is completely flawed.

 

[Simplelogic]

Mark 2:5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic: “Child, your sins are forgiven.”

You must be unaware there there are MANY cases of YHVH forgiving sins without animal sacrifices in the Tanakh (old testament). If you would like a list I will be happy to provide them. YHVH always made it clear that repentance was the utmost importance, not merely sacrifice.

 

[Simplelogic]

[QUOTE

Jesus also said that the worship of God would not always be based in Jerusalem via the preisthood (who were the administers of the mosaic law) or temple:
John 4:21 Jesus said to her: “Believe me, woman, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father

Matt 24:1 Now as Jesus was departing from the temple, his disciples approached to show him the buildings of the temple. 2 In response he said to them: “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, by no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.”

The worship of God through the mosaic law was coming to an end.[/QUOTE]

Jesus was predicting the destruction of the Temple because of Israel's sins. This had already happened to Israel before. It does not mean that sacrifices were coming to an end forever. I can prove this because Jesus' followers continued to offer animal sacrifices after Jesus was raised from the dead:

23“Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law. Acts 21: 23-24

There "expenses" are listed in the Law of Moses. It consist of numerous animal sacrifices!

13And this is the law of the Nazarite, when the days of his separation are fulfilled: he shall be brought unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: 14And he shall offer his offering unto the LORD, one he lamb of the first year without blemish for a burnt offering, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish for a sin offering, and one ram without blemish for peace offerings, 15And a basket of unleavened bread, cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, and wafers of unleavened bread anointed with oil, and their meat offering, and their drink offerings. 16And the priest shall bring them before the LORD, and shall offer his sin offering, and his burnt offering: 17And he shall offer the ram for a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, with the basket of unleavened bread: the priest shall offer also his meat offering, and his drink offering. Num 6: 13-17

Also, Ezekiel tells us that the Messiah will offer animal sacrifices in the future Messianic kingdom!

18And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon. 19And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord GOD, a young bullock for a sin offering. 20And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it. 21Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.

22And on the second day thou shalt offer a kid of the goats without blemish for a sin offering; and they shall cleanse the altar, as they did cleanse it with the bullock. 23When thou hast made an end of cleansing it, thou shalt offer a young bullock without blemish, and a ram out of the flock without blemish. 24And thou shalt offer them before the LORD, and the priests shall cast salt upon them, and they shall offer them up for a burnt offering unto the LORD. 25Seven days shalt thou prepare every day a goat for a sin offering: they shall also prepare a young bullock, and a ram out of the flock, without blemish. 26Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves. 27And when these days are expired, it shall be, that upon the eighth day, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt offerings upon the altar, and your peace offerings; and I will accept you, saith the Lord GOD. Ezekiel 43:18-27

It also tells us that these offerings will "atone" for the sins of Israel even!!

"Then it shall be the Prince's part (royalty!) to give burnt offerings, grain offerings, and drink offerings, at the feasts, the New Moons, the Sabbaths, and at all the appointed seasons of the house of Israel, he shall prepare the sin offering, the grain offering, the burnt offering, and the peace offerings to make atonement for the house of Israel." Ezekiel 45:17.

 

[sojourner]

Mark 2:5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic: “Child, your sins are forgiven.”

You must be unaware there there are MANY cases of YHVH forgiving sins without animal sacrifices in the Tanakh (old testament). If you would like a list I will be happy to provide them. YHVH always made it clear that repentance was the utmost importance, not merely sacrifice.

According to the Law, Jesus could not forgive sin. It's a case of Jesus going against the Law.

 

[Simplelogic]

According to the Law, Jesus could not forgive sin. It's a case of Jesus going against the Law.

So you are arguing that Jesus broke the law of Moses? Can you please site which law he was breaking? Also, are you aware that this would make Jesus a false Messiah? This would also disqualify him from being considered an unblemished sacrifice.

 

[sojourner]

So you are arguing that Jesus broke the law of Moses? Can you please site which law he was breaking? Also, are you aware that this would make Jesus a false Messiah? This would also disqualify him from being considered an unblemished sacrifice.

Only God can forgive sin. The point is that it's the way the law is kept that has become blemished.

 

[Desert Snake]

'Was'? He still is.

 

[Desert Snake]

For the record Xians don't actually follow Sauls teachings, but his act of putting Scripture into format is valued.
Real Xians follow the first Xian ideas, which are extant in various churches today.