The Mark of the Beast

[Judgment]

I'm happy that I can provide you with some entertainment. I have no problem thanking those who discuss in a logical manner their beliefs....

Ben has been systematically picking apart your religion - in a very clever way. I understand - he feels his religion has been hijacked... correct me if I am wrong of course Ben.

Ben and I probably agree on more than he realizes... (Maybe Jesus was married, maybe he didn't die on the cross, heck - maybe that is his family buried at the Talpiot Tomb (that last one is me - I know .. widely criticized) The point is... no one can be 100 % positive on much that happened such a long time ago.......

anyways - If my beliefs were the one's being attacked I would fight back with more fervor. But - You may be more of a gentleman than myself

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben has been systematically picking apart your religion - in a very clever way. I understand - he feels his religion has been hijacked... correct me if I am wrong of course Ben.

Ben and I probably agree on more than he realizes... (Maybe Jesus was married, maybe he didn't die on the cross, heck - maybe that is his family buried at the Talpiot Tomb (that last one is me - I know .. widely criticized) The point is... no one can be 100 % positive on much that happened such a long time ago.......

anyways - If my beliefs were the one's being attacked I would fight back with more fervor. But - You may be more of a gentleman than myself

Hi Judgment, if you allow me, I would like to correct you in a small detail: It's not that I am attacking Chistianity. The issue is that I am defendilng Judaism. If you agree with me that Jesus was a religious Jew, it's only obvious that anything non-Jewish about him is not true, and serves only to give a bad piacture about Judaism, which was his Faith.

Ben:

 

[Judgment]

Hi Judgment, if you allow me, I would like to correct you in a small detail: It's not that I am attacking Chistianity. The issue is that I am defendilng Judaism. If you agree with me that Jesus was a religious Jew, it's only obvious that anything non-Jewish about him is not true, and serves only to give a bad piacture about Judaism, which was his Faith.

Ben:

Hey Ben. Correction noted.

I agree that Jesus was a religious Jew - I do not fully agree with your full assessment. Jesus was clearly referencing Judaism in his teaching (I don't know how anyone could deny that) - however - In your 'My views on Jesus' thread I did point out some of Jesus' words that did move away from Judaism teachings. But - I do understand.... of course you will defend your faith.

 

[Ben Masada]

Hey Ben. Correction noted.

I agree that Jesus was a religious Jew - I do not fully agree with your full assessment. Jesus was clearly referencing Judaism in his teaching (I don't know how anyone could deny that) - however -

In your 'My views on Jesus' thread I did point out some of Jesus' words that did move away from Judaism teachings. But - I do understand.... of course you will defend your faith.

I am sure you must be aware that according to Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus confirmed the teachings of Judaism down to the dot of the letter, affirming categorically that he did not come to abolish anything whatsoever. Therefore, we have no choice but to attribute those "some of Jesus' words that did move away from Judaism teachings." as an interpolation or contradiction of the NT.

Ben:

 

[Judgment]

Hey Ben. Correction noted.

I agree that Jesus was a religious Jew - I do not fully agree with your full assessment. Jesus was clearly referencing Judaism in his teaching (I don't know how anyone could deny that) - however -



I am sure you must be aware that according to Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus confirmed the teachings of Judaism down to the dot of the letter, affirming categorically that he did not come to abolish anything whatsoever. Therefore, we have no choice but to attribute those "some of Jesus' words that did move away from Judaism teachings." as an interpolation or contradiction of the NT.

Ben:

Yes Ben - we have already discussed this.

Jesus did not abolish anything in Judaism. It was left as is - the followers of Judaism would go on worshiping as they always had.

But.... Jesus had 'enough' words - that moved away from Judaism - to be the basis for an updated version. Many Jews accepted this new version... and became the first Christians.

 

[Ben Masada]

Yes Ben - we have already discussed this.

Jesus did not abolish anything in Judaism. It was left as is - the followers of Judaism would go on worshiping as they always had.

But.... Jesus had 'enough' words - that moved away from Judaism - to be the basis for an updated version. Many Jews accepted this new version... and became the first Christians.

Sorry, but I can't agree with you. I think we are not speaking about the same person. The Jesus I am talking about was a religious Jew. It seems to me that
you are speaking either about Paul or someone else not Jewish. Jesus never implied anything that could give origin to Christians. The Jews who accepted
Jesus version gave origin to the Sect of the Nazarenes, whose converts would become staunch defenders of the Law. Christians, on the contrary would preach
against Moses, the Jewish laws and the Jewish customs.

Ben: :no:

 

[Judgment]

Sorry, but I can't agree with you. I think we are not speaking about the same person. The Jesus I am talking about was a religious Jew. It seems to me that
you are speaking either about Paul or someone else not Jewish. Jesus never implied anything that could give origin to Christians. The Jews who accepted
Jesus version gave origin to the Sect of the Nazarenes, whose converts would become staunch defenders of the Law. Christians, on the contrary would preach
against Moses, the Jewish laws and the Jewish customs.

Ben: :no:

"His disciples asked and said to him :
'Do You want us to fast ? How shall we pray and give alms ? What diet shall we observe ?' Jesus said : 'Tell no lie and do not what You hate, for all things are plain in the face of Heaven. For nothing hidden will fail to be revealed, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered.'"
The Gospel of Thomas

Jesus' answer to the questions above are very telling - he saw that the obedience to rules and prohibitions that regulated the smallest details of daily life were not necessary - they only spoke to the outward appearance of men's behavior - not within - (below).

"For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a man.' " (Mark 7:21—23)



Words such as these below - against the experts of the OT - helped bring about his death.

"Jesus said : 'Damn the Pharisees, for they are like a dog sleeping in the manger of oxen, for neither does he eat nor does he let the oxen eat.'"
The Gospel of Thomas, 102.



Here - Jesus teaches us not to hate - and moves beyond the OT's message of revenge.

Matthew 5:43-48 (New International Version)
43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies[b] and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Now - you can claim that Jesus said none of these things - but - that is mere speculation. You base this on one verse - but - the verse you continue to mention may be the false verse - no one can know for sure.

To claim that these are the words of Paul - is also mere speculation. If so, he was a wise man - but - to prove fraud - you need more than you have given.

 

[Ben Masada]

"His disciples asked and said to him :
'Do You want us to fast ? How shall we pray and give alms ? What diet shall we observe ?' Jesus said : 'Tell no lie and do not what You hate, for all things are plain in the face of Heaven. For nothing hidden will fail to be revealed, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered.'"
The Gospel of Thomas

Jesus' answer to the questions above are very telling - he saw

that the obedience to rules and prohibitions that regulated the smallest details of daily life were not necessary - they only spoke to the outward appearance of men's behavior - not within - (below).

That's absolutely not what I understand from his response. On the contrary. The way you understand the above, is a contradiction to Matthew 5:17-19.

"For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a man.' " (Mark 7:21—23)

Words such as these below - against the experts of the OT - helped bring about his death.

No, sir. What brought about his death was to interfere with the Roman occupation of Israel.

"Jesus said : 'Damn the Pharisees, for they are like a dog sleeping in the manger of oxen, for neither does he eat nor does he let the oxen eat.'"

The Gospel of Thomas, 102.

This above was not true. You might be confusing Jesus with Paul. Jesus never had any problem with Pharisees, as he was from the same line. Paul was the one who kept a grudge against the Pharisees, because these never allowed him to build a church in Israeli soil.

Here - Jesus teaches us not to hate - and moves beyond the OT's message of revenge.

Matthew 5:43-48 (New International Version)
43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies[b] and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Here, Jesus was only building fences around the commandments, just like the Rabbis did with the oral laws.

Now - you can claim that Jesus said none of these things - but - that is mere speculation. You base this on one verse - but - the verse you continue to mention may be the false verse - no one can know for sure.

To claim that these are the words of Paul - is also mere speculation. If so, he was a wise man - but - to prove fraud - you need more than you have given.

Well, speculations based on evidences are perfectly acceptable. Hypothetical speculations yes, they are the ones to cause problem.

Ben:

 

[Judgment]

Ben Masada:

"His disciples asked and said to him :
'Do You want us to fast ? How shall we pray and give alms ? What diet shall we observe ?' Jesus said : 'Tell no lie and do not what You hate, for all things are plain in the face of Heaven. For nothing hidden will fail to be revealed, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered.'"
The Gospel of Thomas

Me: Jesus' answer to the questions above are very telling - he saw that the obedience to rules and prohibitions that regulated the smallest details of daily life were not necessary - they only spoke to the outward appearance of men's behavior - not within - (below).

Ben Masada: That's absolutely not what I understand from his response. On the contrary. The way you understand the above, is a contradiction to Matthew 5:17-19.

"For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a man.' " (Mark 7:21—23)

It may well be - but - the two verses I quoted make much more sense. By your reasoning, That would also mean that the majority of the NT is a contradiction of Matthew 5:17 - 19.

There are contradictions in 'all' religions.

If you do not accept my view of the two quotes I posted - What then is your understanding of them ?

Ben Masada:No, sir. What brought about his death was to interfere with the Roman occupation of Israel.

I see. The Romans are 100 % responsible for Jesus' death ?

Ben Masada: This above was not true. You might be confusing Jesus with Paul. Jesus never had any problem with Pharisees, as he was from the same line. Paul was the one who kept a grudge against the Pharisees, because these never allowed him to build a church in Israeli soil.

So.. everything that Jesus said - that did not match with the OT - are the words of Paul ? or.. are you making Hypothetical speculations ?

Ben Masada: Here, Jesus was only building fences around the commandments, just like the Rabbis did with the oral laws.

I see. So, Jesus was not teaching us not to Hate ? Even though... he said to Love your enemies ? Which was not taught by the OT.

Or - is this Paul again?

Ben Masada: Well, speculations based on evidences are perfectly acceptable. Hypothetical speculations yes, they are the ones to cause problem.

Ben:

You are viewing everything through Judaism eyes - which means your thoughts have been corrupted by your very beliefs. I am standing outside of your battle - this enables me to see things from a clearer perspective.

 

[Ben Masada]

It may well be - but - the two verses I quoted make much more sense. By your reasoning, That would also mean that the majority of the NT is a contradiction of Matthew 5:17 - 19.

You can say that again!

There are contradictions in 'all' religions.

I agree with you on that one too.


I see. The Romans are 100 % responsible for Jesus' death ?

Please, tell that to Christians, so that they will stop blaming the Jews.


So.. everything that Jesus said - that did not match with the OT - are the words of Paul ? or.. are you making Hypothetical speculations ?

You can try me. Everything which is claimed that Jesus said which is against the Tanach, doesn't come from him but from Paul.

I see. So, Jesus was not teaching us not to Hate ? Even though... he said to Love your enemies ? Which was not taught by the OT.

And it was not taught by Jesus either. Jesus was not that masochist. Besides, love is an emotion. No one can be commanded to love. Respect is the word. Even the enemy, one ought to respect.

Or - is this Paul again?

Most definitely!

You are viewing everything through Judaism eyes - which means your thoughts have been corrupted by your very beliefs. I am standing outside of your battle - this enables me to see things from a clearer perspective.

Listen my friend, wasn't Judaism the Faith of Jesus? How do you want me to view him through?

Ben: :clap

 

[Judgment]

Ben: You can say that again!

Ben, you did not give your interpretation of the versus I posted. I only asked because you disagreed with me and said - "That's absolutely not what I understand from his response."

Ben: Please, tell that to Christians, so that they will stop blaming the Jews.

Jesus threatened the temples destruction - and - claimed to be the messiah. All four gospels tell of a hearing before the Jewish counsel. There is enough blame to go around to all parties. Throw in the Gentiles for the heck of it if you like. The blame goes to the human race.

Ben: You can try me. Everything which is claimed that Jesus said which is against the Tanach, doesn't come from him but from Paul.

I will try. You continue to use Matthew 5:17 - 19 as your 'proof' that anything Jesus said that is not in line with Judaism are the words of Paul.

You also said - "This above was not true. You might be confusing Jesus with Paul. Jesus never had any problem with Pharisees, as he was from the same line. Paul was the one who kept a grudge against the Pharisees, because these never allowed him to build a church in Israeli soil".

Yet - what happens when you continue Matthew 5:17 - 19 - Here is 20 "For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

The verse you use as proof - turns - against your reasoning if you only move from 19 to 20.

Ben: And it was not taught by Jesus either. Jesus was not that masochist. Besides, love is an emotion. No one can be commanded to love. Respect is the word. Even the enemy, one ought to respect.

Like your student - you are speaking of the Love that you know - not the Love that God is.

Ben: Listen my friend, wasn't Judaism the Faith of Jesus? How do you want me to view him through?

Ben: :clap

Judaism was the Faith of Jesus - I have never denied that - but - he moved away from the teachings of Judaism. You do not accept this and believe the verses that do this are all the work of Paul/ Saul.

But... by doing this you erase 95 % of Jesus' teachings. Leaving a mere 5% that keep the 'old' ways. I just say that the odds are stacked against you.

 

[Ben Masada]

Jesus threatened the temples destruction - and - claimed to be the messiah. All four gospels tell of a hearing before the Jewish counsel. There is enough blame to go around to all parties. Throw in the Gentiles for the heck of it if you like. The blame goes to the human race.

Jesus never threatened the Temple's destruction and never claimed to be the Messiah. The headquarters of the Nazarenes, followers of Jesus, was in Jerusalem and they were coexisting peacefully with the mainstream Judaism. When Paul appeared preaching about Jesus as the Messiah, son of God, and that he had resurrected, he nearly got killed by the local Jews. It means that the Apostles did not know those things about Jesus. Therefore, they were fabricated as interpolations to the text of the NT.


I will try. You continue to use Matthew 5:17 - 19 as your 'proof' that anything Jesus said that is not in line with Judaism are the words of Paul.

You also said - "This above was not true. You might be confusing Jesus with Paul. Jesus never had any problem with Pharisees, as he was from the same line. Paul was the one who kept a grudge against the Pharisees, because these never allowed him to build a church in Israeli soil".

Yet - what happens when you continue Matthew 5:17 - 19 - Here is 20 "For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

This is Pauline politics against the Pharisees. BTW, I should have told you already that I believe only 20 percent of the NT. The other 80 percent is made up of interpolations. Don't forget I am Jewish and not a Christian. And mind you that to believe 20 percent of the NT is a lot for a Jew to acknowledge. Believe me.

The verse you use as proof - turns - against your reasoning if you only move from 19 to 20. Like your student - you are speaking of the Love that you know - not the Love that God is.

Judaism was the Faith of Jesus - I have never denied that - but - he moved away from the teachings of Judaism.

Show me where Jesus moved away from the teachings of Judaism. You are accusing a religious Jew and contradicting his own words that he came to observe the Jewish laws down to the dot of the letter. (Mat. 5:17-19)

You do not accept this and believe the verses that do this are all the work of Paul/ Saul.

You are 100 percent right, Jesus was a religious Jew. Therefore, anything not Jewish about him is not true, or Pauline, which is the same.

But... by doing this you erase 95 % of Jesus' teachings. Leaving a mere 5% that keep the 'old' ways. I just say that the odds are stacked against you.

Let it be. I am not ready to compromise the truth. If Jesus moved away from Judaism, we are not talking about the same person.

Ben:

 

[Bishadi]

Christians, especially Protestants, and among them, the Seventh-Day Adventists in particular, enjoy to talk about the mark of the Beast; and with fantastic definitions, that only make a ridiculous picture of themselves. Then, they charge each other with the potential to
get the mark of the Beast. They think of almost everything but the real thing, which is given by the NT itself.

not to mention what some of the old school also trying to create definitions within their text

The mark of the Beast appears in conjunction with the Antichrist.

no such thing unless you wish to include the majority of the populations doubts that Jesus was christ

Morphologically, the term Antichrist is composed of two words:
Anti and Christ. Anti means to stand against or to contradict. Christ means what Christians believe Jesus was. So, what stands against
Christ is only obvious that it means the Antichrist.

Nicea made Jesus christ, not Jesus.

According to Matthew 5:17, Jesus declared that he had not come to abolish the Jewish laws. Then, 30 years later, Paul came and said
that what Jesus said was not true, but rather that the Jewish laws were abolished on the cross. (Ephe. 2:15)

matt 5: 17
17`Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets -- I did not come to throw down, but to fulfill;

and if any read the whole chapter will find the laws are being mentioned, just as he mentioned the 'true' laws in Mark 10

18And Jesus said to him, `Why me dost thou call good? no one [is] good except One -- God;

19the commands thou hast known: Thou mayest not commit adultery, Thou mayest do no murder, Thou mayest not steal, Thou mayest not bear false witness, Thou mayest not defraud, Honour thy father and mother.


notice there are only 6, not 600 + misfits...........

TO read the whole chapter of Matt 5 .......... it goes over the true commandments

as the homage aspect (the first four commands are gone) and the 'ordinances' of judaism are the misfits created by the 'religious interpretations'

As we can see, Paul stood against what Jesus said by contradicting his words about his purpose regarding the Jewish laws. If Jesus was
indeed Christ, as Christians believe he was, it's only obvious that Paul acted as the Antichrist.

not even remotely close.......see for yourself..... Eph 2: 15

15the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace

the misfits are dead issue........... 'in ordinances having done away'


and the 2 into one shares an real important item; there is no anti christ coming.

The bringer of Peace is also the destroyer of the religions; 2:1

John 14 15`If ye love me, my commands keep,


16and I will ask the Father, and another Comforter He will give to you, that he may remain with you -- to the age;
17the Spirit of truth, whom the world is not able to receive, because it doth not behold him, nor know him, and ye know him, because he doth remain with you, and shall be in you.

Now, where did Paul say the Jewish laws were abolished? On the cross. And what did the cross mean to him? "God forbid," he said, "that I should glory in anything save in the cross." The cross meant the glory of Paul. (Gal. 6:14)

You are funny



Gal 6: 13 for neither do those circumcised themselves keep the law, but they wish you to be circumcised, that in your flesh they may glory.


14And for me, let it not be -- to glory, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which to me the world hath been crucified, and I to the world;

15for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation;

it says, being circumcised means nothing; the cross; is what to follow; prepare for the new (the new creation/ the revealing)

and if you know that 'light' is simply electric and magnetic fields at perpendicular planes; the know what the 'cross' means; follow the light!

Note that most do not realize, Moses was circumcised by Egyptians and learned the medical benefits from the Egyptians; as well how to read, to write and about everything there is to know to survive the african desert; where they wandered as arabs for 40 years

Now, we have the mark of the Beast: The cross, a symbol of shame and a curse to the Anointed of the Lord, who, in the words of Habakkuk 3:13, is the People of Israel, the Jewish People.

Hab 3:13Thou hast gone forth for the salvation of Thy people, For salvation with Thine anointed, Thou hast smitten the head of the house of the wicked, Laying bare the foundation unto the neck. Pause


That scripture has nothing to do with the cross

the chapter is mentioning that Israel (the olive tree) bares no good fruit (they failed)

17Though the fig-tree doth not flourish, And there is no produce among vines, Failed hath the work of the olive, And fields have not yielded food, Cut off from the fold hath been the flock, And there is no herd in the stalls

Now, your comments are welcome.

Ben :yes:

r u sure you can handle the truth?

 

[Judgment]

Ben: Jesus never threatened the Temple's destruction and never claimed to be the Messiah. The headquarters of the Nazarenes, followers of Jesus, was in Jerusalem and they were coexisting peacefully with the mainstream Judaism. When Paul appeared preaching about Jesus as the Messiah, son of God, and that he had resurrected, he nearly got killed by the local Jews. It means that the Apostles did not know those things about Jesus. Therefore, they were fabricated as interpolations to the text of the NT.

Jesus did in the NT. You just believe the words are Paul's.

That the Nazarenes adhered to the old laws does not make them the truest followers. The original Nazarenes have long ago blown away in the wind. There were several early sects of what was to become Christianity and they all held differing views.

It is hard to part with old ways that are imbedded in your psyche.

Ben: This is Pauline politics against the Pharisees. BTW, I should have told you already that I believe only 20 percent of the NT. The other 80 percent is made up of interpolations. Don't forget I am Jewish and not a Christian. And mind you that to believe 20 percent of the NT is a lot for a Jew to acknowledge. Believe me.

What truly just happened is that the verse you use as proof for your beliefs - actually - tells a different story if you continue with it on it's path.

You can not just say that 5:17 - 19 is all that is required - say that they are the true words of Jesus - and then ignore number #20 like it doesn't exist.

Ben:Show me where Jesus moved away from the teachings of Judaism. You are accusing a religious Jew and contradicting his own words that he came to observe the Jewish laws down to the dot of the letter. (Mat. 5:17-19)

Yes.. I know Ben. Matthew 5:17 - 19.

I have shown you verse after verse where Jesus moved away from Judaism - and I can show many more. However - you will just claim them to be the words of Paul.

Why do you keep asking for me to show you - if - you will only dismiss what is shown ?

 

[Ben Masada]

matt 5: 17

17`Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets -- I did not come to throw down, but to fulfill;

However, in verse 19 Jesus left it very clear that everyone else was supposed to fulfill and to teach all the laws without change down to the dot of the letter.

15the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace

Jesus did not do away with any of the commandments. He said it clear and loud that he didn't come to abolish anything.
Paul was the one who did away with the Jewish laws in contradiction to Jesus' word's..

14And for me, let it not be -- to glory, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which to me the world hath been crucified, and I to the world;

The cross was an instrument of curse for the Jews. But for Paul it was motif of glory. According to Habakkuk 3:13, the Jewish People are the anointed of God. If anointed means Christ, so the Jewish People is Christ. If Paul was anti-Jewish, it's only obvious that he was antichrist.

it says, being circumcised means nothing; the cross; is what to follow; prepare for the new (the new creation/ the revealing)

The circumcision was the mark of the Abrahamic Covenant with God. (Gen. 17:11) The cross is the mark of the Beast.

and if you know that 'light' is simply electric and magnetic fields at perpendicular planes; the know what the 'cross' means; follow the light!

Yes, I know what the cross used to mean: Death for thousands of Jews. And Light means what the Jews are according to Isaiah 42:6 and Matthew 5:14.

Hab 3:13Thou hast gone forth for the salvation of Thy people, For salvation with Thine anointed,

That's according to KJV which is an adulterated version of the Bible. The original brings thus: "You come forth the save your People; to salve your anointed one." It means that the anointed one is the People and not an individual.

the chapter is mentioning that Israel (the olive tree) bares no good fruit (they failed)

Prove it that they fail. This is an attempt to promote Replacement Theology.

17Though the fig-tree doth not flourish, And there is no produce among vines, Failed hath the work of the olive, And fields have not yielded food, Cut off from the fold hath been the flock, And there is no herd in the stalls

On the opposite. Of the other nations God will make an end, but of Israel, He will only chastise as we deserve. Read Jeremiah 46:28.

Ben:

 

[Ben Masada]

Jesus did in the NT. You just believe the words are Paul's.

You got it right. Anything not Jewish about Jesus is a lie, or Pauline, which is the same.

That the Nazarenes adhered to the old laws does not make them the truest followers. The original Nazarenes have long ago blown away in the wind. There were several early sects of what was to become Christianity and they all held differing views.

I am glad that you are the one saying that the Apostles of Jesus were not his truest followers. They were the original Nazarenes.

It is hard to part with old ways that are imbedded in your psyche.

What truly just happened is that the verse you use as proof for your beliefs - actually - tells a different story if you continue with it on it's path.

I repeat what I said: Anything not Jewish about Jesus must be Pauline. Jesus was a religious Jew.

You can not just say that 5:17 - 19 is all that is required - say that they are the true words of Jesus - and then ignore number #20 like it doesn't exist.

Yes.. I know Ben. Matthew 5:17 - 19.

Verse #20 is a non-Jewish interpolation to hide the truth that the grudge against the Pharisees was Pauline and had nothing to do with Jesus.

I have shown you verse after verse where Jesus moved away from Judaism - and I can show many more. However - you will just claim them to be the words of Paul.

You insist in not understanding my point on this issue. Jesus was a religious Jew. He could not contradict himself, or he would be braking the Law.

Why do you keep asking for me to show you - if - you will only dismiss what is shown ?

To make you see that the NT is loaded with contradictions.

Ben: :slap:

 

[Judgment]

Ben:I am glad that you are the one saying that the Apostles of Jesus were not his truest followers. They were the original Nazarenes.

I never said that. The Apostles were the first.

If he didn't teach anything new - then - why were these new religious sects formed at all - with him as the teacher ?

Ben:Verse #20 is a non-Jewish interpolation to hide the truth that the grudge against the Pharisees was Pauline and had nothing to do with Jesus.

Now you are grasping - but - there is nothing to hold.

Ben:I repeat what I said: Anything not Jewish about Jesus must be Pauline. Jesus was a religious Jew.

Ben:You insist in not understanding my point on this issue. Jesus was a religious Jew. He could not contradict himself, or he would be braking the Law.

Just because Jesus was a Jew - does not mean that he could not think outside of the box.

He thought differently - and those thoughts helped transform a world.

Ben:To make you see that the NT is loaded with contradictions.

We have already agreed that all religions are filled with contradictions. Including your own.

 

[Bishadi]

However, in verse 19 Jesus left it very clear that everyone else was supposed to fulfill and to teach all the laws without change down to the dot of the letter.

Jesus did not do away with any of the commandments.

He simply stated the laws Mark 10 17And as he is going forth into the way, one having run and having kneeled to him, was questioning him, `Good teacher, what may I do, that life age-during I may inherit?'


18And Jesus said to him, `Why me dost thou call good? no one [is] good except One -- God;
19the commands thou hast known: Thou mayest not commit adultery, Thou mayest do no murder, Thou mayest not steal, Thou mayest not bear false witness, Thou mayest not defraud, Honour thy father and mother.'

all six............. (good number eh)

Then in John 1415`If ye love me, my commands keep,


16and I will ask the Father, and another Comforter He will give to you, that he may remain with you -- to the age;
17the Spirit of truth, whom the world is not able to receive, because it doth not behold him, nor know him, and ye know him, because he doth remain with you, and shall be in you.

So Jesus stating EXACTLY what 'commands' to follow, and perfectly that ANOTHER will come with the truth.

Nothing conflicting there about reality; solid rules, good statement on the future, as well pointed out, he ain't responsible....... each are, so follow the rules!

The cross was an instrument of curse for the Jews.

Wrong again. As the cross i far older than Jesus, just like circumcision was before torah or moses ever wrote a word.

The circumcision was the mark of the Abrahamic Covenant with God. (Gen. 17:11)

Moses is who is supposed to have written Genesis but was a baby just born when put on the river, gathered by the Pharaohs daughter (per moses). So the circumcision was done by egyptians and had nothing to do with abraham. He learned how to read and write as an egyptian and since pharaohs were considered living Gods, then talking to God was normal to moses.

The cross is the mark of the Beast.

the cross is the representation of light. such to hold a single unit of light at the one meter wavelength and point it at you, would be like holding a cross.

see for yourself electromagnetic wave - Google Image Search

Yes, I know what the cross used to mean: Death for thousands of Jews. And Light means what the Jews are according to Isaiah 42:6 and Matthew 5:14.

Isaiah 42 is practically all about the messiah

Isaiah 42


1Lo, My servant, I take hold on him, My chosen one -- My soul hath accepted, I have put My Spirit upon him, Judgment to nations he bringeth forth.

2He doth not cry, nor lift up, Nor cause his voice to be heard, in the street.

3A bruised reed he breaketh not, And dim flax he quencheth not, To truth he bringeth forth judgment.

4He doth not become weak nor bruised, Till he setteth judgment in the earth, And for his law isles wait with hope.

5Thus said God, Jehovah, preparing The heavens, and stretching them out, Spreading out the earth and its productions, Giving breath to the people on it, And spirit to those walking in it.

6I, Jehovah, did call thee in righteousness, And I lay hold on thy hand, and keep thee, And I give thee for a covenant of a people, And a light of nations.
7To open the eyes of the blind, To bring forth from prison the bound one, From the house of restraint those sitting in darkness.

perhaps you should read the rest of the story versus using scriptures like that

Prove it that they fail.

Are you jewish?

if so, then you do not know what to look for from the messiah; now who failed? I could say, just you; but i know you are a product of your environment as well just learning truth.

What you do with it, is what defines who you are.

On the opposite. Of the other nations God will make an end, but of Israel, He will only chastise as we deserve. Read Jeremiah 46:28.

Ben:

again, you in jeremiah and do not realize, the books of zechariah and jer are not the kindest when it comes to israel, they both point out israels destruction (the future event/prophecy)

this single item you post shares something you forget to realize

Jer 46 28Thou, thou dost not fear, My servant Jacob, An affirmation of Jehovah -- for with thee I [am], For I make an end of all the nations Whither I have driven thee, And of thee I do not make an end, And I have reproved thee in judgment, And do not entirely acquit thee!'

that mankind will not end as we as a species are all children of God (existence), it is the dividing of people based on ignorance that will be removed.

That is what the last chapter (bringer of peace) is all about.

Our faith is to trust God (existence) will eventually "reveal" the absolute in truth.

and know the truth by the "light of life"

and then if you are well versed, then know, the 'name' is the last word to all arguments.

 

[RND]

Christians, especially Protestants, and among them, the Seventh-Day Adventists in particular, enjoy to talk about the mark of the Beast; and with fantastic definitions, that only make a ridiculous picture of themselves. Then, they charge each other with the potential to
get the mark of the Beast. They think of almost everything but the real thing, which is given by the NT itself.

The mark of the Beast appears in conjunction with the Antichrist. Morphologically, the term Antichrist is composed of two words:
Anti and Christ. Anti means to stand against or to contradict. Christ means what Christians believe Jesus was. So, what stands against
Christ is only obvious that it means the Antichrist.

According to Matthew 5:17, Jesus declared that he had not come to abolish the Jewish laws. Then, 30 years later, Paul came and said
that what Jesus said was not true, but rather that the Jewish laws were abolished on the cross. (Ephe. 2:15)

As we can see, Paul stood against what Jesus said by contradicting his words about his purpose regarding the Jewish laws. If Jesus was
indeed Christ, as Christians believe he was, it's only obvious that Paul acted as the Antichrist.

Now, where did Paul say the Jewish laws were abolished? On the cross. And what did the cross mean to him? "God forbid," he said, "that I should glory in anything save in the cross." The cross meant the glory of Paul. (Gal. 6:14)

Now, we have the mark of the Beast: The cross, a symbol of shame and a curse to the Anointed of the Lord, who, in the words of Habakkuk 3:13, is the People of Israel, the Jewish People.

Now, your comments are welcome.

Ben :yes:

Mark of the Beast: Forced worship. See Daniel 3.

 

[Ben Masada]

If he didn't teach anything new - then - why were these new religious sects formed at all - with him as the teacher ?

Don't blame Jesus for the confusion among religious sects.

Just because Jesus was a Jew - does not mean that he could not think outside of the box.

Produce an evidence for what you say. If it's Jewish, I am ready to accept it. If it's not, it will definitely be not true.

He thought differently - and those thoughts helped transform a world.

You are accusing Jesus with the purpose to separate him from what he was: A religious Jew.

We have already agreed that all religions are filled with contradictions. Including your own.

Bring them up. Let's discuss them.

Ben: