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:
**Paul was never a Pharisee. That’s another lie of his. The Sect of the Pharisees would never accept Hellenistic Jews. Paul was a Hellenistic Jew from the Greek city of Tarsus, then a Roman province.

And for the case of Stephen seeying Jesus at the right hand of God yes, it would be a blasphemy; but he never said that. He was a Nazarene Jew. The Nazarenes did not know anything of that sort about Jesus for another 15 years when Paul would start preaching his own gospel.**
Click to expand...
How do you KNOW that the Pharisees would NEVER accept Hellenistic Jews? What’s your sources for this one information?
As for Jesus implying that He would come on a cloud sitting at the right hand of God, wasn’t it part of what Daniel spoke about when he talked of the Son of Man (or more exactly of one being looking like a son of man) in the book of Daniel? Did that Son of Man have to be God to do that?
 
Lapell said:
How do you KNOW that the Pharisees would NEVER accept Hellenistic Jews? What’s your sources for this one information?
As for Jesus implying that He would come on a cloud sitting at the right hand of God, wasn’t it part of what Daniel spoke about when he talked of the Son of Man (or more exactly of one being looking like a son of man) in the book of Daniel? Did that Son of Man have to be God to do that?
Click to expand...
Yet when Jesus refers to this, they said He uttered a blasphemy, and they did the same when Stephen refered to the same thing? Did the Jews of Daniel’s time do the same thing to him in his days? I would think they didn’t then…
 
Ben_Masada said:
Stephen could have never preached what Paul used to, because Paul had not started his ministry yet. Paul was a lad about 15 years old when Stephen was allegedly executed. It would take another 15 years for Paul to start preaching his gospel. Therefore, those things in the speech of Stephen were interpolations either by Luke to enhance Paul or by the Church during the centuries of pious forgeries.
Click to expand...
I don’t think they were forgeries, my friend. Are you afraid that we would go for you if they were the truth? There’s no reason to.
And remember, there are people who use religion to justify their crimes, and people who would say they are Christians (or more specifically Catholics) but wouldn’t care much to practice what is preached at the pulpit and in the Bible texts themselves…
 
Ben_Masada said:
Stephen could have never preached what Paul used to, because Paul had not started his ministry yet. Paul was a lad about 15 years old when Stephen was allegedly executed. It would take another 15 years for Paul to start preaching his gospel. Therefore, those things in the speech of Stephen were interpolations either by Luke to enhance Paul or by the Church during the centuries of pious forgeries.
Click to expand...
Paul was not preaching “his” Gospel, but “the” Gospel. He preached it in his words, of course, but the Gospel was the same as the one each of the Apostles and the ones sent by them preached. Paul was sent by the Apostles after they met. He started preaching without their permission at first, true. But then he was sentby the Apostles. He says so himself.
 
Lapell said:
The disciples of Jesus of Nazareth of Jewish origin were still attending the synagogues and the Temple of Jerusalem at first, like the real Jews they still were then. (They were officially banned everywhere in 95 AD (or C.E.) but may have been expelled from certain synagogues way before that) So Paul did not have to pose as an observant Jew, for he was! So, no lie there!
Click to expand...
**To begin with, Jesus disciples were ONLY of Jewish origin. He NEVER had a Gentile for a disciple. He rather had an aversion to Gentiles, as he would forbid his disciples to bring the news of salvation to the Gentiles. Read Matthew 10:5. Please, Lapell, if you don’t want to the check the quotations I put down, don’t return with the same questions over and over again. That’s a wasting of time. Mine and yours.

The Nazarenes, disciples of Jesus were never banned in 95 CE but taken to exile in the year 134 CE immediately after the Bar Korchba war. I mean, those who remained alive.**
 
Lapell said:
How do you KNOW that the Pharisees would NEVER accept Hellenistic Jews? What’s your sources for this one information?
As for Jesus implying that He would come on a cloud sitting at the right hand of God, wasn’t it part of what Daniel spoke about when he talked of the Son of Man (or more exactly of one being looking like a son of man) in the book of Daniel? Did that Son of Man have to be God to do that?
Click to expand...
**Lapell, have you forgotten whom are you having this conversation with? I am Jewish, and I have a degree in Judaism of the First Century. I know about the Sect of the Pharisees. Hellenistic Jews were bitterly hated by Pharisees and Essenes.

Jesus never implied coming on a cloud sitting at the right hand of God. You are making a deranged man out of Jesus. For heaven’s sake, stop painting Jesus like a Greek demigod. He was just a Jew.**
 
Lapell said:
Yet when Jesus refers to this, they said He uttered a blasphemy, and they did the same when Stephen refered to the same thing? Did the Jews of Daniel’s time do the same thing to him in his days? I would think they didn’t then…
Click to expand...
Who Lapell, who said that they had uttered a blasphemy, the Gentiles who wrote the gospels? What did you expect?

What do you mean by “the Jews of Daniel’s time?” The author of the Book of Daniel is still unknown to this day. Nobody knows who wrote the Book of Daniel. The only thing we know is that it was written in Israel by someone about a certain hero called Daniel who lived in Babylon in exile. And this Daniel never returned to the Land of Israel. That’s why neither the writer was a Prophet not the Book was prophetic. In the Bible, the Book of Daniel is a historical book; not prophetic. You can check any website about the Prophets of Israel. They will show you 55 Prophets, and Daniel is not one of them.
 
Ben_Masada said:
**To begin with, Jesus disciples were ONLY of Jewish origin. He NEVER had a Gentile for a disciple. He rather had an aversion to Gentiles, as he would forbid his disciples to bring the news of salvation to the Gentiles. Read Matthew 10:5. Please, Lapell, if you don’t want to the check the quotations I put down, don’t return with the same questions over and over again. That’s a wasting of time. Mine and yours.

The Nazarenes, disciples of Jesus were never banned in 95 CE but taken to exile in the year 134 CE immediately after the Bar Korchba war. I mean, those who remained alive.**
Click to expand...
Since your posts are full of misinformations unchecked by you (or not sufficiently checked because of its one-sidedness), why do you keep posing as a true witness and a “real” Truth-seeker? Even sincerity is not enough. And even to have corrected us on certain true things is not per se a guarantee of consistency in telling the Truth. Why should I trust you totally, tell me? You are a skeptic yourself, except on cetain things which you seem to naively take for the Truth (at any rate, when it comes to matters of Christianity), so you’re not in a position to tell me to fully trust you blindly!
 
Lapell said:
Since your posts are full of misinformations unchecked by you (or not sufficiently checked because of its one-sidedness), why do you keep posing as a true witness and a “real” Truth-seeker? Even sincerity is not enough. And even to have corrected us on certain true things is not per se a guarantee of consistency in telling the Truth. Why should I trust you totally, tell me? You are a skeptic yourself, except on cetain things which you seem to naively take for the Truth (at any rate, when it comes to matters of Christianity), so you’re not in a position to tell me to fully trust you blindly!
Click to expand...
Have I ever told you or anyone else to fully trust me blindly? You have a Bible, don’t you? Why don’t you read it to confirm if things are the way I say? Lapell, for heaven’s sake, we are on a Biblical debate. You have got to be a little more aware about the themes you want to discuss. Why don’t you get some Catholic instructions in a parochial school or religious class? Sorry, but you don’t have enough of what it takes to hold a serious discussion. I am sorry Lapell, and I ask you not to keep the grudge if you are upset.
 
Ben_Masada said:
Have I ever told you or anyone else to fully trust me blindly? You have a Bible, don’t you? Why don’t you read it to confirm if things are the way I say? Lapell, for heaven’s sake, we are on a Biblical debate. You have got to be a little more aware about the themes you want to discuss. Why don’t you get some Catholic instructions in a parochial school or religious class? Sorry, but you don’t have enough of what it takes to hold a serious discussion. I am sorry Lapell, and I ask you not to keep the grudge if you are upset.
Click to expand...
What do you have in mind when you tell me that I have not enough of what it takes to “hold a serious discussion”? Because I don’t limit myself only to the verses you bring us cut off from its context? Just because you are a Jew, descendant of generations of Israelites whom the prophets warned of the consequences leaving the ways of the Lord God but didn’t really care about, “having like sheep gone astray everyone to his own way”? You have some nerve… at least, if you were speaking of the Old Testament, and even then…
 
Ben_Masada said:
** Sorry, but you don’t have enough of what it takes to hold a serious discussion. I am sorry Lapell, and I ask you not to keep the grudge if you are upset.**
Click to expand...
And I HAVE answered you using the Bible and Bible quotations I heard and heard. That I could not tell you always where the passages were from didn’t mean they did not exist!
Just because I answered in another manner doesn’t mean I should automatically be discarded, that is, if Truth really matters to you, which from the sum of your posts I get the impression it’s not the case with you.
 
Lapell said:
Since your posts are full of misinformations unchecked by you (or not sufficiently checked because of its one-sidedness), why do you keep posing as a true witness and a “real” Truth-seeker? Even sincerity is not enough. And even to have corrected us on certain true things is not per se a guarantee of consistency in telling the Truth. Why should I trust you totally, tell me? You are a skeptic yourself, except on cetain things which you seem to naively take for the Truth (at any rate, when it comes to matters of Christianity), so you’re not in a position to tell me to fully trust you blindly!
Click to expand...
Even if we were to remove the word “blindly”, I still maintain what I have said here. Half-truths are far from being the Truth!!
 
Lapell said:
What do you have in mind when you tell me that I have not enough of what it takes to “hold a serious discussion”? Because I don’t limit myself only to the verses you bring us cut off from its context? Just because you are a Jew, descendant of generations of Israelites whom the prophets warned of the consequences leaving the ways of the Lord God but didn’t really care about, “having like sheep gone astray everyone to his own way”? You have some nerve… at least, if you were speaking of the Old Testament, and even then…
Click to expand...
Oh, Oh! I didn’t mean to upset you that much. Can an apology fix that misunderstanding?
 
Lapell said:
Do you mean Y. also upset you?:confused:
Click to expand...
Heh, heh, heh … No Lapell, he didn’t upset me at all. I was just playing with the words in his apology to you: [in Bold]😃
Originally Posted by Ben Masada
Oh, Oh! I didn’t mean to upset you that much. Can an apology fix that misunderstanding?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top