The Idle Tale - Luke 24:11

[Eucharisted]

I do! The problem is that what you say does not make sense to me.

In the Jewish household during the Roman Empire, if a Jew owned a slave, the slave would wait on the master while he ate. Jews would eat with napkins. If he crumbled the napkin up and left the table, it meant “I’m finished eating.” If he folded the napkin and left the table, it meant “I’m coming back.” Jesus folded the linen cloth, which meant “I’m back!”

That’s why Peter was perplexed. He saw Jesus’ body was missing, so he assumed someone had stolen the body. But than he noticed the linen cloth, and it confused him. He didn’t think Jesus had risen from the dead.

There, I fixed it for you. That’s what I meant.

 

[Ben_Masada]

As for Paul teaching the Jews to stop circumcising their children, as this quote of you here shows that you say Paul was accused of, where did you see he did just that, when only the Gentiles entering into the new faith were dispensed from it according to the decision of the first Concile of the then new Church which took place in Jerusalem. Paul and other Christians preaching Jesus the Christ only carried about what the Church had decided, no more! That it may have seemed otherwise to a number of Jews back then may have been, but it was nothing else than an impression, Ben.
Say, Ben, I thought you said you are not a scholar? Are you then telling us your rabbi’s position, or is it simply your own? Maintaining forever a false stand is very possible, you know. Adolf Hitler was very good at that. Some modern ideologists of false ideas too!

**Paul was accused of teaching the Jews among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, not to circumcise their children and to renounce the Jewish customs. That’s in Acts 21:21. Paul had no words in his defense, and silence is an admission of guilt.

Only 2 percent of Paul’s missionary work was among the Gentiles. The other 98 percent was among the Jews. He would operate like the cockoo bird, by getting into the Nazarene synagogues and robbing the Nazarenes of their converts in order to build his churches.

The converts of the Nazarenes would become full Jews. But Paul would tell them that there was no need for circumcision or to become Jewish first in order to follow Jesus. With that message, he would easily get the converts of the Nazarenes to revert to their prior condition of Gentiles. Finally, the Nazarene Council in Jerusalem gave them up and wrote them some recommendations to at least observe the Noahite laws. They had become Gentiles again. **

 

[Lapell]

**Lapell, I’ll tell you where Tertullus is coming from with that generalization in his statement about Paul in Court. Exactly 14 years before, Paul had come to Jerusalem to try to join the Sect of the Nazarenes and the Apostles would not accept him, not only for his history of persecution of the Nazarenes, but also because they were certain that Paul was either lying or crazy with his tale that he had met Jesus on the Road to Damascus.

It happens that among the Nazarenes there was an old friend of Paul’s, called Barnabas, who would put in a word for Paul to be accepted at least on a trial basis. Probably, Barnabas would watch him. Paul! Who could watch Paul? Paul had waited too long for that chance to preach his gospel in Jerusalem. The man went berserk spreading everwhere the news that Jesus was the Messiah, son of God, and that he had resurrected. Within 15 days only, he had caused such a havoc among the local Jews that they were after him to kill him. At this juncture, and in consideration to Barnabas, James and the Elders got him down to Caesarea and from there, they sent him back to Tarsus where he belonged.

Therefore, being reminded of that strategical salvation of Paul by the Nazarenes, Tertullus did not bother to verify the facts and considered Paul a ring-leader of the Sect of the Nazarenes. Because of that incident, the credibility of the Nazarenes was considerably hurt among mainstream Judaism. That’s the reason why Paul was forever banned from Israel and could never build a church in Israel soil, thanks especially to the Pharisees, whom Paul fed his grudge against till the end of his life in Rome.

So, what Tertullus said in Court about Paul was irrelevant for lack of appropriate information. **

Even though the High Priest and the representants of the Sanhedrin fully agreed with Tertullus’ presentatation of the charge?

 

[Lapell]

Also, my understanding of “where Tertullus came from” would have expected to include things about himself, not about Paul and Barnabas… Maybe my idea of this expression should be corrected, but I had thought it was supposed to have more to do with the person’s (here, Tertullus’) background, or else the detail steps in his search to gather the facts of the case…
And your saying that he did not do his homework in representing the party of the plaintiff looks rather like pure speculation!

 

[Ben_Masada]

Even though the High Priest and the representants of the Sanhedrin fully agreed with Tertullus’ presentatation of the charge?

Yes, they tolerated the Nazarenes but were not in love with them. Christians, they would hate them, because of Paul.

 

[Lapell]

Paul was accused of teaching the Jews among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, not to circumcise their children and to renounce the Jewish customs. That’s in Acts 21:21. Paul had no words in his defense, and silence is an admission of guilt.

No, sir, he replied to Tertullus’ presentation of the “facts” of the case. Then he appealed to Rome.

 

[Lapell]

And no, like you just said, he was not accused of telling the Jews not to circumcize their babies any more, even though YOU did say that he was in a previous post. I hope you will remember this in the future!

 

[Ben_Masada]

Also, my understanding of “where Tertullus came from” would have expected to include things about himself, not about Paul and Barnabas… Maybe my idea of this expression should be corrected, but I had thought it was supposed to have more to do with the person’s (here, Tertullus’) background, or else the detail steps in his search to gather the facts of the case…
And your saying that he did not do his homework in representing the party of the plaintiff looks rather like pure speculation!

I don’t think so, because if he had done his job as the professional that he was, he would not have linked Paul with the Nazarenes. That caused the Nazarenes a lot of loss of credibility.

 

[Lapell]

I don’t think so, because if he had done his job as the professional that he was, he would not have linked Paul with the Nazarenes. That caused the Nazarenes a lot of loss of credibility.

Do you think the passage was written after you had called the Nazarenes a sect different from the Christians as they were called later. Really, Ben! Going all by yourself, apart from Jews of all Judaism’s denominations, is prone to have led you to forge strange theories indeed, it seems. You had better follow the Torah rather than absolutely seeking for an ugly fight with us like you have been doing for months. I have tried to show you respect nevertheless, Ben, you should acknowledge that at least. But you prefered to act nastily towards us. I don’t think your posts for the most part have served your God as He fully deserve, unless you are really revolted against Him of course.
Even Job in his trials remained more respectful toward God than you have shown during all these threads you started. I am truly sorry for your behaviour, I don’t see anything truly Jewish in it… Shalom!

 

[Lapell]

I don’t believe you are a credible Jewish source, Ben. Are you even a religious Jew? I doubt it very much now…

 

[Ben_Masada]

Do you think the passage was written after you had called the Nazarenes a sect different from the Christians as they were called later. Really, Ben! Going all by yourself, apart from Jews of all Judaism’s denominations, is prone to have led you to forge strange theories indeed, it seems. You had better follow the Torah rather than absolutely seeking for an ugly fight with us like you have been doing for months. I have tried to show you respect nevertheless, Ben, you should acknowledge that at least. But you prefered to act nastily towards us. I don’t think your posts for the most part have served your God as He fully deserve, unless you are really revolted against Him of course.
Even Job in his trials remained more respectful toward God than you have shown during all these threads you started. I am truly sorry for your behaviour, I don’t see anything truly Jewish in it… Shalom!

Do you really find this post of yours above a fair evaluation of my Jewishness? You sound like someone who is desperately asking me to let you go, because your enforcements have failed to arrive. All you have to do is to stop addressing me your replies.