So, they were not followers of Jesus of Nazareth before that event in Antioch? YOU must be kidding! In Antioch they first called them by the name “Christians”. The Jews in Jerusalem would not have called them by that name, I would think. They were not the ones who started calling themselves Christians. Other people in Antioch started calling them so. Is this so difficult for you to fathom?Why, because you have decided that they were Christians?
You must be kidding! Show me that they were Christians and we are in business. And regarding that speech delivered in Acts 2, the speaker was a Gentile and not Peter, perhaps even Luke himself, but only on the paper, because, in Jerusalem, that speech could never be delivered. Listen to how the speaker introduces himself.: “You who are Jews, indeed all of you staying in Jerusalem…” This speaker could never be a Jew and much less Peter, who could never be an anti-Semite to accuse the Jews with having crucified Jesus. (Acts 2:23) It’s better to think of this as an interpolation by Luke who wrote this more than 50 years after the alleged fact.
Well, did God not tell Moses to make the Tent of the Meeting and the things used in the sacrificial system according to the model that He showed him on the Mount?Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. (Mt 5:18)
The Temple was a miniature replica of the world and an architectural model of the universe fashioned by God.
Actually, what the Cross meant to Paul was because of Jesus crucified, not merely because of the cross as an object. The cross in itself was senseless until Jesus of Nazareth was crucified for the sins of all.Thank you! You have confirmed my views. He gloried himself in the cross, because the cross meant almost everything to him.
Ben, Jews may have written the Hebrew Bible, but it’s Christians who wrote the New Testament. O.K.? As for the contension, it was also between Jesus and the Pharisees, and even more between Jesus and the Sadducees and the scribes… It’s not because you don’t believe it happened that it necessarily did not happen! (I know, you will tell me that it’s not because I state that it happened that it necessarily happened. But one thing is certain: it either happened or it didn’t? Right?matahari;5134209 said:__________________________________________________________________________This has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Besides, all the alleged contension between Jesus and the Pharisees, was not Jesus but Paul, because the Pharisees never allowed him to build a church in Israeli soil. That’s all.
Were there just Jews going to the Temple of Jerusalem? What about the God-fearing Gentiles?Why, because you have decided that they were Christians?
You must be kidding! Show me that they were Christians and we are in business. And regarding that speech delivered in Acts 2, the speaker was a Gentile and not Peter, perhaps even Luke himself, but only on the paper, because, in Jerusalem, that speech could never be delivered. Listen to how the speaker introduces himself.: “You who are Jews, indeed all of you staying in Jerusalem…” This speaker could never be a Jew and much less Peter, who could never be an anti-Semite to accuse the Jews with having crucified Jesus. (Acts 2:23) It’s better to think of this as an interpolation by Luke who wrote this more than 50 years after the alleged fact.
This is a perfect description of an anthropomorphic God.God chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion which he favored. He built his shrine like the heavens, like the earth which he founded forever. He chose David his servant, took him from the sheepfold. From tending sheep God brought him, to shepherd Jacob, his people, Israel, his heritage. He shepherded them with a pure heart; with skilled hands he guided them. (Ps 78:68-72)
In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple. Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they veiled their faces, with two they veiled their feet, and with two they hovered aloft. “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts!” they cried one to the other. “All the earth is filled with his glory!” At the sound of that cry, the frame of the door shook and the house was filled with smoke. (Isa 6:1-4)
Why are you changing the subject?There are people who say that the miracles God did through Moses (the ten plagues of Egypt among them) never happened. Some other say that only some of them happened. And there are others who say they all happened. Do we have a way to know who is right?
And yet people make up their minds one way or another. On what basis?
Were there just Jews going to the Temple of Jerusalem? What about the God-fearing Gentiles?
No, there were Gentiles too, but they were not Christians.
In such a case, it would certainly be appropriate that Peter (yes, sir, that was him!) would specify to the part of the crowd that was Jewish " You who are Jews", wouldn’t it?
**No, it wouldn’t. Peter, as a Jew, would never address to Jews as if he were a Gentile. **
Now, to accuse the Jews of having crucified Jesus is one thing. But do you find in that speech that he is cursing and condemning them?
** Oh! most definitely! For Luke to write down that accusation that the Jews had crucified Jesus was such a terrible curse that even after 2.000 years we are still paying for it. That’s why Pope John 23rd asked publicly the Jesus to forgive Christianity for that antisemitic false accusation.**
To condemn one’s deed is not necessarily to condemn the one who performed it… Unless you are prone to do condemn that one person?
He did not condemn our deed. He falsely accused us of something we did not do it. And because of that false accusation we have become a curse in the eyes of the world. Read Psalm 44:11-26.
Two things: First, that’s a cop-out to add insult to injure.And have you noticed that Peter adds: “I know that you were acting out of ignorance, you and your leaders”. How would it mean condemnation of the people whom he was speaking to? Tell me…
Yep. Quoted from the Holy Scriptures…This is a perfect description of an anthropomorphic God.
Lapell;5136550:
Actually, none in that crowd were already followers of Jesus of Nazareth then. Only the men prophetizing, caught by the Holy Spirit (much the same way as the 70 men with Eldad and the other one (sorry, I don’t have a Bible by me right now) prophetizing in the camp, unlike the rest, causing Joshua to ask Moses to stop them, which Moses gently refused)Were there just Jews going to the Temple of Jerusalem? What about the God-fearing Gentiles?
No, there were Gentiles too, but they were not Christians.
Lapell;5136550:
Ben, I don’t see why a Jew couldn’t tell another Jew: “You who are a Jew”, if only to point him out a thing or two that should make sense to him as a Jew… In such a case, I see no nonsense there.In such a case, it would certainly be appropriate that Peter (yes, sir, that was him!) would specify to the part of the crowd that was Jewish " You who are Jews", wouldn’t it?
**No, it wouldn’t. Peter, as a Jew, would never address to Jews as if he were a Gentile. **
Lapell;5136550:
Ben, dear Ben!!! Peter points out the wrong, but not in condemning those who did it! Or if he did, show me from the text itself, please! People have hated Jews before Jesus’ time. The Book of Esther was written way before! You may argue that it was fiction, but it certainly was a reflection of an actual situation faced by the Jews.Now, to accuse the Jews of having crucified Jesus is one thing. But do you find in that speech that he is cursing and condemning them?
** Oh! most definitely! For Luke to write down that accusation that the Jews had crucified Jesus was such a terrible curse that even after 2.000 years we are still paying for it. That’s why Pope John 23rd asked publicly the Jesus to forgive Christianity for that antisemitic false accusation.**
BTW, it’s surprising how so many people have toward the Catholic Church and the Catholic faith the same gut reaction of hatred that so many have toward Judaism and the Jews… even though we have not been as pogromed and murdered as you Jews have been. But toward us the people are more subtle, more sophisticated… so as to make it a laughable thing if we complain. It’s more hidden…
About Pope John 23rd, you are misrepresenting it. The forgiveness he asked was towards the sons and daughters of the Church who participated in antisemitic libels and acts.
Lapell;5136550:
Yeah, they have told you that the accusation was false. But I am afraid that the accusation was true. The Jewish crowd followed the leaders, who had assumed that Jesus had uttered a blasphemy. Pointing the ignorance factor had a purpose for anyone one reading or listening to the words of that speech in the Acts of the Apostles, so that none should condemn the Jewish people. But Marcion and his followers, and then others, chose to ignore this and to go on with condemning the Jews for deicide, which makes no sense since they were so sure they were condemning a man and not a God!!!He did not condemn our deed. He falsely accused us of something we did not do it. And because of that false accusation we have become a curse in the eyes of the world. Read Psalm 44:11-26.
Would you blame the trees for their existence if anyone chose to climb them and happened to have fallen down from it and got hurt? Same with the text of the Acts of the Apostles!
What Peter said (and I repeat, especially after what I have written in the previous 4 posts of mine, that it WAS him) he did because he believed what he believed, that Jesus was the Messiah promised by God and expected by the people of Israel, and that Jesus resurrected from the dead. So in HIS view he wasn’t adding insult to injure. But you’d refuse to put yourself in his shoe without any preconceived ideas. People are better (AND worse, it is true) than we think…Two things: First, that’s a cop-out to add insult to injure.
And second, stop saying that the speaker was Peter, because it was not, and I have already given you enough logical reasons.
What Peter said (and I repeat, especially after what I have written in the previous 4 posts of mine, that it WAS him)
Ben Masada;5138490:
Are you joking? You are comparing people who can think with trees! The accusations remain false. Your own Pope John 23rd would be that stupid to ask publicly that the Jewish People forgave Christianity for the false accusation that the Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus. The real antichrists are those who bring in their soul the imprinting of this kind of antisemitism.Yeah, they have told you that the accusation was false. But I am afraid that the accusation was true. The Jewish crowd followed the leaders, who had assumed that Jesus had uttered a blasphemy. Pointing the ignorance factor had a purpose for anyone one reading or listening to the words of that speech in the Acts of the Apostles, so that none should condemn the Jewish people. But Marcion and his followers, and then others, chose to ignore this and to go on with condemning the Jews for deicide, which makes no sense since they were so sure they were condemning a man and not a God!!!
Would you blame the trees for their existence if anyone chose to climb them and happened to have fallen down from it and got hurt? Same with the text of the Acts of the Apostles!