Freethought & Rationalism Archive

IamJoseph · 08-05-2009, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Paul says the cross was a stumbling block to Jews.

This is usually taken to mean that Jews would reject the idea that a crucified man could be the Messiah.

It is like saying that the reason Americans rejected Saddam's claim to be the Great Liberator of Iraq is that Saddam had been hanged.

Actually, Saddam had been hanged because America rejected his claim to be the Great Liberator of Iraq.

The Jews clearly had not rejected Jesus as Messiah because he had been crucified.

After all, there was a period in his life when Jesus had not been crucified, and he was still rejected by the Jews.

What explanation does Paul give of why the Jews had crucified Jesus?

Paul must have known the reason why the Jews crucified Jesus.

What was that reason, and what apologetic does Paul produce to show that Jesus was innocent of whatever charge had lead to his crucifixion?

The Jews did not ever crucify anyone - Europe crucified millions of Jews. The law says if you cannot prove a charge the applicable penalty becomes reversed.

Jews did not reject any Messiah. But Christians rejected Mohammed.

premjan · 08-05-2009, 12:09 AM

Well, they didn't accept Jesus as a Messiah even if there was no formal rejection.

Vinnie · 08-05-2009, 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Paul says the cross was a stumbling block to Jews.

This is usually taken to mean that Jews would reject the idea that a crucified man could be the Messiah.

It is like saying that the reason Americans rejected Saddam's claim to be the Great Liberator of Iraq is that Saddam had been hanged.

Actually, Saddam had been hanged because America rejected his claim to be the Great Liberator of Iraq.

The Jews clearly had not rejected Jesus as Messiah because he had been crucified.

After all, there was a period in his life when Jesus had not been crucified, and he was still rejected by the Jews.

What explanation does Paul give of why the Jews had crucified Jesus?

Paul must have known the reason why the Jews crucified Jesus.

What was that reason, and what apologetic does Paul produce to show that Jesus was innocent of whatever charge had lead to his crucifixion?

Most of the million or so Jews obviously never heard of Jesus who was crucified by Rome. I recommend Hengel and Fredriksen.

Vinnie

Vinnie · 08-05-2009, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Getting crucified was fairly common for Jews, so Jesus was nothing special.

Some people apparently disagreed and they told all their friends.

Vinnie · 08-05-2009, 03:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Getting crucified was fairly common for Jews, so Jesus was nothing special.

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.

Maybe they were all written before it.

IamJoseph · 08-05-2009, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

Maybe they were all written before it.

No chance. There is contemporary and cross-nation writings here. Josephus responds to Apion, a Roman writer, etc. When a prominent city like Jerusalem is enitrely desroyed, including the 450 acre Temple fortress [then the largest moniment in the world], and we see its 2000 year booty displayed in the Arch of Titus in today's Rome - there is no question that 1.2 million Jews sacrificed their lives here, as accounted by Josephus.

This event marks the greatest defense of a faith and the war for freedom of belief in Geo-history, and humanity owes the Jews here: it is equivalent to 20Million pro rate today. Incredibly, it is not even mentioned in the Gospels!

IamJoseph · 08-05-2009, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

Most of the million or so Jews obviously never heard of Jesus who was crucified by Rome. I recommend Hengel and Fredriksen.

Vinnie

There were five Jewish candidates nominated as potential Messiahs at this time - and these were soon deemed wrong. All five had a great following, many times more than the Nasserites had of Jesus. Probably, the Romans, with the backing of the Greeks, picked up the Messiah premise from the Jews, and worked up a story around it later.

The Greeks had the septuagint from 300 years before, and appear the most likely cause of copying its style, even listing a geneology of Jesus similar to the Hebrew bible when any figure is introduced - but there are great errors in the Gospel's accounting of this geneology which says Jesus had a direct lineage to King David. Such errors could only go un-noticed when the people made no demands for proof or investgation.

semiopen · 08-05-2009, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Getting crucified was fairly common for Jews, so Jesus was nothing special.

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.

I wonder if "up to 800 a day" means they once crucified 800 people in one day.

1.100,000 Jews were killed according to Josephus. However, it is doubtful that the entire population of Judea was this high. The number of casualties therefore seems grossly overstated.

These exaggerations are distracting and make it difficult to focus on whatever the actual topic here is.

storytime · 08-05-2009, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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?

Heard of FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS?

Why should his account be trusted any more than the exaggerated numbers in OT? I mean, really, Joseph. Any writer can inflate numbers, war victories, and much of just about anything. Much like yourself. Why would I trust your version of the history of the Jews? Or Rome?

storytime · 08-05-2009, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

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

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!

Why did the kingly line run through Moabites? And wasn't David a Benjamite? Jews are certainly a mixed pot of stew. And how did it become legal for only one tribe[Judah] out of 12 to be called "Israel"? That makes no sense to me.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-05-2009, 12:09 AM	#22
premjan Obsessed Contributor Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 61,538	Well, they didn't accept Jesus as a Messiah even if there was no formal rejection.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.