Messiah ben Joseph versus Messiah ben David

[Ben_Masada]

You really seem to believe “the Jesus” and “the Christ of Paul” are not the same person!

 

[Valke2]

You two should get a room

 

[Lapell]

**Stephen did not preceed Paul. This was about 15 years old already when Stephen was executed. But the case of Stephen is so clouded with interpolations that even his execution is put in doubt that it ever happened. And the reason must have been from a variety of sources.

Stephen was a zealous who must have got carried away with the fevour of a neophyte that he was and probably committed a religious blunder. Then, we have reasons not to believe that his execution ever happened because the Romans were already in charge of death penalties in Israel.

Ben: **

Do you say this because Jesus was not stoned? Why would the Romans be in charge of executions in cases of blasphemy according to laws not Roman, eh?

 

[Lapell]

**Lapell, we have been so long discussing with each other that I am sure I have explained this to you already. But I’ll try again.

The headquarters of the Nazarenes, followers of Jesus, was in Jerusalem, and they were coexisting peacefully with mainstream Judaism. About 30 years after Jesus had been gone, Paul showed up in Jerusalem trying to join the Sect, and was allowed to stay under the supervision of Barnabas, an old friend of his.

Insteady of watching tight, Barnabas let Paul go unleashed and the man caused a havoc in Jerusalem preaching around that Jesus was the Messiah, the son of God, and that he had resurrected. The local Jews got in such an uproar that they were after him to kill him for preaching apostasy in Israel. Paul was lucky to escape because the Nazarenes got him down to Ceasarea, and from there they shipped him back to Tarsus where he belonged. (Acts 9:29-31)

Now, ponder. If Paul was nearly killed for preaching those things above about Jesus, what were the Apostles and Nazarenes in general preaching about Jesus? I tell you that they were as surprised about Paul’s gospel as were the rest of the Jews. Otherwise, they kept silent for about 30 years in Jerusalem if they ever knew any of those things in the gospel of Paul. Sometimes it’s possible to apprehend the Truth from deduction.

Ben: **

Valke2, I am sorry for this, but Ben quite asked for it. Maybe those who view the threads started by Ben should be leaving us alone? But why?

Ben, you desperately want to dissociate Paul from the rest of the Church (Peter, James and John sons of Zabdee and the others). We just can’t buy it because Paul himself wrote that he met with the Apostles and they shook hands. Where do you see that Peter rejected what Paul was doing? In fact, he mentions him as “our brother Paul” and that what “we” preach is the same as what Paul preaches in all his letters. He mentions “difficult passages” which the enemies of the Church try to distort to suit their purposes (in one of the two Peter’s letters)…
This passage (from memory, sorry) tells of the unity between Peter and Paul, despite what Paul told about in his letter to the Galatians.
Like I said, Ben, toward Christianity, you are indeed acting like one from the outside. Let’s face it: you have a lot to learn about Christianity in order to speak of us… accurately!

 

[Lapell]

Where do you see that Peter rejected what Paul was doing? In fact, he mentions him as “our brother Paul” and that what “we” preach is the same as what Paul preaches in all his letters. He mentions “difficult passages” which the enemies of the Church try to distort to suit their purposes (in one of the two Peter’s letters)…

From Peter’s two letters also one can deduce some things.
In order to find out the Truth, many clues are far better than just a few!

 

[Ben_Masada]

Valke2, I am sorry for this, but Ben quite asked for it. Maybe those who view the threads started by Ben should be leaving us alone? But why?

Ben, you desperately want to dissociate Paul from the rest of the Church (Peter, James and John sons of Zabdee and the others). We just can’t buy it because Paul himself wrote that he met with the Apostles and they shook hands. Where do you see that Peter rejected what Paul was doing?

In fact, he mentions him as “our brother Paul” and that what “we” preach is the same as what Paul preaches in all his letters.

**So, Peter and Paul preached about the same thing. Well, let’s verify. Peter was a member of the Sect of the Nazarenes. The converts of the Nazarenes would become staunch defenders of the Jewish laws. Read Acts 21:20. Paul, on the other hand,
would teach the Jews to abandon Moses, to stop circumcising their children and to renounce the Jewish customs. Read Acts 21:21.

Peter would maintain Jesus’ teaching that he had not come to abolish the Jewish laws. Read Matthew 5:17. Paul would insist that the Jewish laws were abolished on the cross. Read Ephesians 2:15. Peter would preach that Jesus confirmed the Law. Read Matthew 5:18,19. Paul would preach that his Christ was the end of the Law. Read Romans 10:4. Should I continue or you have changed your mind about the difference between Peter and Paul?

Ben: **

 

[Ben_Masada]

Do you say this because Jesus was not stoned? Why would the Romans be in charge of executions in cases of blasphemy according to laws not Roman, eh?

**Jesus was never a blasphemer. He was not stone because he never blasphemed agains God or the Jewish religion. Blasphemers are those who make a god out of man in the Jewish religion, which never had anything to do with Greek or Roman Mythology.

Ben: **