The Missing Passover

[Ben_Masada]

My question was Did the Jewish leader during 30 - 33 AD believe that Jesus was a Rabbi? It is good for you to believe that Jesus is 20% correct. That means you make Jesus as 20% Rabbi. But still, the majority won. That was why Barabas was freed instead of Jesus.

**IMO I think they did, since Nicodemus was a Jewish leader and he did address to Jesus as a Rabbi. (John 3:2) No, by believing 20 percent of the NT, I do not make of Jesus a 20 percent Rabbi. Jesus was 100 percent Rabbi.

I don’t believe even .1 percent that there was such a thing as a choice put up by Pilate between Jesus and Barabas. This is an later interpolation in order to transfer the responsibility of the death of Jesus from the Romans to the Jews. If fact, Pope John 23rd asked the Jews publicly for forgiveness for this antisemitic false accusation that has lasted for two thousand years and has caused many deaths and hatred of Jews. **

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;5117085:

The other Jews crucified by the Roman, have done sins according to God.

**Well my friend, according to I Kings 8:46, there is no man who does not sin. Jesus was a man upon earth. So, the Scriptures but be true. **

 

[Ben_Masada]

I disagree with the Crusaders too, Ben. That was not what Jesus has taught. I do feel sorry and have my deepest sympathy for the victims. But, I must admit that I owe those crusaders. Without them, there would be all mosques in the land of Judea, including the land you are staying now.

Thank you Swariffin, but to decrease the number of mosques in the Land of Israel is no reason for a Jew to love the Crusades. But how could
a Pope, a man who could not err in spiritual decision, to call for a Crusade?

 

[ralphinal]

Thank you Swariffin, but to decrease the number of mosques in the Land of Israel is no reason for a Jew to love the Crusades. But how could
a Pope, a man who could not err in spiritual decision, to call for a Crusade?

The call for the Crusades were political in nature based on Spiritual and political issues

 

[Ben_Masada]

Why did Paul able to get the letter of authority from the Jewish leader before he went to Damascus?

He never did, because it doesn’t make sense. The headquarters of the Nazarenes was in Jerusalem, and Paul goes to Jerusalem for letters to arrests Nazarenes in Damascus? How can that make sense.? There is another point that does not make sense. Even in the Land of Israel, the Jews had lost the power of Jurisprudence, which was in the hands of Rome. How could Israel send an envoy to arrest citizens of another province as Syria was? It makes even less sense. But then again, why did Luke report such a nonsense? To build a background for the ficticious encounter of Paul with Jesus on the Road to Damascus. And then, we know of this from Paul himself whose word was worthy no credibility.

 

[Lapell]

Then why did Paul declare that He was called by Jesus? and even beheaded in the name of Jesus?

BTW, when exactly the 14 day of the month of Nissan in 2009 according to Jewish calendar? Hope that the Passover meal of yours bring you closer to God.

I was told that it took place on our Easter Sunday (including the Easter’s eve)…
Anyhow… shalom everyone!

 

[Lapell]

He never did, because it doesn’t make sense. The headquarters of the Nazarenes was in Jerusalem, and Paul goes to Jerusalem for letters to arrests Nazarenes in Damascus? How can that make sense.? There is another point that does not make sense. Even in the Land of Israel, the Jews had lost the power of Jurisprudence, which was in the hands of Rome. How could Israel send an envoy to arrest citizens of another province as Syria was? It makes even less sense. But then again, why did Luke report such a nonsense? To build a background for the ficticious encounter of Paul with Jesus on the Road to Damascus. And then, we know of this from Paul himself whose word was worthy no credibility.

Why should it not make some sense? The Jewish authority back then was the High Priest… Any High Priest in office today?

 

[Lapell]

Why did Paul able to get the letter of authority from the Jewish leader before he went to Damascus?

Yes, but then, he was Saul, not Paul!

 

[Ben_Masada]

Why should it not make some sense? The Jewish authority back then was the High Priest… Any High Priest in office today?

**You did not understand my post. What does not make sense is that Paul went to Jerusalem for letters to persecute Nazarenes in Damascus when they were in Jerusalem in much greater number than anywhere else. And it does not make sense that Israel would give letters to arrest citizens of another country when Israel had lost its jurisprudence even over Israel itself. If you ask me, that never happened. It must have been another blunder of Luke’s. Just use Logic and commonsense. **

 

[Ben_Masada]

The call for the Crusades were political in nature based on Spiritual and political issues

This is no answer to my question. The other Crusades, people acted less cruelly because the Church was not behind them. But the 4th Crusade was the cruelest of them all because the masses had the blessing of Pope Innocence
III and felt fully licensed to give vent to their cruelties. The infability of the head of Christianity had gone to the birds.

 

[ralphinal]

This is no answer to my question. The other Crusades, people acted less cruelly because the Church was not behind them. But the 4th Crusade was the cruelest of them all because the masses had the blessing of Pope Innocence
III and felt fully licensed to give vent to their cruelties. The infability of the head of Christianity had gone to the birds.

Please allow me to educate you.

The Pope is ONLY infallible in matters of FAITH and MORALS. That is all. He cannot be considered infallible in anything else. Even then, he is only infallible when teaching AS THE POPE. Rank and file Catholics are not EVER considered infallible in any way.

Now, about your 4th Crusade.

The Fourth Crusade (1199–1204) was originally designed to conquer Muslim Jerusalem by means of an invasion through Egypt. Instead, in April 1204, the Crusaders of Western Europe invaded and conquered the Christian (Eastern Orthodox) city of Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire. This is seen as one of the final acts in the Great Schism between the Eastern Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church.

Please show me where in that passage the pope taught anything about faith and morals.

Historian Geoffrey Hindley’s The Crusades: Islam and Christianity in the Struggle for World Supremacy mentions that in 1202, Innocent III “forbade” the Crusaders of Western Christendom from committing any atrocious acts on their Christian neighbours, despite wanting to secure papal authority over Byzantium (Hindley 143, 152). This letter was concealed from the bulk of the army and the attack proceeded. The citizens of Zara made reference to the fact that they were fellow Catholics by hanging banners marked with crosses from their windows and the walls of the city, but nevertheless the city fell after a brief siege. Both the Venetians and the crusaders were immediately threatened with excommunication for this by Innocent III.

Notice that the Pope forbade them from doing what they did. That would be good. Again, where did he err in teaching matters of faith and morals?

As an epilogue to the event, Pope Innocent III, the man who had unintentionally launched the ill-fated expedition, thundered against the crusaders thus:

“How, indeed, will the church of the Greeks, no matter how severely she is beset with afflictions and persecutions, return into ecclesiastical union and to a devotion for the Apostolic See, when she has seen in the Latins only an example of perdition and the works of darkness, so that she now, and with reason, detests the Latins more than dogs? As for those who were supposed to be seeking the ends of Jesus Christ, not their own ends, who made their swords, which they were supposed to use against the pagans, drip with Christian blood,* they have spared neither religion, nor age, nor sex. They have committed incest, adultery, and fornication before the eyes of men. They have exposed both matrons and virgins, even those dedicated to God, to the sordid lusts of boys. Not satisfied with breaking open the imperial treasury and plundering the goods of princes and lesser men, they also laid their hands on the treasures of the churches and, what is more serious, on their very possessions. They have even ripped silver plates from the altars and have hacked them to pieces among themselves. They violated the holy places and have carried off crosses and relics.”

Again, the Pope was not taching anything in error.

I cannot see how you are getting that infallibility had anything to do with it.

Ben, please, you seem to be somewhat intellegent. Give up this illogical hatred of Christianity and live in peace with your fellow man.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

**You did not understand my post. What does not make sense is that Paul went to Jerusalem for letters to persecute Nazarenes in Damascus when they were in Jerusalem in much greater number than anywhere else. And it does not make sense that Israel would give letters to arrest citizens of another country when Israel had lost its jurisprudence even over Israel itself. If you ask me, that never happened. It must have been another blunder of Luke’s. Just use Logic and commonsense. **

Wasn’t Saul Jewish? Why would it have been odd for a Jew to ask other Jews for letters to arrest followers of Christ?

I assume when you refer to Israel, you’re speaking of the Jews. Didn’t the Jews hand Christ over to the Romans for persecution?

 

[Ben_Masada]

Wasn’t Saul Jewish? Why would it have been odd for a Jew to ask other Jews for letters to arrest followers of Christ?

I assume when you refer to Israel, you’re speaking of the Jews. Didn’t the Jews hand Christ over to the Romans for persecution?

**From the moment Paul apostated from Judaism to found Christianity, he ceased being Jewish.

Your question back to me about Paul getting letters to persecute Nazarenes in Damascus shows that you still haven’t understood my post. It says that Paul went for letters from the High Priest to arrest Nazarenes in Damascus. It doesn’t make sense that Israel, the Country would send an envoy to arrest citizens of another country when the Jewish leaders had no power even over Israel itself.

No, the Jews did not hand Jesus over to the Romans. Not Jesus of all men who had come to confirm the most precious thing of the Jew, which is the Law. Therefore, it makes no sense to accuse the Jews with the death of Jesus. Jesus was crucified on political charges.**

 

[Ben_Masada]

Please allow me to educate you.

The Pope is ONLY infallible in matters of FAITH and MORALS. That is all. He cannot be considered infallible in anything else. Even then, he is only infallible when teaching AS THE POPE. Rank and file Catholics are not EVER considered infallible in any way.

Now, about your 4th Crusade.[/quoe]

 

[rinnie]

Jesus was a Jew. A Jew cannot be God.

WRONG AGAIN BEN. God can be whoever he wants. God is God he does not answer to anyone. Especially you Ben. God can reveal himself however and whatever way he chooses. He is God.

Funny though isn’t it. Jesus really was the king of the Jews. But the Jews denied him. And now to hear you say that Jesus was a Jew. Well you sure don’t even accept him now do you Ben! I really do pray for you ben, because I really don’t think you realize what you say and do. You are always proven wrong, ALWAYS. But you still cannot accept the truth. It really a waste of time to discuss things with you, but I can see why people do. They take that time to show others the truth. And if not for you lies we could not reveal the truth. SO see a good can come out of a bad after all. And just like Jesus (GOD) the truth and the light STANDS ALONE!

 

[rinnie]

BRIT72;5115546:

How about the other Jews crucified by the Romans? Were not they also passover lambs? I hope you don’t suppose that Jesus was the only Jew crucified by the Romans. Read Josephus.

You tell me Ben. What does the O.T. say. Does it say the Savior will come into the world or Savior’s.

Did the other Jews crucified with Jesus come back and did they take away our sins. I think not. SO the answer is easy NO. THey were not the LAMB OF GOD. Did the other Jews forgive sin? Please Ben!

 

[qui_est_ce]

Please allow me to educate you.

The Pope is ONLY infallible in matters of FAITH and MORALS. That is all. He cannot be considered infallible in anything else. Even then, he is only infallible when teaching AS THE POPE. Rank and file Catholics are not EVER considered infallible in any way.

Ben:

** You don’t see faith and morality in the attempt to unite the two Christian factions: Constantinople and Rome?**

The whole word at the time was pretty ignorant. Communications were not what they are today. You are making a judgement about the state of mind of a human being (the Pop). I guess you were there in his head, making the decision “Hmm, I’ll just send a bunch of yahoos out there to destroy churches.” In spite of the fact that history and the Pope’s personal correspondence proves you wrong. BTW, not all were ignorant. My ancestors were successful farmers and rode in the Crusades. But I guess you were there because you make the following statement:

ben:

A Pope of all people in the world is supposed to possess some power of premonition to know that if he blessed a horde of ignorant mass of unemployed people to go on a Crusade, things would go wrong and turn into violence. He knew from prior Crusades how many Jewish lives had been destroyed on the way to the Holy Land.

How about how many Jewish lives he saved from the Muslims? The Muslims had built a mosque on the site of the Temple!!

He was expected to know much better that this one too would get out of hand somewhere, somehow, and violence would erupt. He acted without any moral responsibililty.
In the fact that the Pope committed a moral blunder by allowing and blessing potential criminals in a mission that he should know much better, would turn out into terrorism.
Nowhere did anybody say whether or not the Pope was acting morally or immorally. We said the Pope only speaks infallibly when he sits on the Chair of Peter and makes doctrinal statements on faith and morals. The Pope’s personal morality has nothing to do with Church Teaching. The Pope is not to be likend to Muhammed. We don’t think he is the best and most perfect man on Earth. Having said that, our modern Popes are certainly Holy role models for us.

Ben:

I do not hate Christianity; I just want to erase the hatred of Christianity in accusing the Jews with the death of Jesus

. Catholics should not hate the Jews. That is our Church Teaching. It was the Jews who crucified Jesus, but they represent the whole world. We are all guilty of crucifying Jesus, just as we all bear the mark of Adam’s sin. This is why Catholics are called to unite themselves into Jesus’ suffering and death.

God bless you Ben. I hope you understand Catholics don’t hate Jews, or CAF wouldn’t allow your POV here.

 

[ralphinal]

ralphinal;5140572:

Please allow me to educate you.

The Pope is ONLY infallible in matters of FAITH and MORALS. That is all. He cannot be considered infallible in anything else. Even then, he is only infallible when teaching AS THE POPE. Rank and file Catholics are not EVER considered infallible in any way.

Now, about your 4th Crusade.[/quoe]

Yes, but you brought it up

You don’t see faith and morality in the attempt to unite the two Christian factions: Constantinople and Rome?

Yes and no

**A Pope of all people in the world is supposed to possess some power of premonition to know that if he blessed a horde of ignorant mass of unemployed people to go on a Crusade, things would go wrong and turn into violence. He knew from prior Crusades how many Jewish lives had been destroyed on the way to the Holy Land. He was expected to know much better that this one too would get out of hand somewhere, somehow, and violence would erupt. He acted without any moral responsibililty. **

Sorry, the Catholic Church has never taught that the pope has “power of premonition” as part of his office. Again, just because things did not go perfectly before does not mean they will fail this time. There were new people going with a new mission.

In the fact that the Pope committed a moral blunder by allowing and blessing potential criminals in a mission that he should know much better, would turn out into terrorism.

Again, how did he know that there were “potential criminals?” Did he check in the no-fly list? Did he google the names?

I do not hate Christianity; I just want to erase the hatred of Christianity in accusing the Jews with the death of Jesus.

Christians know that Jesus died for all men because of the sins of all men. There was a small group of Jewish leaders who were part of the physical aspect of it, but ALL of humanity is to blame.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

**From the moment Paul apostated from Judaism to found Christianity, he ceased being Jewish.

Your question back to me about Paul getting letters to persecute Nazarenes in Damascus shows that you still haven’t understood my post. It says that Paul went for letters from the High Priest to arrest Nazarenes in Damascus. It doesn’t make sense that Israel, the Country would send an envoy to arrest citizens of another country when the Jewish leaders had no power even over Israel itself.

No, the Jews did not hand Jesus over to the Romans. Not Jesus of all men who had come to confirm the most precious thing of the Jew, which is the Law. Therefore, it makes no sense to accuse the Jews with the death of Jesus. Jesus was crucified on political charges.**

I realize Saul converted to Christianity. Prior to that, he was a Jew.

I don’t think I buy into your idea that Israel had no authority over other countries, much less itself. Israel was a nation, not confined by borders. While they may have been under a government’s authority because of borders, they all were bound by the old laws, governed by the Pharisees.

What I understand about the “political” charges of the time was, the Jews arrested Jesus, but did not have the “political” authority to put Him to death, so they handed Him over to the Romans who was the governing body, in affect making all guilty of the crucifixion.

 

[rinnie]

Yes we all crucified Jesus by our sins. But the Jews were driving the bus. It was the Jews that pushed for it. Because Jesus didn’t care about money. He didn’t want them making his Father’s house a market place. They saw that Jesus was getting more power.

And they knew that People were beginning for follow Jesus and they would lose their power. So they had to get rid of him. But little did they know by his death and resurrection it only gave him more power. And made more people believe.

The Jews did not accept Jesus because Jesus didn’t fit their ideal of him. They never thought their King would come into this world poor. They were looking for a Powerful ruler as a King. Not as a humble , poor, loving caring Man who gave nothing but love and forgiveness for free. Jesus gave and gave and gave. But he never took anything in return. And power to the Jews was money. Because the Jews were of this world not of Gods world. In Gods world money is nothing. They could not accept that teaching.