IamJoseph

Upto 800 a day in numerous towns, after depraved Nero resurrected Caligula's decree of heresy in 66 CE - to deflect the cause of his turmoil of starting a fire in Rome. No heed was shown for gender or sex - mothers and children were slain before the men nailed on crosses - while the Roman generals watched laughing and performing sex acts with their concubines from carraiges.

The Gospels does not even mention the massacre of over a million Jews who stood up to Rome - constituting the most terrible lie-by-omission in all recorded history, and Roman Catholocism went on to boldly apply the name of Rome as its prefix, and also kill off any who did not worship its own latinised divine man - that says a lot.

IamJoseph

Absolutely. Not a single of the numerous factors in Isaiah was attended - in fact its antithesis occured. The Romans contrived fictional names and stories of a trial, apostles, divine man - embellished with horrific villifications - as a political tool and to condone their own Roman/Hellenist beliefs. The real victims are those who never demanded proof - or had no means to do this.

Ultimately, the quagmire faced by christians today can only be answered whether the Jews represent the truth or a falsehood - this is based on the Gospel's own criteria of the truth shall set you free. Its perhaps the toughest call for christians and muslims today - both quagmired by core contradictions each holds as non-negotiable: both both cannot be right.

steve_bnk

For the Jews and Muslims rerpresentation of god in any form is balsphemy.

storytime

Why would restoring the kingdom of Judah to Israel have anything to do with Romans? The two so-called kingdoms in sons of Jacob were divided in days of King Rehoboam. Both Jews of Judea and whatever other northern 10 tribes looked forward to being reunited as one whole nation called Israel with no more a wall of separation between them.

I think you're right. Jesus didn't fulfill expectations of restoration[reuniting] the Kingdom of Judah to Israel. When the disciples ask him "will thou this day restore the kingdom to Israel"?, Jesus merely said it would be in Gods own time. In other words, Jesus didn't have a clue. But he told his diciples to remain at Jerusalem until they received word from on high, or something to that effect. Jesus may have indicated the High Priest would declare a restoration and giving god the credit.

storytime

Up to 800 a day huh? Would there be any actual proof of your statements from any source outside your own mouth? There should be something somewhere don't you think?

Diogenes the Cynic

Because they were an occupying force. It wasn't so much that they were Romans, but that they weren't Jews.

premjan

Is any of modern (Republic of) Israel's founders a descendant of David?

Anat

There are quite a few families claiming Davidic descent - the Shaltiels are rather famous for making that claim, there was an early Zionist named Michael Halpern who believed himself of Davidic descent (supposedly he would ask women to marry him so they'd have the chance to give birth to the messiah). I don't know what evidence besides family traditions the various families have. I don't know of any such claimant playing an important role in the founding of Israel.

IamJoseph

Heard of FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS?

IamJoseph

Yes - generically. The Jews are the only peoples who followed the Mosaic laws, allowing no other candidates possible. David, a descendent of Ruth from the Judges period, also followed the Mosaic, as is seen in the psalms texts.

The Jews exiled to the European continent in 70 CE, and those exiled to Arabian states in 586 BCE, retained their beliefs - proven when the Greeks translated the Hebrew bible in 300 BCE, and their descendents represent modern Israel. Because the restoration of Israel overturns doctrines held in the NT and Quran - one can find unending denials to eliminate this truth. This includes historical deeds of genocide in Europe solely because they were Jews - and also their denial today that they are Jews!