FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-18-2013, 02:32 PM   #21
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post

Christianity came out of Judiasm. Without historical Jewish theology, Christianity loses all meaning.
That doesn't show that Christianity came out of Judaism, as opposed to adopting it.
Quote:
Christians see Christianity as the completion of Judiasm----the extension of God's plan, and not as a rejection of it.
Jews tend to take deep offense at this.

Quote:
This has nothing to do with a rejection of the Hebrew faith and I don't really see why anyone here feels the need to defend the Hebrew faith anyway. Is this a Hebrew board or an atheist board? The Hebrews should be about 1000 times more offended by atheism than Christianity!
I don't see anyone here defending the content of the Jewish faith, other than to explain what it is versus what it is not.

Quote:
And yet, Christianity arose out of a crucified Jewish man/being. Why a Jewish one? There is no escaping that fact.
It's not a fact. It is a hypothesis. We only know as a fact that Christians claimed a crucified man was the origin of their salvation.

Quote:
Quote:
Christians did it in a unique way though, by abolishing the need to sacrifice through the ultimate sacrifice. That sacrifice was conceptually involved is nothing particularly Jewish, but that the Messaiah dies in such ignominy - that is most especially not Jewish.
Yet it caught fire with the Jews.
Where? We have no record of mass conversions of Jews.
Toto is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 02:40 PM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
Is it the word 'Messiah' that you are objecting to? Would a different word have been better to use -- like 'the Chosen One' or something like that?
It is the misappropriation of the term "messiah" that I'm trying to communicate to you. That is what interests me. Your blindness to it.
Quote:
I have no problem with the fact that Jesus is represented as a savior, nor the story that he was crucified, nor that he was supposed to be Jewish. It is that you can unashamedly call him the messiah, an act of religious disinheritance of the Jews, while showing no understanding of the actual term.
You must be mighty bored today. Hope you enjoyed playing your little word game with me.
TedM is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 02:46 PM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Is the akedah the binding of Isaac and its significance in Jewish worship relevant here ?

Quote:
"Remember in our favor, O Lord our God, the oath which Thou hast sworn to our father Abraham on Mount Moriah; consider the binding of his son Isaac upon the altar when he suppressed his love in order to do Thy will with a whole heart! Thus may Thy love suppress Thy wrath against us, and through Thy great goodness may the heat of Thine anger be turned away from Thy people, Thy city, and Thy heritage! . . . Remember to-day in mercy in favor of his seed the binding of Isaac."
Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 02:46 PM   #24
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
...The fact that this Savior came from Jewish origins and was considered to be 'the One' they had been awaiting, should be all the evidence you need, spin, to conclude that the culture was flexible enough to accept the idea of a Messiah-like Jewish crucified Savior. What is it about that which you have such an objection to? Isn't the evidence in the method chosen? If not, why portray this Savior as the long-awaited Jewish Messiah at all, if such a portrayal was absolutely impossible to be conceived by them?...
The Expected Messiah of the Jews based on Jewish Scripture is NOT the Jesus of the Christian cult.

The Jewish Messianic ruler was expected c 70 CE and never did come and Vespasian was claimed to be the Predicted Messiah.

See Wars of the Jews 6.5.4, Tacitus Histories 5 and Suetonius "Life of Vespasian.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM
..It makes no sense to do that if they weren't open to the idea. And, you can't just get away with calling it a 'Roman' religion when we know that the Jews were spread throughout the Roman empire. Were early Christian Romans just taunting the Jews by making fun of their Messianic expectations and coming up with a whole other one? Makes no sense spin.
The Jesus cult was HIJACKED by the Romans sometime in the 4th century or later. There is no evidence whatsoever that any Jew was a member of the Jesus cult and worshiped Jesus of Nazareth as a God and for Remission of Sins by Sacrifice.

Outside the Canon and characters in the Canon we cannot find a single Christian writer of the Jesus cult who was a Jew from the supposed 1st century to the 5th century.

This is a partial list of some of the Non-Jewish writers--Ignatius, Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Papias, Justin Martyr, Aristides, Melito, Hegesippus, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Clement of Alexandria, Arnobius, Origen, Eusebius, Ephrem the Syrian, Jerome, Chrysostom and others.

Magically, there is no known Jewish Christian writer of the early Jesus cult and hundreds of years later.

The Christian Teachings of the Jesus cult was assembled without the input of a single LIVING Jewish writer.

The Jesus cult did NOT originate from Jews. In fact, the Jesus cult propagated Teachings that were Contrary to Hebrew Scripture or was essentially blasphemous.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 02:48 PM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post

Christianity came out of Judiasm. Without historical Jewish theology, Christianity loses all meaning.
That doesn't show that Christianity came out of Judaism, as opposed to adopting it.
But why would they want to do that, especially when --as you say-- it would be so offensive to the Jews? Do you buy into the conspiracy theory that Christianity tried to offend the Jews? I don't.


Quote:
Quote:
And yet, Christianity arose out of a crucified Jewish man/being. Why a Jewish one? There is no escaping that fact.
It's not a fact. It is a hypothesis. We only know as a fact that Christians claimed a crucified man was the origin of their salvation.
I said man/being. Why a Jewish one?

Logic would dictate that Christianity came out of Judiasm because something within Judiasm inspired it, not the other way around.

What was it?

I maintain that rather than appealing to a 'nutter' Paul, the context of the Jewish culture was such that there was an underground movement that either created a crucified mythical figure and called him their Messiah, or they responded to an unusual event that was so stunning in its parallels to their expectations and theology regarding salvation that they couldn't ignore it: a Messiah claimant was killed during Passover.

This last option is the more reasonable one to me.
TedM is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 02:54 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Is the akedah the binding of Isaac and its significance in Jewish worship relevant here ?

Quote:
"Remember in our favor, O Lord our God, the oath which Thou hast sworn to our father Abraham on Mount Moriah; consider the binding of his son Isaac upon the altar when he suppressed his love in order to do Thy will with a whole heart! Thus may Thy love suppress Thy wrath against us, and through Thy great goodness may the heat of Thine anger be turned away from Thy people, Thy city, and Thy heritage! . . . Remember to-day in mercy in favor of his seed the binding of Isaac."
Andrew Criddle
Sure would seem to be Andrew. Thanks.

I just can't comprehend how anybody here can think that the Jewish people, whose salvation depended on sacrifice to please God wouldn't at least entertain the idea that a popular godly man killed on Passover might have been a sacrifice for their benefit. The parallels are too obvious to pretend to know that the mindset of a Jewish person was not open to the possibility. Your quotation is more support for the idea.
TedM is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 02:59 PM   #27
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post

I maintain that rather than appealing to a 'nutter' Paul, the context of the Jewish culture was such that there was an underground movement that either created a crucified mythical figure and called him their Messiah, or they responded to an unusual event that was so stunning in its parallels to their expectations and theology regarding salvation that they couldn't ignore it: a Messiah claimant was killed during Passover.

This last option is the more reasonable one to me.
You are merely repeating what you imagine. Where is the supporting evidence?? We have the writings of Philo, Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius and they do NOT show that any Messianic claimant called Jesus of Nazareth was considered a God of the Jews and was claimed to be the Savior of the Whole world by his crucifixion and resurrection.

You have utterly failed to comprehend that thousands of Jews were crucified in the 1st century and that there is no evidence whatsoever that any of them were Deified based on their suffering.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:05 PM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post

I maintain that rather than appealing to a 'nutter' Paul, the context of the Jewish culture was such that there was an underground movement that either created a crucified mythical figure and called him their Messiah, or they responded to an unusual event that was so stunning in its parallels to their expectations and theology regarding salvation that they couldn't ignore it: a Messiah claimant was killed during Passover.

This last option is the more reasonable one to me.
You are merely repeating what you imagine. Where is the supporting evidence?? We have the writings of Philo, Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius and they do NOT show that any Messianic claimant called Jesus of Nazareth was considered a God of the Jews and was claimed to be the Savior of the Whole world by his crucifixion and resurrection.
Why should they? How big was the sect when they wrote?

Quote:
You have utterly failed to comprehend that thousands of Jews were crucified in the 1st century and that there is no evidence whatsoever that any of them were Deified based on their suffering.
Why would they have been? If Jesus were mythical, why was he made Jewish, aa?
TedM is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:24 PM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 3,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Is the akedah the binding of Isaac and its significance in Jewish worship relevant here ?



Andrew Criddle
Sure would seem to be Andrew. Thanks.

I just can't comprehend how anybody here can think that the Jewish people, whose salvation depended on sacrifice to please God wouldn't at least entertain the idea that a popular godly man killed on Passover might have been a sacrifice for their benefit. The parallels are too obvious to pretend to know that the mindset of a Jewish person was not open to the possibility. Your quotation is more support for the idea.
This is pretty nuts.

There is a good chance nobody got killed and that it might not have been passover. Finally who cares if he got sacrificed on passover, is that an especially good time to sacrifice? If it is not, your argument is more ridiculous than it appears at first glance. When presenting an argument (especially one as absurd as yours seems) you should explain why sacrifices were special during passover.

The idea behind human sacrifice is that you get more bang with pleasing God than doing a cow or bird or whatever. I've written before that there is an excellent chance that all sacrifices are bullshit, in fact I doubt if anybody here would argue that sacrificing animals was useful in any way to the Jews as far as getting favors from God.

Your concept is a huge double down on the sacrificial cult being theologically useful and finally it is ended by Yoshke as the ultimate sacrifice.

The whole concept seems stupid to me.
semiopen is offline  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:37 PM   #30
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post

I maintain that rather than appealing to a 'nutter' Paul, the context of the Jewish culture was such that there was an underground movement that either created a crucified mythical figure and called him their Messiah, or they responded to an unusual event that was so stunning in its parallels to their expectations and theology regarding salvation that they couldn't ignore it: a Messiah claimant was killed during Passover.

This last option is the more reasonable one to me.
You are merely repeating what you imagine. Where is the supporting evidence?? We have the writings of Philo, Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius and they do NOT show that any Messianic claimant called Jesus of Nazareth was considered a God of the Jews and was claimed to be the Savior of the Whole world by his crucifixion and resurrection.
Why should they? How big was the sect when they wrote?
All of a sudden you cannot remember the Pauline Epistles and Acts of the Apostles in the Christian Bible.

Is it not claim in the Christian Bible that Paul wrote letters to Churches "all over" the Roman Empire??

Is it NOT claimed in the Christian Bible, Acts of the Apostles, that there were THOUSANDS of conversions to the Jesus cult even before the Paul was converted???

We cannot find anything about Jesus the Son of God who was crucified for the Sins of ALL Mankind outside the Christian Bible WHEN there should have been THOUSANDS of converts to the Jesus cult even before Paul.

Acts 2:41 KJV
Quote:
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized : and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
Acts 4:4 KJV
Quote:
Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed ; and the number of the men was about five thousand.
Acts 21:20 KJV
Quote:
And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest , brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe...
What happened to all those thousands of Jews that were converted in the Christian Bible???

They vanished into thin air.

All the Christian writers of the Jesus cult outside the Christian characters in their Bible are NON-JEWS--the thousands of converts simply melted away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874
You have utterly failed to comprehend that thousands of Jews were crucified in the 1st century and that there is no evidence whatsoever that any of them were Deified based on their suffering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM
...Why would they have been? If Jesus were mythical, why was he made Jewish, aa?
You keep on repeating the same questions??? Why??

Please, read the Bible.

The story of Jesus in the Canon was ALTERED--INTERPOLATED.

We have the ACTUAL FORGERY. We have the short gMark and the Forgery called the long gMark--Read them.

The author of the earliest Canonised story of Jesus [the short gMark] NEVER EVER claimed Jesus would die and resurrect for the Sins of ALL Mankind.

See Mark 8, Mark9 and Mark 10.

When Jesus Resurrected the Story ended.

The author of the short gMark merely wrote a story about the Son of God who people thought was a man and was found guilty of death for blasphemy until he resurrected. Even the disciples of Jesus did NOT understand that he was the Son of God.
aa5874 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:27 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.