The Missing Passover

[Ben_Masada]

OH Ben, I desided not to go to bed right now, just to answer. When it is said the Messiah it means ONE person not the whole nation, and yes Jesus is king of the Jews because he is King of all. All 12 tribes are his, but not all of the 12 tribes will go to the Father, many will be judged for their non belief. When you or the Jews believe in Jesus it will be just before he comes back and do you know why they will believe? Because he will come to rescue them from the hands of the enemy’s and then they will know he is God and every knee will bow and every eye will see, and every toung will confess, that Jesus Christ is LORD! Even so Lord Jesus come. Love of Christ Nancy Shalome Ben.:extrahappy:

**Oh Nancy, but that’s you saying. Isaiah the Prophet says otherwise. I am sorry, but between you and Isaiah, I bet you don’t blame me if I choose Isaiah instead, do you?

Do you believe that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah? I am sure you do. Now, if you read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4, you will see that Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel, the People and not one individual.

Here is another thing to surprise you. When the Almighty Himself said, “Israel is My son,”
He meant Israel, the People and not an individual in particular. (Exo. 4:22,23)

Regarding being king of the 12 Tribes, already at the time of Jesus there was no such a thing as distinction of Tribes. There was just one People, the Jewish People.

Jesus will never come back and much less as God. You seem to have been brainwashed with Pauline rhetoric. And you say “Jesus Christ is the Lord” when Jesus himself said in Mark 12:29 that God is One and the only Lord. Are you implying Jesus was wrong?
**

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben-You are wrong here. The facts are that Jesus did in fact claim divine status, and alluded to the resurrection. His diciples merely did not understand his claims until later.

Steve, sorry but you are the one wrong here. You are talking about Gentiles speaking about a religlious Jew that Jesus was, with Hellenistic ideas. You ignore that there is no place for Greek Mythology in Judaism.

For instance:

1. Within 20 years of his death, a full blown Christology proclaiming Jesus as God incarnate existed. This is inexplicable, especially among monotheistic Jews, unless Jesus made these claims himself.

** About 30 years for the Pauline Letters to start coming out, and 50+ years for the gospels. Jesus, as a religlious Jew could never have made such claims, unless he was not even Jewish at all. If you erase the Jewish identity from the Jewish personages in the NT, I might accept it as I accept the Eneid and Odissey.**

(3) The authors of the NT epistles use the language of divine Wisdom with reference to Jesus.

I know that, but it doesn’t mean it’s true. They are interpolations with the purpose to document Christianity.

(4) The earliest pagan report of the church’s activities indicates that Jesus was worshipped as Lord. For instance, Celsus said that Jesus called Himself the Son of God, but wrongly.

The simple minded believes everything.

(5) Paul’s letters, written between 49 and 65 A.D., exhibit the same fully-evolved Christology; logically, he must have gotten it from sometime earlier than 49 A.D. See Rom. 1:3-4; 1 Cor. 11:23; Col. 1:15-16; Phil. 2:6-11; 1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 2:8

No Steve, Luke is very clear when he says that Christians originated with Paul in Antioch. And that was about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. You can check it out in Acts 11:26.

Moreover, there is some archealogical evidence dating from the late 30’s-early 40’s of a very early belief in the divine status of Jesus. “Several of the tombs in the DOMINUS FLEVIT catacombs outside Jerusalem bear inscriptions like, ‘Jesus, have mercy’, and ‘Jesus, remember me in the resurrection’, inscriptions thought to date from the 40’s or late 30’s, and indicating the presence in Jerusalem from a fairly early date of a community that believed in resurrection and in the power of someone named Jesus to see the believer safely through death and beyond.” - Alan Millard, Discoveries From the Time of Jesus

Those are frauds not only about Jesus but also about others with extraordinary claims, like a certain Simon, another Judah from Egypt, and others from Galilee.

As far as evidence showing that Jesus claimed divine status directly, consider these facts:
Christ claimed to be divine by:

(1) His use of the term Son of Man.

**Son of man is the most common term to be used even today in Israel. **

(a) This term is used in Daniel 7:13-14. this term is used only four times in the Oew Testament, although Jesus used it eighty times. Therefore, this term is not a subsequent insertion by New Testament writers, but part of the original gospel text. Jesus referred to himself as “The Son of Man,” in contrast to “a son of man” indicating the divinity of the title. Additionally, the context of his usage shows He intended it to have divine implications. See Mark 2:10. See also Mark 2:28 (Jesus says the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath).

The emphasis on the son of man in a reference to Jesus is all part of the Pauline and gospel conspiracy to project Jesus as the one. Don’t be that naive!

1. Implicit Christology

Jesus always prayed to God using the familiar term “Abba” This would have been inconceivable to a Jew, who could not even say the name of God. There is no known historical example in Palestinian Judaism where God is referred to as “my Father” by an individual person. See The parable of the wicked tenants (Mark 12:1-9).

We do the same everyday in our daily prayers.

1. Jesus identifies himself as the Son in Mark 13:32. See also Matthew 11:27 “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” This saying shows Jesus considered Himself to be the Son in an exclusive and absolute sense.

Jesus was a religious Jew and not a Greek man. Perhaps Paul was the one, since he was a Greek Hellenistic former Jew.

 

[GraceDK]

**Oh Nancy, but that’s you saying. Isaiah the Prophet says otherwise. I am sorry, but between you and Isaiah, I bet you don’t blame me if I choose Isaiah instead, do you?

Do you believe that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 is the Messiah? I am sure you do. Now, if you read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4, you will see that Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel, the People and not one individual.

**

Not to disturb the discussion between the to of you. I just want to say that my own opinion differs from that of Nancy.
In my eyes the Messiah and His people is deeply united. There are many parallels in the life of Yeshua and that of the Jewish people in this world.
I say that you are both wrong. The Scripture is deep… many prophesies are layered… Like Isaiah… He speaks both about the people of Israel and of the person of Messiah… I believe this is also understood to be so in the rabbinic tradition, although they of course do not believe the Messiah was Yeshua the Nazarene.

If you are rigid to the extreme Ben Masada, you can also argue that the whole Messiah idea is false … you can say that everyone has misunderstood the passages in the Bible and that everything only speaks of the chosen people as a unit.

I wonder… Do you apply the same reading to Zachariah 12: 9: “On that day… I will pour out my Spirit of grace and prayer over the house of david and the people Jerusalem, and they will look to me, him they have pierced. They will mourn him, like one weeps over an only son, like over a first born”. ?

And also… have you ever done the calculations on the prophesy of Daniel according to the arrival time of the Messiah. Many a Jew has had a schock when they did the calculation… but I have been told some of your religious leaders don’t allow you to study this prophesy. is that true?

Shalom and peace.

 

[Ben_Masada]

**Ben Masada;

Apostles means “eye witnesses”. They saw the risen Messiah and was willing to die rather than deny that He is alive. You get the point?

**Show me in the NT where an apostle was an eyewitness to the resurrection of Jesus. ****

You need not be condescending. I am not ignorant athough we disagree on the identity of the Messiah of Israel.
Again, my point was to say: why let your self be crucified for saying that you have seen the living Messiah, if in fact you know you never have?

First, the Messiah of Israel is Israel and not Jesus, according to Isaiah the Prophet. And second, who said that any of the Apostles was crucified or killed for believing that Jesus was the living Messiah, Paul and the Gentiles who wrote the gospels? Why should I believe Gentiles adulterating Judaism with Hellenistic innovations? Think it through.

Ben Masada. You say we speak as if Yeshua is the only one to have died on the cross. I could say you speak as though the Jews are the only ones who have suffered. The first Christian martyr, Stephen, was stoned to death by Jewish pharisees,

That’s what I call a false accusation. There was not a single Pharisee stoning Stephen that day. Pharisees did not do things like that. Only the common people were appointed to execute a criminal. And the stoning of Stephen could never have happened. Too many contradictions involved.

While growing up I read the dairy of Anne Frank 3 times and thought of her as my best friend. I read countless other books on the Shoah too. lastly I read “The Night”. Early on I started loving the Jewish people… simply like they were my family. Also I could hardly bear to think they could be cruel, after all that happend to them, so I was very one-sided in my view of the Israeli nation for many years. Then I saw the Israeli documentary: “To see if I am smiling”,and my heart broke in so many tears both for the Israelis and the Palestinians.

I live here. I know what’s going on. The suffering of the “Palestinians” has nothing to do with us but with their own brothers who forced them into refugee camps. And from there they attack us every single day with missiles and cartushas, destroying our school of children and running to hide behind their own children in the hope to escape retribution. The difference between us and them is that they use their children to protect their weapons and we use our weapons to protect our children.

Now I have been in the Holy Land 4 times… lived there 10 months and God has taught me so much. My love for the chosen people is still huge. I think that any kind of substitution theology is a vulgar error.

If you honestly think so, why do you still keep your NT? Replacement Theology comes from Galatians 4:21-31 especially.

A “shalom” from my wonderful priest was met with spittle in his face… And that is just one of many incidents. There is so much poison in the human heart, Ben Masada.

I know that some of ours are poinsened by hatred of Christianity, but if you ask me, I think Christians are to blame for the attrocities they have caused to the Jews in the name of Jesus throughout History with Crusades, Inquisition and hundreds of pogroms.

Pope John Paul said: “The church must always ask forgiveness for the times where Christians did evil or where they passively stood by while evil was comitted”. Hitler was a nazi. Not a Christian.

Hitler was born a Catholic; and he signed a Concordata with Pope Pius XI to spare the Christian instiltutions. I guess Jews were considered open season even by the Church in that Concordata.

The Jews have suffered greatly in mideval Europe by the hands of people who called themselves Christians. However, the vast majority of progroms came after the papacy lost its power… before that time the Jews appealed to the papacy for help against the masses and the papacy helped them to some extent to be able to live and work freely.

Really! Why would Pope Innocence III organize the 4th Crusade? This special Crusade, perhaps because it enjoyed the Pope’s blessing, was famous for its excesses against the Jews.

Lets start a new thread about messianic prophesy in Jewish Scripture.

Go for it! If you want to start it, you can count with me.

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

Not to disturb the discussion between the to of you. I just want to say that my own opinion differs from that of Nancy.
In my eyes the Messiah and His people is deeply united. There are many parallels in the life of Yeshua and that of the Jewish people in this world.
I say that you are both wrong. The Scripture is deep… many prophesies are layered… Like Isaiah… He speaks both about the people of Israel and of the person of Messiah… I believe this is also understood to be so in the rabbinic tradition, although they of course do not believe the Messiah was Yeshua the Nazarene.

If you are rigid to the extreme Ben Masada, you can also argue that the whole Messiah idea is false … you can say that everyone has misunderstood the passages in the Bible and that everything only speaks of the chosen people as a unit.

I wonder… Do you apply the same reading to Zachariah 12: 9: “On that day… I will pour out my Spirit of grace and prayer over the house of david and the people Jerusalem, and they will look to me, him they have pierced. They will mourn him, like one weeps over an only son, like over a first born”. ?

And also… have you ever done the calculations on the prophesy of Daniel according to the arrival time of the Messiah. Many a Jew has had a schock when they did the calculation… but I have been told some of your religious leaders don’t allow you to study this prophesy. is that true?

Shalom and peace./QUOTE Hi Grace,what I said about the Jews is Biblical and,I was talking about Jerusalem not the Jews around the world. There are alot of Jewish who are Christian, an believe in Christ, I know because I have been in contact with them. God’s chosen people are all over the earth if that were not so then why would he come in his glory and seperate the sheep from the goats from the 4 corners of the world? Nancy

 

[GraceDK]

**Ben Masada;

Apostles means “eye witnesses”. They saw the risen Messiah and was willing to die rather than deny that He is alive. You get the point?

**Show me in the NT where an apostle was an eyewitness to the resurrection of Jesus. ****

Peter (Head of the Apostles) said: “And we are witnesses of everything He did in Judea and Jerusalem. He that they crucified by hanging him on a tree, Him God raised up on the third day and let Him step forward visible, not for the whole people, but for us who were chosen to be witnesses, we who ate and drank with Him after His resurrection. And He commanded us to preach to the people and testify that it is Him God has chosen to be the judge of the living and the dead. It is Him that all the prophets testify about, that whoever believes in Him will have forgiveness by His Name”
Atcs 10,39-43

First, the Messiah of Israel is Israel and not Jesus, according to Isaiah the Prophet. And second, who said that any of the Apostles was crucified or killed for believing that Jesus was the living Messiah, Paul and the Gentiles who wrote the gospels? Why should I believe Gentiles adulterating Judaism with Hellenistic innovations? Think it through.

But forgive me if I ask: Are you not alone with this view? Is it not so that the Jews always have and still do await a Messianic figure … a person, and not just themselves…? You know this is so. Maybe for you it has become a mere metaphor but for your brothers, no.

That’s what I call a false accusation. There was not a single Pharisee stoning Stephen that day. Pharisees did not do things like that. Only the common people were appointed to execute a criminal. And the stoning of Stephen could never have happened. Too many contradictions involved.

Chapter 6 and 7 of Acts tell the story of Stefanus. He was clearly condemned by the leading religious authorities… Its by the way an amazing story worth reading.

I live here. I know what’s going on. The suffering of the “Palestinians” has nothing to do with us but with their own brothers who forced them into refugee camps. And from there they attack us every single day with missiles and cartushas, destroying our school of children and running to hide behind their own children in the hope to escape retribution. The difference between us and them is that they use their children to protect their weapons and we use our weapons to protect our children.

Its interesting… I have lived in Israel 10 months and actually befriended people both palestinians and jews. The orthodox Jewish friends I had did not deny that Palestinians suffer both because of the Israeli harshness and because of the idiotic mindset of Hamas and others. To say there is no injustice or unessesary dominance on the part of Israel is to be simply unwilling to face the facts. Do you know any Palestinians personally? I have one friend in particular who told me he had been subjected to violence from Israeli police when he and his coworkers came out from a hotel where they worked in the early morning. This person worked with me now and he could hardly ever stay to talk after work in the evening because he would be held back and interrogated for up to 40 minutes on the way home, having to answer tons of stupid and humiliating questions and always feeling these soldiers wanted to drive him to madness so they could have an excuse to take him in… Can you tell me how loyalty and brotherly love can grow in a person who feels like a second ranging citizen even if he never did anything wrong and even is not interested in politics??
But to argue with people like you is hopeless… if you cannot even admit that you have any fault of your own. The rest of Israeli society Thank-G-d is not as stubborn as you. I urge you to look into the “breaking the silence” organisation… then come back and tell me again that the only problem of the Palestinian is the other Palestinian.
A few links: youtube.com/watch?v=37MFa7ZKQWo
youtube.com/watch?v=Q-BxHCDsCG0

If you honestly think so, why do you still keep your NT? Replacement Theology comes from Galatians 4:21-31 especially.

You want to know the Christian doctrine on the Jews? This is the fulness of it… and it speaks of the conclusion. Please read. Paul said: “Did they (Israel) stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, through their transgression, salvation has come to the gentiles to make Israel envious. But if their transgression means riches for the world and their loss means riches for the gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring! For if their rejection (of Christ) is the reconciliation of the world (with God), **what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? **After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that was wild by nature, and contrary to nature, were grafted into a cultivated olive tree (israel), how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!
Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the gentiles has come in, and so all Israel will be saved.As far as election is concerned they (Israel) are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and His call are irrevocable”. ( Romans 11)

Continued …

 

[GraceDK]

I know that some of ours are poinsened by hatred of Christianity, but if you ask me, I think Christians are to blame for the attrocities they have caused to the Jews in the name of Jesus throughout History with Crusades, Inquisition and hundreds of pogroms.

You excuse one injustice with another? Ben Masada. You disapoint me… is this Jewish justice still: eye for an eye?.. so maybe tomorrow some Catholic can go out on the street here and spit in the face of a passing by-Jew, because a priest somewhere was spat in the face… or how about we go to Germany and beat up some young Germans or shout insults at them for the sins of their grand parents?
Oh wait… I see a line of reasoning. Many a Jew has tragically been beat up by Catholics with the words: “Christ-killer!”
According to your reasoning these people are also excusable or…?
No… the world must be ruled by love and forgiveness…

Hitler was born a Catholic; and he signed a Concordata with Pope Pius XI to spare the Christian instiltutions. I guess Jews were considered open season even by the Church in that Concordata.

No one is born Catholic. “Catholic” is not an ethnicity like “Jew” is. Catholic is a person who believes in Christ. Hitler did not believe in Christ and he loated Catholicism. Live with that fact, please. As for the pope, there are different versions of reality. The Vatican was between a stone and a hard place. Trying to spare the lives of thousands if not millions of Catholics in occupied Europe, the pope thought it wise to stay more passive than I think was fair… However, posterity always has a privilege.

Really! Why would Pope Innocence III organize the 4th Crusade? This special Crusade, perhaps because it enjoyed the Pope’s blessing, was famous for its excesses against the Jews.

The crusades were started because of Islamic agression. At one time they were standing outside Vienna. The crusaders were a mob of crazy peasants who had little knowlege about anything. Its a shame for the Church’s history, yes. Also, yes, we have had nasty popes… like you have had nasty Jewish leaders. Our sadness is that the Church thought itself a political power for a while… that was an error. God is not a politician.

Enough for now…
Where do you live in Israel, by the way?
Shalom to you

 

[SteveLohr]

Ben-Here’s my response. My original comments are in plain text, and my response to you in bold. I’ll have to post in two parts due to length:

SteveLohr;5249691:

1. Within 20 years of his death, a full blown Christology proclaiming Jesus as God incarnate existed. This is inexplicable, especially among monotheistic Jews, unless Jesus made these claims himself.

** About 30 years for the Pauline Letters to start coming out, and 50+ years for the gospels. Jesus, as a religlious Jew could never have made such claims, unless he was not even Jewish at all. If you erase the Jewish identity from the Jewish personages in the NT, I might accept it as I accept the Eneid and Odissey.**

**Ben-The Pauline letters began to come out in approximately 49 AD, and were completed around 64 AD. See Oxford Companion to the Bible, “Corinthians”, pg. 135. According to the majority of scholarship, the Gospels were written between 65-90 AD. However, there is reason to believe that they were all completed before 70 AD, as none mention the destruction of Jerusalem. Additionally, a fragment of what may be from the book of Mark that was found in the dead sea scrolls has been dated to the mid-50’s. **

(3) The authors of the NT epistles use the language of divine Wisdom with reference to Jesus.

I know that, but it doesn’t mean it’s true. They are interpolations with the purpose to document Christianity.

My intent in making this statement was to demonstrate that the belief in the divinity of Jesus was a fundamental part of Christianity from its inception. There is no historical evidence of a “proto-Christianity” that shows Jesus as being merely a wise teacher, and later developing into a belief in the divinity of Christ. Rather, the belief in the divinity of Christ occurs hand-in-hand with the development of the earliest believers. Accordingly, it is not based on the writings of Paul, but pre-dates those writings. For further evidence, consider the writing of Josephus who refers to the stoning of James in 62 CE “James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ….” Given that this passage from his Antiquities was written in approximately 93 AD, it shows a wide-spread belief in the divinity of Jesus that is unlikely to have transpired if it originated from writings that were completed (as you appear to maintain) a mere 10 years earlier. Likewise my citations to Celsus (see below) provide support for this position. Ditto the writings of Tacitus. Ditto my citations to the tombs in the DOMINUS FLEVIT, dated to the 30’s to early 40’s that indicate a belief in the divinty of Jesus (see below)

(4) The earliest pagan report of the church’s activities indicates that Jesus was worshipped as Lord. For instance, Celsus said that Jesus called Himself the Son of God, but wrongly.

The simple minded believes everything.

See above. The citation is intended to show an early belief in the divinity of Jesus that must originate pre-Paul.

 

[SteveLohr]

(5) Paul’s letters, written between 49 and 65 A.D., exhibit the same fully-evolved Christology; logically, he must have gotten it from sometime earlier than 49 A.D. See Rom. 1:3-4; 1 Cor. 11:23; Col. 1:15-16; Phil. 2:6-11; 1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 2:8

No Steve, Luke is very clear when he says that Christians originated with Paul in Antioch. And that was about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. You can check it out in Acts 11:26.

I believe you are misinterpreting this passage. It reads (Acts 11:25-26):

Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch. (emphasis added) (NIV)

**This passage clearly does not mean that Christianity was founded by Paul in Antioch. Rather, it is at Antioch that the believers were first called Christians. **

Moreover, there is some archealogical evidence dating from the late 30’s-early 40’s of a very early belief in the divine status of Jesus. “Several of the tombs in the DOMINUS FLEVIT catacombs outside Jerusalem bear inscriptions like, ‘Jesus, have mercy’, and ‘Jesus, remember me in the resurrection’, inscriptions thought to date from the 40’s or late 30’s, and indicating the presence in Jerusalem from a fairly early date of a community that believed in resurrection and in the power of someone named Jesus to see the believer safely through death and beyond.” - Alan Millard, Discoveries From the Time of Jesus

Those are frauds not only about Jesus but also about others with extraordinary claims, like a certain Simon, another Judah from Egypt, and others from Galilee.

See above. The citation is intended to show an early belief in the divinity of Jesus that must originate pre-Paul.

As far as evidence showing that Jesus claimed divine status directly, consider these facts:
Christ claimed to be divine by:

(1) His use of the term Son of Man.

**Son of man is the most common term to be used even today in Israel. **

**But it wasn’t common in Roman times, showing Jesus used it to express his divinity (see below). **

(a) This term is used in Daniel 7:13-14. this term is used only four times in the Oew Testament, although Jesus used it eighty times. Therefore, this term is not a subsequent insertion by New Testament writers, but part of the original gospel text. Jesus referred to himself as “The Son of Man,” in contrast to “a son of man” indicating the divinity of the title. Additionally, the context of his usage shows He intended it to have divine implications. See Mark 2:10. See also Mark 2:28 (Jesus says the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath).

The emphasis on the son of man in a reference to Jesus is all part of the Pauline and gospel conspiracy to project Jesus as the one. Don’t be that naive!

Please provide proof. I provide evidence above that the belief in the divinity of Jesus pre-dates Paul, i.e., this can’t be part of a “Pauline conspiracy.” As an aside, I recommend you don’t accuse me of being naive-it reduces the force of your arguments. Rather, defeat my facts with facts of your own.

1. Implicit Christology

Jesus always prayed to God using the familiar term “Abba” This would have been inconceivable to a Jew, who could not even say the name of God. There is no known historical example in Palestinian Judaism where God is referred to as “my Father” by an individual person. See The parable of the wicked tenants (Mark 12:1-9).

We do the same everyday in our daily prayers.

**The Jews didn’t pray this way in Roman times. As I stated There is no known historical example in Palestinian Judaism where God is referred to as “my Father” by an individual person.” **

1. Jesus identifies himself as the Son in Mark 13:32. See also Matthew 11:27 “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” This saying shows Jesus considered Himself to be the Son in an exclusive and absolute sense.

Jesus was a religious Jew and not a Greek man. Perhaps Paul was the one, since he was a Greek Hellenistic former Jew.

Agree that Jesus was a Jew. How does that affect my argument about Jesus’ self identification in para 3?

**You didn’t address these lines of evidence:

Jesus claimed to act with divine authority. Jesus contrasted His teachings with those of the divinely given Mosaic Law. He would begin by saying “You have heard it said” and then contrast it with “But I say to you…”(Matt 7:28-29). Jesus adjusted the Law, in divorce (Matt 5:31-32, Mark 10:2-12). Jesus cast out demons using divine authority and using this as proof that the Kingdom of God had come. (Luke 11:20). Jesus forgave sins, which was a prerogative only of God. Jesus taught that his miracles were the “seal of authenticity” on his message. “The works which the Father has given Me to accomplish, the very works that I do, bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me” (John 5:36). See also John 10:37-38.

1. Jesus believed himself able to perform miracles. Other prophets had performed miracles, but only by praying for them to be done. Jesus, in contrast, orders them to be done in His name.
2. Jesus claimed to determine the eternal destiny of people. (Luke 12:8-9).
3. Jews understood that Jesus was making divine claims. Jesus was in fact executed only because of his divine claim.**

Regards,
SteveLohr

 

[SteveLohr]

One minor addendum. My ciation to The Oxford Companion to the Bible, pg 135 has 1 Corinthians as being reliably dated from 51-53 AD, not 49 AD, as I refer to in my post #447. I do have sources which back up the earlier date, but I want to go with mainstream scholarship, hence my citation to The Oxford Companion. My apologies for the inaccurate citation in reference to that date.

Regards,
SteveLohr

 

[Ben_Masada]

GraceDK;5250488:

Not to disturb the discussion between the to of you. I just want to say that my own opinion differs from that of Nancy.
In my eyes the Messiah and His people is deeply united. There are many parallels in the life of Yeshua and that of the Jewish people in this world.
I say that you are both wrong. The Scripture is deep… many prophesies are layered… Like Isaiah… He speaks both about the people of Israel and of the person of Messiah… I believe this is also understood to be so in the rabbinic tradition, although they of course do not believe the Messiah was Yeshua the Nazarene.

And neither did Isaiah. When he identifies the Suffering Servant with Israel by name, it’s for a reason: That none should assume that the Messiah could be an individual.

If you are rigid to the extreme Ben Masada, you can also argue that the whole Messiah idea is false … you can say that everyone has misunderstood the passages in the Bible and that everything only speaks of the chosen people as a unit.

Isaiah does, and that for me is enough.

I wonder… Do you apply the same reading to Zachariah 12: 9: “On that day… I will pour out my Spirit of grace and prayer over the house of david and the people Jerusalem, and they will look to me, him they have pierced. They will mourn him, like one weeps over an only son, like over a first born”. ?

That’s a reference to the return of the Jews from exile in Babylon. When they arrived in Jerusalem and had prior knowledge then of what had happened to Israel, Messiah ben Joseph, the Suffering Servant, they became conscious that their happiness at their return to the Land of the Living was due to the redemptive death of Israel (MbJ), and then they would look in their memory to those whom they had pierced with their own sins, and mourn for him (MbJ) as one who weeps for his firstborn.

And also… have you ever done the calculations on the prophesy of Daniel according to the arrival time of the Messiah. Many a Jew has had a schock when they did the calculation… but I have been told some of your religious leaders don’t allow you to study this prophesy. is that true?

No, it’s not true. A Jewish mind is free. You know what I mean when we are dealing here with Catholics. Jews are free to read and study everything. Yes, I have done my calculations on that prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27. In fact, I have posted a thread on the results. You may become a little wiser by cheching it out.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;5250640:

**Ben Masada;

Apostles means “eye witnesses”. They saw the risen Messiah and was willing to die rather than deny that He is alive. You get the point?

I don’t think so. Apostle means messenger. Bearers of good news. Besides, none of Jesus’ Apostles was an eyewitness of Jesus’ resurrection. To see him after his sufferings or passion, as Luke says in Acts 1:1,2 is no proof that Jesus died or much less resurrected.**

Peter (Head of the Apostles) said: "And we are witnesses of everything He did in Judea and Jerusalem. He that they crucified by hanging him on a tree, Him God raised up on the third day and let Him step forward visible, not for the whole people, but for us who were chosen to be witnesses, we who ate and drank with Him after His resurrection.

I asked for an eyewitness and not for people who saw Jesus alive afterwards. And when they say that they even ate and drank with Jesus, this is another evidence that Jesus was alive in flesh and bone just as before crucifixion.

But forgive me if I ask: Are you not alone with this view? Is it not so that the Jews always have and still do await a Messianic figure … a person, and not just themselves…? You know this is so. Maybe for you it has become a mere metaphor but for your brothers, no.

**There are many, who still hold the slavish mentality of an individual Messiah, since the time of slavery in Egypt, when they thought that Moses had been the one and not a simple Messianic leader. But more and more of the learnt Jews are adopting the Isaiah’s view that the Messiah is collective. **

Chapter 6 and 7 of Acts tell the story of Stefanus. He was clearly condemned by the leading religious authorities… Its by the way an amazing story worth reading.

I don’t believe it ever happened because there are too many contradictions involved. First of all a death sentence would not be decreed in that fashion in Israel. Second, it would take from months to years of Court procedures for a final decision. Third, the one condemned to die would never be given that chance for such a speech. Fourth, why had he been condemned, for blasphemy? If it had been true, he wouldn’t be allowed the chance to continue blaspheming before being stoned to death.
Last but not least, the Sanhedrin had lost the right to draw death sentences in Israel since the Roman had declared the Land of Israel a Roman Province. If his stoning ever took place, it must have been as a result of hooligan street riots

Its interesting… I have lived in Israel 10 months and actually befriended people both palestinians and jews. The orthodox Jewish friends I had did not deny that Palestinians suffer both because of the Israeli harshness and because of the idiotic mindset of Hamas and others. To say there is no injustice or unessesary dominance on the part of Israel is to be simply unwilling to face the facts.

**We do not dominate them. We defend ourselves from their daily attacks at us. They are free to go wherever they want, only as long as they respect our right to exist in our own Land. **

Do you know any Palestinians personally?

I have a few of them in my working place. Even one in my department. When Perez and Rabbin donated a lot of weapons to them in Ramala and Gaza, this coworker of mine laughed saying to me that he never thought we were so blind to see that they would be using those weapons against our own people.

I have one friend in particular who told me he had been subjected to violence from Israeli police when he and his coworkers came out from a hotel where they worked in the early morning. This person worked with me now and he could hardly ever stay to talk after work in the evening because he would be held back and interrogated for up to 40 minutes on the way home, having to answer tons of stupid and humiliating questions and always feeling these soldiers wanted to drive him to madness so they could have an excuse to take him in… Can you tell me how loyalty and brotherly love can grow in a person who feels like a second ranging citizen even if he never did anything wrong and even is not interested in politics??

**You are too easy to believe in their lies. I don’t wish you to have one of your children being killed at cold blood, but if this ever happened you would stop believing them. I have seen and heard from them here, that by killing a Jew an Arab guarantees his place in Gan Eden. And for those who die in a suicide attempt will have 70 virgins in Gan Eden. And what is scary is that they do believe it. **

But to argue with people like you is hopeless… if you cannot even admit that you have any fault of your own. The rest of Israeli society Thank-G-d is not as stubborn as you. I urge you to look into the “breaking the silence” organisation… then come back and tell me again that the only problem of the Palestinian is the other Palestinian.

The problem of the “Palestinians” are not the other
“Palestinians” but the other Arabic Countries who forced them out of Israel in the hope to push the Jews to the sea. They have tried that in four major wars that they started and lost. And they will lose again any time they try, because Elohim is with us.

 

[Ben_Masada]

You excuse one injustice with another? Ben Masada. You disapoint me… is this Jewish justice still: eye for an eye?.. so maybe tomorrow some Catholic can go out on the street here and spit in the face of a passing by-Jew, because a priest somewhere was spat in the face… or how about we go to Germany and beat up some young Germans or shout insults at them for the sins of their grand parents?
Oh wait… I see a line of reasoning. Many a Jew has tragically been beat up by Catholics with the words: “Christ-killer!”
According to your reasoning these people are also excusable or…?
No… the world must be ruled by love and forgiveness…

**Now, after the above, does it mean you are against those few Jews who became know as partisans during the Holocaust and decided to take weapons and kill a few Nazis? Does it mean you protest the fact that some Jews decided to fight the Nazis in the revolt of Warsaw in Poland? Are we to be the sacapegoat all the time and never fight back? Guess what Grace, that time is gone. There is a new generation of Israeli Jews who don’t like to give the other cheek. **

No one is born Catholic. “Catholic” is not an ethnicity like “Jew” is. Catholic is a person who believes in Christ. Hitler did not believe in Christ and he loated Catholicism.

It doesn’t matter. That monster was baptized as a Catholic when he was born. If this does not make one a Catholic, the Church has changed.

The crusades were started because of Islamic agression. At one time they were standing outside Vienna. The crusaders were a mob of crazy peasants who had little knowlege about anything. Its a shame for the Church’s history, yes. Also, yes, we have had nasty popes… like you have had nasty Jewish leaders. Our sadness is that the Church thought itself a political power for a while… that was an error. God is not a politician.

Wow! I am surprised to read from a Catholic that the Church has failed or erred. That’s a change for the better. I always thought the Church was infalible.

 

[Ben_Masada]

1Within 20 years of his death, a full blown Christology proclaiming Jesus as God incarnate existed. This is inexplicable, especially among monotheistic Jews, unless Jesus made these claims himself.

**This “full blown Christology” you are talking about started being spread in the gospel of Paul after 60 CE with Paul’s Letters to the churches. That’s more than 30 years after Jesus had been gone. **

**Ben-The Pauline letters began to come out in approximately 49 AD, and were completed around 64 AD. See Oxford Companion to the Bible, “Corinthians”, pg. 135. According to the majority of scholarship, the Gospels were written between 65-90 AD. However, there is reason to believe that they were all completed before 70 AD, as none mention the destruction of Jerusalem. Additionally, a fragment of what may be from the book of Mark that was found in the dead sea scrolls has been dated to the mid-50’s.

**I have even Catholic sources with the dates for the books of the NT setting Mark to 70 CE, soon after the destruction of the Temple. Luke to 75 CE, Matthew to 85 CE and John in between 95 and 100 CE. ****

My intent in making this statement was to demonstrate that the belief in the divinity of Jesus was a fundamental part of Christianity from its inception.

**Which was by Paul in Antioch about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. (Acts 11:26) **

There is no historical evidence of a “proto-Christianity” that shows Jesus as being merely a wise teacher, and later developing into a belief in the divinity of Christ. Rather, the belief in the divinity of Christ occurs hand-in-hand with the development of the earliest believers.

From the time of Paul. But for 30 years in Jerusalem, the Nazarenes never preached about Jesus as Christ or son of God.

Accordingly, it is not based on the writings of Paul, but pre-dates those writings. For further evidence, consider the writing of Josephus who refers to the stoning of James in 62 CE “James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ….”

But not by the Nazarenes, followers of Jesus; but by Paul. Read Acts 11:26.

Given that this passage from his Antiquities was written in approximately 93 AD, it shows a wide-spread belief in the divinity of Jesus that is unlikely to have transpired if it originated from writings that were completed (as you appear to maintain) a mere 10 years earlier. Likewise my citations to Celsus (see below) provide support for this position. Ditto the writings of Tacitus. Ditto my citations to the tombs in the DOMINUS FLEVIT, dated to the 30’s to early 40’s that indicate a belief in the divinty of Jesus (see below)

Which sources enjoy more credibility in your eyes, Luke or these guys you mention above? He says that Christians originated with Paul in Antioch. If it’s not true, you will have to admit contradictions in the NT.

(4) The earliest pagan report of the church’s activities indicates that Jesus was worshipped as Lord. For instance, Celsus said that Jesus called Himself the Son of God, but wrongly.

Read Mark 12:29. Jesus himself said that God is One and the only Lord. I think you are digging contradictions in the NT.

See above. The citation is intended to show an early belief in the divinity of Jesus that must originate pre-Paul.

Which serves only to cause contradictions in the NT.

 

[Ben_Masada]

(5) Paul’s letters, written between 49 and 65 A.D., exhibit the same fully-evolved Christology; logically, he must have gotten it from sometime earlier than 49 A.D. See Rom. 1:3-4; 1 Cor. 11:23; Col. 1:15-16; Phil. 2:6-11; 1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 2:8

I am glad you have quoted II Timothy 2:8. It says in there that Jesus was a descendant of David and that he resurrected according to the gospel of Paul. Opposite to what gospel? Obviously the gospel of the Apostles, which he used to call “the other gospel.” (Gal. 1:6-9) It means that Paul was indeed the one who fabricated the whole Christology about Jesus.

I believe you are misinterpreting this passage. It reads (Acts 11:25-26):
Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch. (emphasis added) (NIV)

Now, tell me, how were the disciples called before Paul spent that whole year there preaching that Jesus was Christ? Would you be able to venture a answer here? In case you got embarrassed, I’ll tell you. Nazarenes, that’s the name they were called. Okay, I am not going to say anything about being naive here. But please, have mercy on yourself!

This passage clearly does not mean that Christianity was founded by Paul in Antioch. Rather, it is at Antioch that the believers were first called Christians.

If something starts with you, does it mean that I was the founder of it? Please! Do I need facts to refute you? I can do it with Logic.

The Jews didn’t pray this way in Roman times. As I stated There is no known historical example in Palestinian Judaism where God is referred to as “my Father” by an individual person.”

You do have the nerve as a Gentile to pretend to teach Judaism to the Jew. That’s all we need in the realm of Replacement Theology. Then, there was never such a thing as “Palestinian” Judaism. Judaism is Jewish.

1. Jesus identifies himself as the Son in Mark 13:32. See also Matthew 11:27 “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” This saying shows Jesus considered Himself to be the Son in an exclusive and absolute sense.

The only Son of God I acknowledge is the one written in Exodus 4:22,23. “Israel is My Son,” says the Lord.

Agree that Jesus was a Jew. How does that affect my argument about Jesus’ self identification in para 3?

Very much so. Isn’t your main point in this post to prove that Jesus was divine, or son of God? You must be talking about someone who was not Jewish. A Jew cannot be God.

You didn’t address these lines of evidence:

Jesus claimed to act with divine authority. Jesus contrasted His teachings with those of the divinely given Mosaic Law.

**That’s not true. On the contrary, he declared to have come to confirm the Law to the letter. And if you read the parable of the Richman and Lazarus, he said that the only way to avoid falling in the same place of the Richman is to listen to Moses. (Luke 16:29-31) **

He would begin by saying “You have heard it said” and then contrast it with “But I say to you…”(Matt 7:28-29).

He would not contrast anything in the Law. On the contrary again. He would build fences around the commandment to make the transgression of it further remote.

Jesus adjusted the Law, in divorce (Matt 5:31-32, Mark 10:2-12). Jesus cast out demons using divine authority and using this as proof that the Kingdom of God had come. (Luke 11:20).

That’s not true either. Jesus was Jewish and Jews don’t believe in demons.

Jesus forgave sins, which was a prerogative only of God. Jesus taught that his miracles were the “seal of authenticity” on his message. “The works which the Father has given Me to accomplish, the very works that I do, bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me” (John 5:36). See also John 10:37-38.

Listen my friend, you believe Jesus was Jewish, don’t you? You have said above that you do. So, anything not Jewish about him is not true but interpolations either by the guys who wrote the gospels or by the Church. So, to forgive sins is not Jewish. Therefore, it was not true. Unless he was a Catholic priest.

1. Jesus believed himself able to perform miracles. Other prophets had performed miracles, but only by praying for them to be done. Jesus, in contrast, orders them to be done in His name.

**All later interpolations. **

1. Jews understood that Jesus was making divine claims. Jesus was in fact executed only because of his divine claim.

**Was it what was written on that plate on the top of his cross? That was the reason why he was crucified. **

 

[Ben_Masada]

One minor addendum. My ciation to The Oxford Companion to the Bible, pg 135 has 1 Corinthians as being reliably dated from 51-53 AD, not 49 AD, as I refer to in my post #447. I do have sources which back up the earlier date, but I want to go with mainstream scholarship, hence my citation to The Oxford Companion. My apologies for the inaccurate citation in reference to that date.

**It’s getting better. Go back and aresearch a little better and you will approach my numbers of 60’s. **

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

HI Ben! Jesus is Lord, and He fulfiled the scriptures, how ever you are waiting for I feel for you, because your in for a rude awakening when you see Yashuma come in the clouds. I love you Ben and I am praying for you. God is good. Nancy

 

[Prodigal_Child]

It’s quite clear that the gospel accounts are recording a Seder meal as Jesus’ last supper. Obviously it wasn’t in 30 AD.

 

[Prodigal_Child]

The Jews didn’t pray this way in Roman times. As I stated There is no known historical example in Palestinian Judaism where God is referred to as “my Father” by an individual person.”

Isaiah 63:16
But you are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israel acknowledge us; you, O LORD, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name.

Isaiah 64:8
Yet, O LORD, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.

Malachi 2:10
Have we not all one** Father **? Did not one God create us?

What is this nonsense about “Palestinian Judaism”??? The area was not called Palestine until 70 AD when the Romans crushed Judah and renamed the area Palestine in a failed attempt to destroy the memory of the Jewish state. Judaism is Judaism – the covenant of the People of Israel.

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

It’s quite clear that the gospel accounts are recording a Seder meal as Jesus’ last supper. Obviously it wasn’t in 30 AD.

Hello Prodigal child, what is ment by this statement? What gospel account? When was it if not in 30AD? God Bless Nancy