N
Nathan_Wagar
Guest
Ben check your inbox bro.
- Status
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Ah, so the prophecy to Abraham and David meant, “… and you would be a light to the Gentiles, but only those who become Jews”. My translation must have left that out.
My bad. But I do seem to recall Jeremiah speaking of a New Covenant. One that would re-unite all the tribes of Israel. And the only Covenant I see that is fulfilling that prophecy is the New Covenant instituted in the upper room during the feast of Passover about 2000 years ago. The only way I see that Israel’s tribes could be reunited is if you let in the Gentiles who had the watered down blood of those rebellious 10 tribes about 3000 years ago.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I’m sorry. I didn’t realize this was a personal testimony.
My thoughts are that your middle Eastern friends would be more offended by our use of “Heavenly Father” for God. From what I understand, Muslims find that extremely offensive.
But regarding this multi-cultural world, I find that being politically correct has caused more problems than the tender feelings of others we are trying to protect. Sorry.
Thanks brother. And I don’t feel I have to pardon you for anything, since you haven’t offended me.
God Bless!
C
Canto
Guest
The Church was built on the Rock of Peter not Paul Mt 16:18
Peter got the keys not Paul
Peter was Bishop of Rome (Pope) but evangelised Christ in other parts of the globe too.
He believed Christ rose from the dead 1 Pt 1:3
He believed that God calls us to eternal glory in Christ 1 Pt 5:10
He believes Christ is our God and Saviour 2 Pt:1:1
sound pretty Catholic/Christian to me
R
ready
Guest
Who said? Where do you get your authority to say such a thing? You are wrong, what you say can not even be proven.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Ben Masada:
Well… Ben does have a point. A Jewish Man does not claim to be God Incarnate… unless, of course, that Jewish Man IS God Incarnate!
R
ready
Guest
Well… Ben does have a point. A Jewish Man does not claim to be God Incarnate… unless, of course, that Jewish Man IS God Incarnate!
I’m afraid Ben does not have a point - because Jesus was not just a Jewish man.
T
twb1621
Guest
Yes, I agree, but the Apostles were not Christians or Catholics for that matter. How could Peter become the first Pope if he had nothing to do with Christians?
He was and did as evident in the scripture verse I previously posted to you.
Now, yes, I am ready to hear when Paul fulfilled his call and went to the Gentiles. Would let me know where to find this in the NT?
So much writing for nothing because you haven’t answered any of my questions. Show me when Paul decided to go to the Gentiles.
**No offense but perhaps you need to be more specific with your questions if you are looking for a specific answer. Asking when can be asking in time or in relation to an event. **
****By his own words he did and after ******Barnabas ****requested he accompany him. Many of the Apostles fled to Antioch for their safety so there in all common sense would have been more of their activity there based on what is written. As in any other circumstance, followers of a particular faith or belief system were referenced based on the teacher. Christians were designated for who they followed and such a term distinguishes them by others and from others of different beliefs or ways of life. **
But why? There must have been a reason why they were called Christians for the first time in Antioch and not in Jerusalem or in Alexandria. What happened in Antioch for the disciples to be called Christians for the first time? Believe me, I am ready to accept that it had nothing to do with Paul. What was the background for that change of name? The text is the whole chapter 11 of Acts, and the quote is 11:26 when they are said to have been called Christians for the first time; but the reason, you haven’t told me yet. And I am asking with all my respects for your beliefs. But it is important for me to know. Maybe I have been wrong all the time.
**AGAIN… By Paul’s own words he did and after ****Barnabas ****requested he accompany him. Many of the Apostles fled to Antioch for their safety so there in all common sense would have been more of their activity there based on what is written. As in any other circumstance, followers of a particular faith or belief system were referenced based on the teacher. Christians were designated for who they followed and such a term distinguishes them by others and from others of different beliefs or ways of life. **
You keep repeating the same thing which has nothing to do with my question. How can Catholics evangelize Jews by using such a method?
It depends on the underlying motive of the Jewish individual who is asking the questions.
See the next post if you need time frames…
T
twb1621
Guest
**An interval of seventeen years — or at least sixteen, counting incomplete years as accomplished — elapsed between the **conversion of Paul and the Apostolic council, for Paul visited Jerusalem three years after his conversion (Galatians 1:18) and returned after fourteen years for the meeting held with regard to legal observances (Galatians 2:1: “Epeita dia dekatessaron eton”). It is true that some authors include the three years prior to the first visit in the total of fourteen, but this explanation seems forced. On the other hand, twelve or thirteen years elapsed between the Apostolic council and the end of the captivity, for the captivity lasted nearly five years (more than two years at Caesarea, Acts 24:27, six months travelling, including the sojourn at Malta, and two years at Rome, Acts 28:30); the third mission lasted not less than four years and a half (three of which were spent at Ephesus, Acts 20:31, and one between the departure from Ephesus and the arrival at Jerusalem, 1 Corinthians 16:8; Acts 20:16, and six months at the very least for the journey to Galatia, Acts 18:23); while the second mission lasted not less than three years (eighteen months for Corinth, Acts 18:11, and the remainder for the evangelization of Galatia, Macedonia, and Athens, Acts 15:36-17:34). Thus from the conversion to the end of the first captivity we have a total of about twenty-nine years.
**Now if we could find a fixed point that is a synchronism between a fact in the life of Paul and a certainly **dated event in profane history, it would be easy to reconstruct the Pauline chronology. Unfortunately this much wished-for mark has not yet been indicated with certainty, despite the numerous attempts made by scholars, especially in recent times. It is of interest to note even the abortive attempts, because the discovery of an inscription or of a coin may any day transform an approximate date into an absolutely fixed point. These are
**·**the meeting of Paul with Sergius Paulus, Proconsul of Cyprus, about the year 46 (Acts 13:7)
**·**the meeting at Corinth with Aquila and Priscilla, who had been expelled from Rome, about 51 (Acts 18:2)
**·**the meeting with Gallio, Proconsul of Achaia, about 53 (Acts 18:12)
**·**the address of Paul before the Governor Felix and his wife Drusilla about 58 (Acts 24:24).
T
twb1621
Guest
**All these events, as far as they may be assigned approximate *dates, agree with the Apostle’s general chronology but give no precise results. Three synchronisms, however, appear to afford a firmer basis:
(1) The occupation of **Damascus by the ethnarch of King Aretas and the escape of the Apostle three years after his conversion (2 Corinthians 11:32-33; Acts 9:23-26). —*Damascenecoins bearing the effigy of Tiberius to the year 34 are extant, proving that at that time the city belonged to the Romans. It is impossible to assume that Aretas had received it as a gift from Tiberius, for the latter, especially in his last years, was hostile to the King of the Nabataeans whom Vitellius, Governor of Syria, was ordered to attack (Joseph., “Ant.”, XVIII, v, 13); neither could Aretas have possessed himself of it by force for, besides the unlikelihood of a direct aggression against the Romans, the expedition of Vitellius was at first directed not against Damascus but against Petra. It has therefore been somewhat plausibly conjectured that Caligula, subject as he was to such whims, had ceded it to him at the time of his accession (10 March, 37). As a matter of fact nothing is known of imperial coins of Damascus dating from either Caligula or Claudius. According to this hypothesis St. Paul’s conversion was not prior to 34, nor his escape from Damascus and his first visit to Jerusalem, to 37.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Which was exactly MY point, as well. Ben says no “ordinary” Jewish man would claim to be God. You and I both know that Jesus is no “ordinary” Jew.
S
Steven_John
Guest
Is cool with me.
Yes sharing with Middle eastern Muslims can be very delicate and extremely important.
I have and India Brother in our parish and he does not get Australian culture when we poke at each other. He is getting there but i guess at times we have mad him a bit lonely. “why do you treat each other so nasty?”
Thanks be to G-d we did not drive him away, i guess we will gently twist his brain to be more like ours and in the process we will grow greater sensitivity for others.
I reckon it is one of if not the biggest challenge we have where i live.
Recently a group of Indians appeared on a “talent” show on tv with curly wigs as the Jackson five. Well we had an American guest judge and he was not impressed offering he would have never gone on the show if he knew the skit would be on.
My cultural upbringing has me feel we are going way over the top, but i guess if American Nigros are offended we should re frame. The goal is to come together.
for me personally i am of Irish, French genes and have a field day poking at my own self. I love a laugh and endear my strange culture that is fast going.
Bless ya Bro pray well and stay well.
R
ready
Guest
Yes, we both know that Jesus is God.
D
Dale_Lerette
Guest
D
Dale_Lerette
Guest
C
Canto
Guest
Thanks. Welcome aboardExcellent points!
On top of all this, Jesus is Christianity.
J
JP_Marat
Guest
RESPONSE:
Please cite the passage in the New Testament in which Jesus **specifically claimed **to be God.
Hint: Jesus never did. But John’s Gospel, written in 95 to 110 AD, claims that Jesus came close. No such reports exist in the earlier Synoptic Gospels. Jeus was the Messiah but not divine himself.
And did you ever wonder why only in John’s Gospel does Jesus “rise” from the dead (under his own power). All other Gospels and Acts say Jesus was “raised from the dead” by God, just like Lazarus was.
Also check out the Old Testament. It is not claimed that the Messiah will be divine.
J
JP_Marat
Guest
RESPONSE:
Your facts are in error as shown by Act’s 2:2
"You who are Israelites, hear these words. Jesus the Nazorean was a man commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, **which God worked through him **in your midst, as you yourselves know.
This man, delivered up by the set plan and foreknowledge of God, you killed, using lawless men to crucify him.
But God raised him up, releasing him from the throes of death, because it was impossible for him to be held by it."
Through God’s power. Jesus, although the Messiah, being only human, did not have such power.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I thought we’ve been through this, before. But it may have been with another poster.
Who but God alone can tread the waves, according to the Old Testament?
Who but God alone can calm the seas, according to the Old Testament?
In the story where the rich young man asks Jesus, “Good Teacher…” and Jesus responds with, “Why do you call me Good? No one is good but God alone.” Notice that as Jesus runs through the commandments… all of them EXCEPT for those pertaining to Love of God. After the young man admits to keeping all the “Love of Neighbor” commandments, Jesus gets to the “Love of God” commandments. “Sell everything you have and follow Me”. THAT was the Love of God commandments that the Jews were to follow. Jesus is claiming that He is God.
Let me ask you something. Can anyone add anything to God’s Words? Or God’s Commandments? Jesus certainly does that in the “Sermon on the Mount”. “It has been said to you… But I say to you…”.
Let me add my own commentary to Matthew 5:21-22: **21"You have heard that it was said to your ancestors **(By God Himeself), **‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment…
**John’s Gospel, btw, was written to address people just like you - those who claimed Jesus wasn’t divine. That’s why John spoke so openly of Jesus’ divinity. That Gnostic schtick was put down then and every other time its raised its ugly head, my friend.
J
JP_Marat
Guest
RESPONSE:
You didn’t answer my question. Let me repeat it.
Please cite the passage in the New Testament in which Jesus specifically claimed to be God.
Suggested answer. Jesus didn’t because Jesus isn’t.
- Status