My Opinion: No Piercing At Jesus' Side

[Ben_Masada]

Just want to point out that even if jesus claimed he was the Messiah, this would not make him a blasphemer. I don’t even think saying he would be resurrected would make him a blasphemer. And saying he was the son of God might be construed as slang for righteous if I recall how that term was used back in the day.

You are right. I am changing the term from blasphemer to deranged. For a Jew to claim that he is God, he must first have lost his mind.

Ben:

 

[swariffin]

Very much better! However, I am not sure your Catholic authorities would agree with your assertion, because you have cancelled out the role of divine inspiration. Yes, Luke was not Jewish, but how about the spirit that inspired him, it doesn’t count? Besides, Luke leaves no one in the dark when he declares to Theophilus that he was reporting ALL about Jesus until the end of his life on earth. (Acts 1:1,2) How could he miss the massacre of the kids in Bethlehem? How could he miss Egypt in the life of Jesus? I’ll tell why. Because those things never happened. They were plagiarized from the Tanach to be fabricated in terms of prophecies to enhance Jesus’ credibility as the one.

Ben:

Not at all. Even the Catholic priest told me about Luke. For sure, Matthew is correct because Matthew was a Jew and an educated Jew for sure. Luke may have a different view about Jewish tradition, but the message is the word of God, not the Mizna not Talbut. We don’t bother for Luke’s missing idea about the kids massacre. You seems to believe in a non Jewish Luke more to the Jewish Matthew, to me.

Moreover, the Tanach you mentioned was not in the complete collections of the OT until 90AD, after the Jewish conference in Yamnia. Even the OT in Hebrew with the insertion of the vowel (Masoretic text) was not even exist yet at the first century.

 

[Ben_Masada]

And lastly: I didn’t know there were Jews who don’t believe Jesus was a magician and blasphemer, boiling in excrement in hell. Thanks for the info. That’s a step in the right direction for the Jews!

There are indeed many Jews who think so about Jesus. But for two reasons: The first is lack of knowledge. The other reason, they are not to blame for, because such a development has taken place throughout almost two thousand years of antisemitic persecutions perpetrated in the name of Jesus, when Jesus never had anything to do with them.

Ben:

 

[swariffin]

The Jewish Sect of the Nazarenes were indeed formed by followers of Jesus but they were 100 percent according to Judaism. Their troubles with mainstream Judaism started with Paul, because they had helped Paul escape when he was about to stand trial for preaching apostasy in Jerusalem. That’s why Tertullus connected Paul with them.

If they are 100% Judaism, why did they were affraid of the Jews? That means they were the Jews, but they were the Christian, the follower of Jesus. What Jesus taught was the true Thorah, not the Mizna and Talbut of the Judaism. For sure, the Jew did not cure people during Sabbath, which was criticized heavily by Jesus. That means the Thorah in the mind of Jesus and his follower was different than the Thorah that Kayafas and the gang had.

Jesus was a religious Jew and so were all the Nazarenes. Breaking bread was Christian and Christians did it in churches. Jesus and the Nazarenes congregated in synagogues and did not behave like Christians. Many of the Nazarenes converts did turn back into Gentiles because of Paul’ missionary work in the synagogues of the Nazarenes throughout Asia Minor. But because Paul was not able to start a church from scratch. So, he would fish his converts in the synanogues of the Jews.

The breaking of the bread was done even before Paul was converted to become the follower of Jesus. Jesus celebrated the breaking of the bread and order the apostle to do so in memory of him. For sure, Jesus’ follower when entering the synagogues would never discussed Jesus’ teaching. You gotta be kidding if you believe they were discussing about Jesus in the synagogues in Jerusalem during that time. It is just like you are preaching about Judaism in Iran. Paul started his service not only from the synagogues of the Jews, he also started his service from nothing at all in Athena, the heart of Greek civilization, and gained converts there.

The only thing logical about Jesus being the Messiah is that Paul was the first to start spreading the news about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. It’s written in Acts 11:26. There were no Christians before Antioch and Paul. Otherwise, we have to admit that there is contradiction in the NT. Are you ready for that?

There were Christians prior to Paul, the one Tertulus called as the Sect of Nazarene.

Last but not least, you fell in your own trap. You say that outside Jerusalem the power of the Jewish leaders was weak. Nevertheless, before going to Damascus, Paul went to Jerusalem for letters to arrest Nazarenes in Damascus as if the Jewish leaders were so powerful that they had even jurisdiction over another country, as to
send envoy to arrest citizens in another country because they dared to believe differently.
It means you dropped the cards on the table too early and lost the game. Good luck next time.

Ben:

Damascus was also within the control of the Roman. The Roman did not care a damn thing about Judaism. So, to take care of the business of the religious quarrel of the Jews, Paul get the authorization from the Jewish leader from the center of Judaism. Such letter was the paperwork that Paul must show to the Romans there. Paul definitely could not do a damn thing in Damascus out of the knowledge of the Romans. Paul knew that, since he was also a Roman citizen. I am not losing the game because the truth is there.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Damascus was also within the control of the Roman. The Roman did not care a damn thing about Judaism. So, to take care of the business of the religious quarrel of the Jews, Paul get the authorization from the Jewish leader from the center of Judaism. Such letter was the paperwork that Paul must show to the Romans there. Paul definitely could not do a damn thing in Damascus out of the knowledge of the Romans. Paul knew that, since he was also a Roman citizen. I am not losing the game because the truth is there.

Paul never worked for the Romans, but for the High Priest before the Road to Damascus. If the Jewish authorities could not do much inside Israel proper,
much less in the province under the power of another Governor. Only Caesar had the authority to cancel power between Roman Governors. It’s only obvious that Paul lied with regards to those letters from Jerusalem to Damascus.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Not at all. Even the Catholic priest told me about Luke. For sure, Matthew is correct because Matthew was a Jew and an educated Jew for sure. Luke may have a different view about Jewish tradition, but the message is the word of God, not the Mizna not Talbut. We don’t bother for Luke’s missing idea about the kids massacre. You seems to believe in a non Jewish Luke more to the Jewish Matthew, to me.

Moreover, the Tanach you mentioned was not in the complete collections of the OT until 90AD, after the Jewish conference in Yamnia. Even the OT in Hebrew with the insertion of the vowel (Masoretic text) was not even exist yet at the first century.

The writer of the first gospel was not Matthew the Apostle. Two reasons:
The first is too much non-Jewish stuff in the gospel. And Matthew the Apostle was a Nazarene Jew. None of the writings of the Nazarenes was approved into the Canon of the NT in 327 CE by the Fathers of the Church, due to their controversial character vis-a-vis the writings of Paul.

 

[swariffin]

Paul never worked for the Romans, but for the High Priest before the Road to Damascus. If the Jewish authorities could not do much inside Israel proper,
much less in the province under the power of another Governor. Only Caesar had the authority to cancel power between Roman Governors. It’s only obvious that Paul lied with regards to those letters from Jerusalem to Damascus.

Ben:

If Paul want to arrest the Jewish Christians in Damascus, he should have gained the approval from the Roman leaders there. How could he convince the Roman leader in Damascus of his mission? Surely the letter from the Judaism authority in order to settle Judaism issue. No need for Paul to work for the Roman. Perhaps the letter was written in Latin, instead of in Hebrew or Greek.

If the Jewish leaders were that strong to have power even out of the country, how could the Roman destroy the temple in 70AD. That is the undeniable fact.

 

[swariffin]

The writer of the first gospel was not Matthew the Apostle. Two reasons:
The first is too much non-Jewish stuff in the gospel. And Matthew the Apostle was a Nazarene Jew. None of the writings of the Nazarenes was approved into the Canon of the NT in 327 CE by the Fathers of the Church, due to their controversial character vis-a-vis the writings of Paul.

The first gospel as widely known was written by Mark, you are correct. But D’cancona in the book “Eyewitness to Jesus” after examining the fragments of Matthew’s gospel using electron microscope, and papirology suggests that the gospel of Matthew was written in 50AD, preceding Mark’s.

 

[CassiusLonginus]

because such a development has taken place throughout almost two thousand years of antisemitic persecutions perpetrated in the name of Jesus, when Jesus never had anything to do with them.

Ben:

More “anti-semitism” directed toward Catholics. (‘anti-catholicism’ doesn’t inspire the same fear and hatred as ‘anti-semitism’, oh well).

The first three hundred years of Christianity was an underground movement because of persecution from both Jews and the civil authorities of Rome.

Moreover, you act like persecutions over the last 2000 years only go one way. It’s always violence perpetrated on the Jews by the Christians, isn’t it? Sure. And we all know that Pius XII was ‘silent’ about the Jews, and that he was “hitler’s pope” and “didn’t lift a finger” to help the Jews.

Yeah, just more bigotry…but it’s directed at Catholics so hey, you can get away with it. You won’t lose your job or be thrown in jail for saying so. Hmmm:shrug:

 

[Ben_Masada]

More “anti-semitism” directed toward Catholics. (‘anti-catholicism’ doesn’t inspire the same fear and hatred as ‘anti-semitism’, oh well).

The first three hundred years of Christianity was an underground movement because of persecution from both Jews and the civil authorities of Rome.

Moreover, you act like persecutions over the last 2000 years only go one way. It’s always violence perpetrated on the Jews by the Christians, isn’t it? Sure. And we all know that Pius XII was ‘silent’ about the Jews, and that he was “hitler’s pope” and “didn’t lift a finger” to help the Jews.

Yeah, just more bigotry…but it’s directed at Catholics so hey, you can get away with it. You won’t lose your job or be thrown in jail for saying so. Hmmm:shrug:

Well my friend, you are right almost in all counts; what can I say? If you pick up a book about the Christian Crusades, the Christian “Autos-da-Fe” of the Inquisition
and throughout all Christian blood libels, it could cause a lot of embarrassment.

You say that for about 300 years Jews and Roman authorities persecuted Christians! I am sorry to hear that in spite of other things you exhibit also ignorance of History. Can you prove to me that Jews persecuted Christians ever in History? No, you can’t. You threw that one as a shield to hide the black page of the Church. That’s too low a punch. Let alone the unfairness that it reflects.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

The first gospel as widely known was written by Mark, you are correct. But D’cancona in the book “Eyewitness to Jesus” after examining the fragments of Matthew’s gospel using electron microscope, and papirology suggests that the gospel of Matthew was written in 50AD, preceding Mark’s.

When I say the first, second, third and fourth gospels I am referring to the actual form of the NT. I know that the first gospel to be written was the one according to Mark soon after the destruction of the Temple. Luke in 75 CE, Matthew in 85 CE and John at the end of the First Century. My sources are sponsored by the Bishops’ Committee of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

If Paul want to arrest the Jewish Christians in Damascus, he should have gained the approval from the Roman leaders there. How could he convince the Roman leader in Damascus of his mission? Surely the letter from the Judaism authority in order to settle Judaism issue. No need for Paul to work for the Roman. Perhaps the letter was written in Latin, instead of in Hebrew or Greek.

If the Jewish leaders were that strong to have power even out of the country, how could the Roman destroy the temple in 70AD. That is the undeniable fact.

There were no Jewish christians in Damascus. They were Jewish Nazarenes followers of Jesus’ teachings. The first Christians started with Paul in Antioch.
Read Acts 11:26.

 

[swariffin]

There were no Jewish christians in Damascus. They were Jewish Nazarenes followers of Jesus’ teachings. The first Christians started with Paul in Antioch.
Read Acts 11:26.

All followers of Jesus = Christian. Matthew and also John were also Jewish followers of Jesus called as Sect of Nazarene by a roman prosecutor named Tertulus. Sect of Nazarene was a Roman terminology, because they detected a difference in the teaching. Tertulus definitely was a Roman name.

 

[swariffin]

When I say the first, second, third and fourth gospels I am referring to the actual form of the NT. I know that the first gospel to be written was the one according to Mark soon after the destruction of the Temple. Luke in 75 CE, Matthew in 85 CE and John at the end of the First Century. My sources are sponsored by the Bishops’ Committee of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine.

Ben:

Which Bishops? The Roman Catholic’ or the Non-Catholic’ bishops?

 

[swariffin]

Well my friend, you are right almost in all counts; what can I say? If you pick up a book about the Christian Crusades, the Christian “Autos-da-Fe” of the Inquisition
and throughout all Christian blood libels, it could cause a lot of embarrassment.

You say that for about 300 years Jews and Roman authorities persecuted Christians! I am sorry to hear that in spite of other things you exhibit also ignorance of History. Can you prove to me that Jews persecuted Christians ever in History? No, you can’t. You threw that one as a shield to hide the black page of the Church. That’s too low a punch. Let alone the unfairness that it reflects.

Ben:

Who killed Stephen then? the Roman? Jewish Christians were expelled and barred to enter the synagogues in 90AD following the Yamnia conference. What did Paul do before he was converted to Christianity with respect to the followers of Jesus?

 

[Ben_Masada]

Who killed Stephen then? the Roman? Jewish Christians were expelled and barred to enter the synagogues in 90AD following the Yamnia conference. What did Paul do before he was converted to Christianity with respect to the followers of Jesus?

To begin with, the case of Stephen is so loaded with interpolations that it has become much more probable that it didn’t happen. And Stephen was a Nazarene and not Christian.

Christians being barred to enter the synagogues in 90 CE could be true and advisable. What in the hell had Christians to do with synagogues? They had learned with Paul to get into the synagogues and mess up with the Jewish religion. They should have not only been barred but also gotten a few punches to stop interfering with other people’s places of prayer. Intead of going after Gentiles, they would prefer to fish converts in the synagogues of the Jews, just as Paul loved to do.

Regarding Paul, he never persecuted a single Christian. One does not found a religion to persecute the adepts. Those followers of Jesus were Nazarenes, and they never had anything to do with being Christians. Try again something else because you are too ill-informed.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Which Bishops? The Roman Catholic’ or the Non-Catholic’ bishops?

Roman Catholic Bishops. Published by the Catholic Book Publishing CO.
Saint Joseph Edition of the New American Bible. Sponsored by the Vatican II Constitution on Divine Revelation.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

If Paul want to arrest the Jewish Christians in Damascus, he should have gained the approval from the Roman leaders there. How could he convince the Roman leader in Damascus of his mission? Surely the letter from the Judaism authority in order to settle Judaism issue. No need for Paul to work for the Roman. Perhaps the letter was written in Latin, instead of in Hebrew or Greek.

If the Jewish leaders were that strong to have power even out of the country, how could the Roman destroy the temple in 70AD. That is the undeniable fact.

There were NO Jewish Christians in Damascus. Those followers of the Way were Nazarenes. Christians started with Paul in Antioch. Read Acts 11:26.

 

[Ben_Masada]

All followers of Jesus = Christian. Matthew and also John were also Jewish followers of Jesus called as Sect of Nazarene by a roman prosecutor named Tertulus. Sect of Nazarene was a Roman terminology, because they detected a difference in the teaching. Tertulus definitely was a Roman name.

Tertullus, Roman prosecutor! I rest my case with you. Sorry. At least for now. You win. Congratulations.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

What is this supposed to be a threat? And regarding pushing Arabs into the desert and leaving them there, you find scandalous, but to push Jews into the sea and watch them drown is not. As I can see, as long as the shoe is causing calous only on the feet of the Jews, it’s okay with you.

You either did not understand my post or found comfortable to make some alteration to serve your purpose. I said that when the Arabs attacked us in 1948, they made no secret about their intentions to push the Jews into the sea and have the “Palestinians” return later and take over their homes and land. Then, I said that we should have paid them with the same coin and pushed them into the desert. Were we doing anything different from their purpose? No, but to you it would be different because Arabs cannot be pushed into the deserts. But it’s okay for Jews to be pushed into the sea.I got you and do understand your being cristal clear.

Ben: