The Mystery Of The Empty Tomb

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Masada
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ben_Masada said:
**That’s what you think. I am going to prove to you that John 8:44 is a lie
and to ask you to commit it to memory never to forget. Read John 8:31. Jesus was speaking to the Jews who had believed in him. How could Jesus call children of the Devil the Jews who had believed in him. Does it make sense to you? While you think what to say in reply think of the Golden Rule that Jesus broke by calling his fellow Jews children of the Devil. Would you like to be called a child of the Devil? I don’t think so. Therefore, do not do unto others what you would not like they did unto you. **
Click to expand...
It appears that there is something missing in these passages for while it is true that it states that Jesus was talking to coverted Jews further down he accuses them of wanting to kill him and it is these same Jews that wanted to stone him because of the I AM episode. What’s your take?
 
Ben_Masada said:
If you believe so, explain the contradiction why he was not chased to be arrested by the local Jews, for preaching about Jesus as Messiah and Paul was for doing the very same thing.
Click to expand...
You must have closed your attentive eyes when meeting with Acts 3,20. Peter and John WERE preaching Jesus as Messiah!! And they WERE arrested 3 times by the Jewish authorities, in Acts 4,3; then in Acts 5, 18; and then in Acts 5, 26. Then Gamaliel intervened to ask the Sanhedrin to act very carefully, in case they would be really sent by God. Then the Sanhedrin had them beaten and asked them NOT TO PREACH any more IN THE NAME OF JESUS. That was even before Saul of Tarse was with the group who stoned deacon Stephen.
 
Ben_Masada said:
**That’s what you think. I am going to prove to you that John 8:44 is a lie
and to ask you to commit it to memory never to forget. Read John 8:31. Jesus was speaking to the Jews who had believed in him. How could Jesus call children of the Devil the Jews who had believed in him. Does it make sense to you? While you think what to say in reply think of the Golden Rule that Jesus broke by calling his fellow Jews children of the Devil. Would you like to be called a child of the Devil? I don’t think so. Therefore, do not do unto others what you would not like they did unto you. **
Click to expand...
Why were those Jews who were beginning to believe in Him reacting so strongly to what Jesus was saying precisely in John 8,31, tell me. He did not call them children of the devil in that verse, but later… Why did they react so strongly to Jesus’ words right then, tell me?
 
Ben_Masada said:
**That’s what you think. I am going to prove to you that John 8:44 is a lie
and to ask you to commit it to memory never to forget. Read John 8:31. Jesus was speaking to the Jews who had believed in him. How could Jesus call children of the Devil the Jews who had believed in him. Does it make sense to you? While you think what to say in reply think of the Golden Rule that Jesus broke by calling his fellow Jews children of the Devil. Would you like to be called a child of the Devil? I don’t think so. Therefore, do not do unto others what you would not like they did unto you. **
Click to expand...
I don’t think Jesus was even harsh in uttering what he said to them precisely in John 8, 31. So why did those Jews react so strongly already then?
 
What Jesus told those Jews in John 8,44 applied only to those Jews, not to all Jews. If adrift meant that Jesus’ words in 8, 44 applied to all Jews, then I have to say he is greatly mistaken.
 
To conclude that the passage in John 8, 44 is a lie is equally a mistake, but maybe Ben was gut-reacting to what adrift was telling him, and so in my view he can be excused.
 
Ben_Masada said:
**Oh yes! Elijah had those kinds of Jews at his time. We like to call them Jews-for-Baal. They would practice a pagan religion, while insisting on being identified as Jews. They, as well as those of today, were straddling the issue until Elijah lost his patience with them and slitted the throats of 850 of their prophets. (I Kings 18:23,40) **
Click to expand...
Jews for Baal? in those passages they are refered to as “the prophets of Baal”, not as Jews for Baal. You confuse their case with that of the Israelites who worshipped the Golden Calf!
 
Ben_Masada said:
**You see the handiwriting on the wall in your own language and deny what is written. When the text says that “No man can die for the guilt of another” it means all men and not only the father or the son.

Regarding Jesus choosing to die on the cross, because no one would take his life from him, lacks all truth. When he sensed arrest, he left the Upper Room and fled to the Ghetsemane to pray for three times asking God not to die on the cross. When he saw that his prayer would not be heard, he declared, “Be Thy will done, NOT MINE.” What was Jesus’ will to die on the cross? That’s what I don’t like about faith. It makes people blind to Reason.**
Click to expand...
adrift said:
John 10 11-18
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with the Gethsemane.
Click to expand...
Your characterization of what Jesus did is false. He did not flee to Gethsemane. He knew that His betrayer knew the place well. It is not logical to flee to a well known meeting place.
How much obvious do you want this to be that Jesus walked the via dolorosa against his will?
Click to expand...
John 10 11-18
Jesus is very Plain.
Code: 
 This is why the Father loves me, **because I lay down my life **in order to take it up again.
Click to expand...
I will lay down my life for the sheep.
Click to expand...
Code: 
**No one takes it from me**, **but I lay it down on my own. I have power to lay it down, and power to take it up again**. This command I have received from my Father."
Click to expand...
 
Lapell said:
What Jesus told those Jews in John 8,44 applied only to those Jews, not to all Jews. If adrift meant that Jesus’ words in 8, 44 applied to all Jews, then I have to say he is greatly mistaken.
Click to expand...
I didn’t post 8:44 avflf did. I don’t know what was meant.🤷
 
avflf said:
It appears that there is something missing in these passages for while it is true that it states that Jesus was talking to coverted Jews further down he accuses them of wanting to kill him and it is these same Jews that wanted to stone him because of the I AM episode. What’s your take?
Click to expand...
Forgive me my dear friend, but my take is that the whole thing is a real messy. It seems to me that a bunch of lazy editors were putting together fragments from here and there, mixed up apples with oranges, so to speak, and counted them all together without being thoughtful of us the readers and let the chapter go as they had slaughtered it.
 
Lapell said:
You must have closed your attentive eyes when meeting with Acts 3,20. Peter and John WERE preaching Jesus as Messiah!! And they WERE arrested 3 times by the Jewish authorities, in Acts 4,3; then in Acts 5, 18; and then in Acts 5, 26. Then Gamaliel intervened to ask the Sanhedrin to act very carefully, in case they would be really sent by God. Then the Sanhedrin had them beaten and asked them NOT TO PREACH any more IN THE NAME OF JESUS. That was even before Saul of Tarse was with the group who stoned deacon Stephen.
Click to expand...
If you really believe this is true, go ahead and explain to me Acts 9:31,
which states that the Cause was at peace throughout all Judea, Galilee and Samaria, being built up and mking steady progress in the fear of the Lord; at the same time it enjoyed the increased consolation of the Holy Spirit. If you can’t explain it, it’s okay to admit contradiction.
 
Ben_Masada said:
If you really believe this is true, go ahead and explain to me Acts 9:31,
which states that the Cause was at peace throughout all Judea, Galilee and Samaria, being built up and mking steady progress in the fear of the Lord; at the same time it enjoyed the increased consolation of the Holy Spirit. If you can’t explain it, it’s okay to admit contradiction.
Click to expand...
In my version of the NT, it doesn’t say “the Cause”, but “the Church”. She was growing and getting stronger, and more certain of the Lord Jesus whom she has been preaching.
Haven’t you experienced some peace during turmoil or harsh adversity? Teresa of Avila certainly experienced it in her days when she was to found a monastery of Descalzed Carmelites: assurance and peace during great adversity. Quite paradoxal, I agree, but true!
 
For Paul, now being one of them (the Church) was experiencing persecution, but there still was persecution elsewhere in the meantime against the Church. To be at peace doesn’t ALWAYS mean than there are no fights nor wars.
In fact, ever since you, others and I belong to God, we have constantly at war… that is, spiritually. Don’t you agree?
 
Ben_Masada said:
Forgive me my dear friend, but my take is that the whole thing is a real messy. It seems to me that a bunch of lazy editors were putting together fragments from here and there, mixed up apples with oranges, so to speak, and counted them all together without being thoughtful of us the readers and let the chapter go as they had slaughtered it.
Click to expand...
You haven’t answered me as to why those Jews reacted so much to what Jesus was saying in John 8,31-32…
 
Ben_Masada said:
Forgive me my dear friend, but my take is that the whole thing is a real messy. It seems to me that a bunch of lazy editors were putting together fragments from here and there, mixed up apples with oranges, so to speak, and counted them all together without being thoughtful of us the readers and let the chapter go as they had slaughtered it.
Click to expand...
And on the contrary, what is told in John 8, 12- 59 seems very plausible in my view (even though it sure is just a summary of the essential things that were being said…)
 
Of course, you might tell me that true Jews don’t act like that, or are not supposed to. But in the history of man, even of the Jewish man, there have happened things which were not supposed to have happened from the Jewish side. There’s a dark side in virtually every human person, you know that…
 
Lapell said:
And on the contrary, what is told in John 8, 12- 59 seems very plausible in my view (even though it sure is just a summary of the essential things that were being said…)
Click to expand...
Very good! In that case explain verse 31 to me, justaposed to verse 44.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top