IamJoseph

Call me when you find a Hebrew document, with the name of an identifiable Jew therein, similar to the dead sea scrolls: a most reasonable ask, considering this was a time when writings were commonplace, and the Gospels sites numerous [not one] writer. Jews never wrote in Latin or Aramaic but Hebrew - the last supper being called as such [!], and denoted as Aramaic - is a total hoax! No Hebrew - no Gospels truth.

Till then - the Gospels remains a European Protocolian type affair, made far from the crime scene, with not a single alphabet therein evidential. Here, a christian or muslim view is totally irrelevent, devoid of arms length and totally inculcated via the rake and sword. I say this with total respect of the otherwise genuine beliefs of christians and muslims today - these are the hapless and quagmired victims of history's greatest hoaxes.



We do not have an original Hebrew or Greek Septuagint, while the greeks then followed a belief system exactly as does the Gospels point at. The Macs did NOT write theological stuff in Greek. No Hebrews rejected anything - they remained as they were in their beliefs, and constitute the only peoples who did so - all the ancesters of christians and muslims were enforced to those beliefs. In fact, it was christianity, not the Hebrews, who rejected Mohammed - then went on to villify the Jews for remaining Jews - its own criteria back fired upon itself.

But Islam remains closer with Judaism in the pivotal factors - as a pointer to Europe; its discordance with Judaism is firmly based on politics and envy - which is reasonable, and anyone would likewise be the same. The most blatant but disdained truth appears to be that the revered figures of both Christianity and Islam have harkened to the God of Israel: the greatest 'OPEN' miracle the last 2000 years [as well as the telling and most disdained one], is the return of Israel, exactly as prophesized, as a remnant, when this was least plausable. Both Christianity and Islam failed the test before them, and ended up in grotesque distortions of theology, history, geography, truth and morality.

Both christianity and islam are quagmired today with serial 2-state demands in the same miniscule land every 20 years, alternatingly resurrecting the term Palestinians for jews then for Muslims, and enraged that israel is occupying 12% of the land originally allocated her in the Balfour. This war has been lost - by Europe and Islam - only denial and rage remains. The scariest thought for a christian and muslim would have to be cnfronting their own revered figures: they may not necessaily get the questions they now anticipate.

Christians easily forget, the Jewish temple was destroyed before Christianity existed, before Greece entered Arabia, and yet Judaism prevailed: would Christianity under the same conditions prevail, noting that no other ancient name is around today?

The fact is, it is not feasable to get such admissions from a christian or muslim, because it negates core principles of faith. But the temple destruction was always foreseen [by Solomon and a host of Prophets], and this has nothing whatsoever to do with the Gospels or Jesus. If anything, it over-turns the Gospel's immoral revelry no bricks shall stand [1000s of bricks stand today at the wailing wall], and its ubsurd attaching of belief in God with a vilification of another people as its claim to fame, and the disdain that Judasim still survives within a sea of death to you if I could - it that an evil or a good result?

The pre-islamic arabs who today chant the jerusalem temple was a myth - were in the front rows destroying that temple; the pre-christian Europeans who remain silent of such grotesque falsehoods - were also in the front rows as Rome, destroying that temple - because the jews remained as jews and rejected worshipping divine Roman brutes. The right to freedom of belief comes from Jews confronting Euopean and Arabian gangsters.

So the jews should be hailed - but they are abjectly disdained instead. And look who's doing the disdaining - not the Buddhists or Hindus or Chinese. Look who's accusing Jews of disbelief - two new kids on the blocks holding swords which would render the jews wrong whichever way they truned - and also if they never turned but remained as they always were. Humanity is pointed in a totally insane path - and this has nothing to do with Jews - the only factor which can fix this insanity, thus the witness must be wiped off the map. But for Israel - christianty and islam would have a dandy face off - at least say thanks to your favorite scapegoat?

jon-eli

The oldest preserved fragment of biblical text is a silver amulet that dates to circa 600bc. One must assume that Judaism predates this amulet by some significant amount of time. It's also fair to assume that Judaism predates the second temple. And for what it's worth, the earliest mention of the Israelites (not of Judaism, admittedly), is found in the Merneptah Stele, which dates to circa 1200bc.

More to the point, Christianity is clearly an outgrowth of Judaism, since it purports to be (Jesus was a fulfillment of Jewish prophecy, after all), and since the story of Jesus is set during a period that vastly post-dates the beginning of Judaism. As for Islam, it's basis is the Qu'ran, which is dependent on the Jewish scriptures; and once again we have a religion that claims to be a fulfillment and elaboration of those scriptures.

gentleexit

So to be clear - a Jew is someone who writes in Hebrew. So for you - Joseph! - Philo was NOT a Jew and the writers of Maccabees (1-4) were NOT Jews. Josephus, not Jewish. They were what exactly? These "others" writing in Greek (or Aramaic in the case of Josephus). Are you the "un-Sandler"? "Philo, not Jewish, Mother of the Maccabees, not Jewish, ..."

IamJoseph

Define 'fullfillment'

IamJoseph

Jewish theology is what was always in Hebrew. There are many writers such as Philo, Josephus, who also wrote in other languages - but these are not theological. If you see that the Gospels writes in Latin only because this was their language, and you do not see a disdaining of all things Jewish there - we can respectfully agree to disagree.

IamJoseph

What is fullfillment to one - is genocide to another.

PROOF: Does Islam 'FULLFILL' the Gospels?

The premise of Christianity and islam are identical, and based on: WHAT IS GOOD FOR YOU - DO UNTO OTHERS.

That doctrine mass murdered millions.

Isabel of Spain declared: 'BETTER TO DESTROY THEIR BODIES AND SAVE THEIR SOULS'.

Islam declared: 'THERE SHALL NOT BE ANOTHER RELIGION IN ARABIA'

A Pope declared: 'WE WILL NEVER SUPPORT THE RETURN OF JEWS TO *THEIR HOMELAND* - BECAUSE THEY REJECTED JESUS'



Shall those doctrines also be wished upon those who make such doctrines?

The correct doctrine is:

'WHAT IS HATEFUL TO YOU - DO NOT UNTO OTHERS' [R. Hillel; 10 BCE].

Imagine how many millions of innocent peoples would have been saved from death - if they were not FULLFILLED!

DCHindley

On what basis, pray tell, are your estimates of the terminus post quem and terminus ante quem founded?

DCH

spin

And all the rabbinical writers who used Aramaic? They Jews of Elephantine were not Jewish!? All the Targums? What about those Aramaic portions of Ezra and Daniel? They're not in Hebrew so they're not Jewish, right?


spin

IamJoseph

You are quoting scholars who wrote in the diaspora, not theological writings. The only aramaic in the Passover liturgy is of quotation dialogue passages of the Hebrews in Egypt, who spoke this language with the Egyptians because the Egyptians did not speak Hebrew - this applies only to two short passages - all the rest is in Hebrew. The notion of presenting Jesus as an aramaic speaker is total fiction and dis-history. This is a pointing of a fiction in the Gospels - not about knocking it for no reason.

IamJoseph

Both Christianity and Islam have compiled their scriptures well after the fact, and by others. In the case of the NT - Paul never even met Jesus - and none in Europe had any compulsion to bounce what was said with those who did see Jesus!

This is varied from the Hebrew bible - which says Moses himself wrote, in the presence of millions. Whether the latter is accepted or not - it still renders the texts as positing logical factors, as oppsed accepting the greatest of claims with no questions asked and no first hand witnesses present. With the Quran, it was made with supposed recall of every word - decades later - and not even the term paraphrasing is applied here.

The result is that those writings must be accepted via belief - or the rake and sword applies - even when both are in total conradiction of history, and nothing they say can be verified. This is a difference in kind than degree of these two writings with the Hebrew. But above all - there is a mysterious phenomenon here - making the factor of belief a different species from science and history.