K
kimmielittle
Guest
Is there any reason we’ve let Ben hi-jack this thread?
Actually, it might have been his INTENT to hi-jack, but I see that Christians in fact hi-jacked, his speculations
- Status
Actually, it might have been his INTENT to hi-jack, but I see that Christians in fact hi-jacked, his speculations
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Hiyas Ben
" I am a Jewish man with knowledge of Jewish Law, ancient and modern."]…
Then you would know the difference between speculation and fact.
Yes, you can say that again. This case recorded by John is pure speculation of very bad taste.
You can not make speculation, thoughts, conjectures - fact… without proof,
I know the Jewish Law about women caught in adultery. The Gentile who wrote that case in the fourth Gospel knew zero of it.
You can not ‘prove’ insert ] your speculations - without disproving what is accepted…as being false. In all of your posts you fail to do this.
I have indeed disproved the case here, and rather quite well. You don’t see it because your faith won’t allow you to.
Using your basis of speculation, alone…
I might as well be trying to sell… say, The Kennedy’s where assassinated by Harry Potter.
I am sure you know very well that your remark does not apply to the issue at hand.
You are presenting your subjective according your mindset ] , . theory… only.
In short it takes more than a shadow of doubt…new OR old law…to be accepted as fact
I have used Logic to prove my point. You can’t see it because where faith begins Logic ends. And where there is no chance to apply Logic, knowledge is handicapped. And for lack
of knowledge people perish. That’s in Hosea 4:6.
Ben:
T
twb1621
Guest
sorry adrift… I wasn’t writing to you…
T
twb1621
Guest
adrift;4705467:
yup, your correct kimmie… the quoting got goofed up on that one.Hiyas Adrift
I think, TWB was referencing our friend Ben’s answer to you. Not your post…it came out looking like TWB was referencing you. This is just IMHO , of course.
T
twb1621
Guest
kimmielittle;4704171:
You can not make speculation, thoughts, conjectures - fact… without proof,Hiyas Ben
" I am a Jewish man with knowledge of Jewish Law, ancient and modern."]…
Then you would know the difference between speculation and fact.
Yes, you can say that again. This case recorded by John is pure speculation of very bad taste.
I know the Jewish Law about women caught in adultery. The Gentile who wrote that case in the fourth Gospel knew zero of it.
You can not ‘prove’ insert ] your speculations - without disproving what is accepted…as being false. In all of your posts you fail to do this.
I have indeed disproved the case here, and rather quite well. You don’t see it because your faith won’t allow you to.
Using your basis of speculation, alone…
I might as well be trying to sell… say, The Kennedy’s where assassinated by Harry Potter.
I am sure you know very well that your remark does not apply to the issue at hand.
You are presenting your subjective according your mindset ] , . theory… only.
In short it takes more than a shadow of doubt…new OR old law…to be accepted as fact
I have used Logic to prove my point. You can’t see it because where faith begins Logic ends. And where there is no chance to apply Logic, knowledge is handicapped. And for lack
of knowledge people perish. That’s in Hosea 4:6.
Ben:
In the event you missed this post;
John CH 8 - 3 Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. 4 They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. 5 Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. 2 So what do you say?” 6 They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger. 3 7 4 But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he bent down and wrote on the ground.
Book Of Deuteronomy Ch;22 - 22 si dormierit vir cum uxore alterius uterque morientur id est adulter et adultera et auferes malum de Israhel 23 si puellam virginem desponderit vir et invenerit eam aliquis in civitate et concubuerit cum illa 24 educes utrumque ad portam civitatis illius et lapidibus obruentur puella quia non clamavit cum esset in civitate vir quia humiliavit uxorem proximi sui et auferes malum de medio tui.
Translation;
22 If a man lie with another man’s wife, they shall both die, that is to say, the adulterer and the adulteress: and thou shalt take away the evil out of Israel. 23 If a man have espoused a damsel that is a virgin, and some one find her in the city, and lie with her, 24 Thou shalt bring them both out to the gate of that city, and they shall be stoned: the damsel, because she cried not out, being in the city: the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s wife.
T
twb1621
Guest
" I am a Jewish man with knowledge of Jewish Law, ancient and modern."]…
Then you would know the difference between speculation and fact.
Yes, you can say that again. This case recorded by John is pure speculation of very bad taste.
You can not make speculation, thoughts, conjectures - fact… without proof,
I know the Jewish Law about women caught in adultery. The Gentile who wrote that case in the fourth Gospel knew zero of it.
You can not ‘prove’ insert ] your speculations - without disproving what is accepted…as being false. In all of your posts you fail to do this.
I have indeed disproved the case here, and rather quite well. You don’t see it because your faith won’t allow you to.
Using your basis of speculation, alone…
I might as well be trying to sell… say, The Kennedy’s where assassinated by Harry Potter.
I am sure you know very well that your remark does not apply to the issue at hand.
You are presenting your subjective according your mindset ] , . theory… only.
In short it takes more than a shadow of doubt…new OR old law…to be accepted as fact
I have used Logic to prove my point. You can’t see it because where faith begins Logic ends. And where there is no chance to apply Logic, knowledge is handicapped. And for lack
of knowledge people perish. That’s in Hosea 4:6.
Ben:
In the event you missed this post;
John CH 8 - 3 Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. 4 They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. 5 Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. 2 So what do you say?” 6 They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger. 3 7 4 But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he bent down and wrote on the ground.
Book Of Deuteronomy Ch;22 - 22 si dormierit vir cum uxore alterius uterque morientur id est adulter et adultera et auferes malum de Israhel 23 si puellam virginem desponderit vir et invenerit eam aliquis in civitate et concubuerit cum illa 24 educes utrumque ad portam civitatis illius et lapidibus obruentur puella quia non clamavit cum esset in civitate vir quia humiliavit uxorem proximi sui et auferes malum de medio tui.
Translation;
22 If a man lie with another man’s wife, they shall both die, that is to say, the adulterer and the adulteress: and thou shalt take away the evil out of Israel. 23 If a man have espoused a damsel that is a virgin, and some one find her in the city, and lie with her, 24 Thou shalt bring them both out to the gate of that city, and they shall be stoned: the damsel, because she cried not out, being in the city: the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s wife.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Hi Ben, You were proven wrong in that you attested to there never having been a law of stoning in the history of Jewish law.
I have never said that there was never a law of stoning in the history of Jewish Law. I said that stoning was never done that way reported by the gospel.
Aside from all of your comparisions, one you failed to bring up was all those who rose from the dead. None of these other victims of crucifixion returned from the dead
Prove to me that Jesus returned from the dead. He did appeared to the disciples but not after he had died. Luke says in Acts 1:3 that he appeared after his passion or sufferings.
It doesn’t mean he had died.
and by the way, many Christians who were not teachers were tortured and killed by the hundreds by all different methods so don’t even think your defense stands up to History let along Christianity.
Christians being killed by the hundreds! What does it say? Jews were killed by the millions, because they refused to become Christians. Have you forgotten the Christian Crusades and Christian Inquisions?
Finally, not one credible archeological find that provided historic verification to the existence of Christianity from its origin has ever disproved any of the teachings of Jesus or His Church. That includes the most recent finds in Jordan within the last year. SO again, why not offer credible support for your claims.
The Archaeologists don’t have to disprove the Church. We have proved what the Church has done to our People
throughout History in the name of Jesus. Jesus must have turned in his grave if the dead could be aware of what Christianity has done to his people on earth.
Ben:
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Ben. Explain this to me. You agree the Jews just did whatever they could and you yourself to discredit Jesus. Why did your own people do this?
No, Rinnie, the Jews didn’t and we still don’t do anything to discredit Jesus. We discredit those who claim that Jesus was what he was not.
Caiphas the High priest that year said Jesus should die for the people rather than the whole nation perish. INTERESTING, VERY INTERESTING WOULD YOU NOT SAY.
No, Rinnie, what is not true is not interesting. No Jew would ever say that because we all know that it’s against Torah for an individual to die for another or for a whole nation. (Deut. 24:16; II Kings 14:16; Jer. 31:30; Ezek. 18:4)
Now He was PROPHESYING that Jesus was to die for the nation and not for the nation only but also to gather together into one the scattered children of God.
If that was a prophecy it would be a false prophecy because it would be against Torah.
Now is that not odd, and it does fullfill scripture. Could you explain it to me. Why would your people do this, do you feel this discredited Jesus. Or could you say just more proof?
I told you already. We are not here to discredit Jesus but what people claim falsely about Jesus.
How could you not say this is proof. Especially when it was done by your people. Can’t blame any believer of Jesus for that one.
It’s not, Rinnie. Proof of what, by the way?
Ben:
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Okay Now no one has denied that this is a Parable. Actually is callled a parable. But here is something I would like you to answer me.
You said That according to Jewish law before someone could be stoned there was to be a trial. Now you claim that this COULD not have happened. Why Not. Becasue you said there had to have been a trial. I do not disagree with you on that. Here is where we differ. You said it could not have happened. Why NOT?
I mean not that way. After the trial and the decision of the Sanhedrin, the condemned could never be brought to a private citizen, with the power to reverse the Sanhedrin’s decision. IMPOSSIBLE! The guy who wrote about that case was literally making a joke out of Jesus to report such a thing; unless it was only a parable.
IT says they brought this women to Jesus and asked Jesus to test him to make a decision. Did Jesus make a call. No he did not. Why did he not. 2 reasons. First of all do you not think that JEsus knew according to the law he could not.
That’s exactly what I mean. Jesus knew he could not. It means that the case never happened but as an interpolation to make fun of the Jews. But Jews are much more intelligent than that.
Second do you not think Jesus knew they were trying to trick him to make that call.
Jesus could not know what did not happen. It was fabricated more than 30 years after Jesus had been gone.
He never said the women was inocent or guilty. He said let the one among you who is guiltless throw the first stone.
Then Jesus said where are they, Has no one condemmed you, Neither do I. Go and sin no more.
If you believe the case was real, do you know why neither could Jesus condemn the woman? If the Jews could not condemn her because they were sinners, why couldn’t Jesus either? Do we have to be genius to know that it was for the same reason?
Now why could this not: have happened to try to get him to break the law?
We don’t have to fabricate such a thing to prove that Jesus broke the Law. What does the Golden Rule say? “Don’t do unto others what you would not like they did unto you.” Would you like someone to disrupt the business you use to make a living from? No, you would not like. Jesus did to the money changers in front of the Temple. So, he broke the Golden Rule with no need to invent something that makes no sense.
For the record I was taught Jesus never wrote anything in the sand, and was only doing it to save her embarrasment. BUt its your definition I have a problem with. Your turn
I am not the one who said that Jesus wrote something on the sand. I only elaborated on what was asked and gave my contribution. You guys started the whole thing.
Ben:
T
twb1621
Guest
T
twb1621
Guest
Ben Masada;4707310Okay Now no one has denied that this is a Parable. Actually is callled a parable. But here is something I would like you to answer me. said:
IT says they brought this women to Jesus and asked Jesus to test him to make a decision. Did Jesus make a call. No he did not. Why did he not. 2 reasons. First of all do you not think that JEsus knew according to the law he could not.
That’s exactly what I mean. Jesus knew he could not. It means that the case never happened but as an interpolation to make fun of the Jews. But Jews are much more intelligent than that.
Second do you not think Jesus knew they were trying to trick him to make that call.
Jesus could not know what did not happen. It was fabricated more than 30 years after Jesus had been gone.
He never said the women was inocent or guilty. He said let the one among you who is guiltless throw the first stone.
Then Jesus said where are they, Has no one condemmed you, Neither do I. Go and sin no more.
If you believe the case was real, do you know why neither could Jesus condemn the woman? If the Jews could not condemn her because they were sinners, why couldn’t Jesus either? Do we have to be genius to know that it was for the same reason?
Now why could this not: have happened to try to get him to break the law?
We don’t have to fabricate such a thing to prove that Jesus broke the Law. What does the Golden Rule say? “Don’t do unto others what you would not like they did unto you.” Would you like someone to disrupt the business you use to make a living from? No, you would not like. Jesus did to the money changers in front of the Temple. So, he broke the Golden Rule with no need to invent something that makes no sense.
For the record I was taught Jesus never wrote anything in the sand, and was only doing it to save her embarrasment. BUt its your definition I have a problem with. Your turn
I am not the one who said that Jesus wrote something on the sand. I only elaborated on what was asked and gave my contribution. You guys started the whole thing.
Ben:
Ben, your debating has no worth in this sense as you are arguing a point that doesn’t exist. Read the Verses. They do not depict a situation as you are implying to begin with. Also, it is understandable why a person who still is of the Jewish belief would deny the authenticity of Christianity. To acknowledge Christianity would lead to conversion so you wouldn’t be as you are now. But keep in mind for all the expertise and understanding you pride yourself with there were many Jews who converted back then and throughout history and the numbers are growing. Unless you claim to be the most intelligent of all, perhaps there is more you need to research because you DO NOT know Christianity at all to try to refute it.
B
Ben_Masada
Guest
Very good, so what’s taking so long for you to answer my questions? I am here to learn. The Truth is One. Either you have it and I don’t, or it could be the other way around: That I have it and you don’t. Let’s exchange our researches. Who knows you could persuade me of the way you think, or I could persuade you of the way I do.
In John 17:17 Jesus says that the Truth is the Word of God. And in Psalm 147:19,20 the Word of God was given to Israel only and to no other people on earth. Then, Isaiah says that for Gentiles to get instructions in the Word of God, the address is Zion, the Jewish People. (Isa. 2:2,3) What do you have to say about this?
Ben:
R
rinnie
Guest
You answered that question yourself. Jesus says the Truth is the word of God. Jesus gave the word of God to the gentiles because the Jewish People would not except him. Not all of course but most.
Very good, so what’s taking so long for you to answer my questions? I am here to learn. The Truth is One. Either you have it and I don’t, or it could be the other way around: That I have it and you don’t. Let’s exchange our researches. Who knows you could persuade me of the way you think, or I could persuade you of the way I do.
In John 17:17 Jesus says that the Truth is the Word of God. And in Psalm 147:19,20 the Word of God was given to Israel only and to no other people on earth. Then, Isaiah says that for Gentiles to get instructions in the Word of God, the address is Zion, the Jewish People. (Isa. 2:2,3) What do you have to say about this?
Ben:
T
twb1621
Guest
nice twist, What questions did you ask me that I didn’t respond to, which post numbers? your not here to learn, by your words you are here to try to bring back those Chirstians who were previously of Jewish heritage, remember?
Very good, so what’s taking so long for you to answer my questions? I am here to learn. The Truth is One. Either you have it and I don’t, or it could be the other way around: That I have it and you don’t. Let’s exchange our researches. Who knows you could persuade me of the way you think, or I could persuade you of the way I do.
In John 17:17 Jesus says that the Truth is the Word of God. And in Psalm 147:19,20 the Word of God was given to Israel only and to no other people on earth. Then, Isaiah says that for Gentiles to get instructions in the Word of God, the address is Zion, the Jewish People. (Isa. 2:2,3) What do you have to say about this?
Ben:
Was not Jesus Jewish and was not Zion a place of reverence for Jesus and the Apostles? After all, Christianity derived from the Jewish heritage whether you like hearing it or not. It is not up to me to convert you if it is to be, it will be by the will of God. I spent 25 years finding fault with the Church until I used methods, resources, and contacts through my past profession to find out the truth for myself and I was dead wrong and ashamed of myself. But it is each person’s responsibility to learn the truth and pursue it. Researching through numerous credible sources, non-biased and historically first before theologically, especially when you are someone like me who questions and analyzes just about everything. You can’t do it by researching the Jewish heritage alone. If you have questions that I can answer I will, but I will not play the ego entertainment game here with you.
J
Just_Returned
Guest
Lee Strobels “Case For Christ” Refutes just about every argument Mr. Masadas “Case Against Christ” trys to make.
Most of Mr. Masadas comments come out of an OLD Discredited book written back in the 70’s called “Holy Ghost, Holy Grail”. Maybe they stole these arguments from someone else? I don’t know?
For Example, Both Mention Jesus having Died only after a few hours on the Cross. I don’t have time to go over ALL of Mr. Masadas Tired Old arguments. Most are Ridiculous, anyway.
As Lee Strobels book points out. The beating Jesus received with the special whip the Roman Soldiers used tore the flesh off the skin and caused him to lose massive amounts of Blood. Mel Gibson’s Passion of Christ Movie was historically acurate.
Proof? The Loss of Blood from the beating and whipping caused Jesus to go into a Hypovolemic state causing serous fluid to surround the heart. Jesus hardly had the strength to carry his Cross due to the beating and loss of Blood. When Jesus “Thirst” on the Cross, it was not only to fullfill prophecy, but Also due to his Hypovqlemic State. (God Thinks of everything) When the Roman soldier threw his spear into Jesus’s side piercing his Heart, the Blood with water spilled out as witnessed by the Apostle John, prooving that he was in fact an eye witness to the event. For centuries Non-believers questioned John’s account of “Water” flowing from the heart and the side of Christ. Modern medicine tells us this is serous fluid that would have formed from a severe loss of blood. A first century man would have called it Water, since it is a clear fluid. With the Beating, loss of blood, and being Nailed to a Cross, it’s surprising Jesus lasted as Long as he did. I hope I explained it as well as Mr. Strobel did in his book.
SO!
Jesus was IN-Fact Dead. John was INDEED an eyewitness. When a Roman Soldier Killed you, much like a United States Marine, You Are DEAD.
Also, Strobel points out the fact that EVEN if Jesus was Alive and the Ressurection was a fake. Who in their Right mind would Follow him in the NEW Conemant? The Early Christians gave up everything, THOUSANDS of years of Their Old Covenant, to follow Christ in the New.
All but One of the Original Apostles were Martyred in Horrible ways. Never Once did they deny the Death and Ressurection of Christ. Many other Christians were Murdered for their belief in Christ Jesus. All could Not have been Madmen or Halucinating when they saw the Risen Lord.
" People will die for a great cause, but the Apostles Great cause Died on Good Friday. People will die for a lie they think is the Truth. No One DIES for a LIE that they KNOW is a LIE."
Josh McDowell(I think Josh Might have stole this quote, but he’s who I heard it from)
I Hope Mr. Masada arguments, which are the Same Tired old Arguments that have been refuted for YEARS, are NOT what Jewish Rabbi’s are teaching their Congregation? If so, this LACK of Honesty is Disturbing.
Most of Mr. Masadas comments come out of an OLD Discredited book written back in the 70’s called “Holy Ghost, Holy Grail”. Maybe they stole these arguments from someone else? I don’t know?
For Example, Both Mention Jesus having Died only after a few hours on the Cross. I don’t have time to go over ALL of Mr. Masadas Tired Old arguments. Most are Ridiculous, anyway.
As Lee Strobels book points out. The beating Jesus received with the special whip the Roman Soldiers used tore the flesh off the skin and caused him to lose massive amounts of Blood. Mel Gibson’s Passion of Christ Movie was historically acurate.
Proof? The Loss of Blood from the beating and whipping caused Jesus to go into a Hypovolemic state causing serous fluid to surround the heart. Jesus hardly had the strength to carry his Cross due to the beating and loss of Blood. When Jesus “Thirst” on the Cross, it was not only to fullfill prophecy, but Also due to his Hypovqlemic State. (God Thinks of everything) When the Roman soldier threw his spear into Jesus’s side piercing his Heart, the Blood with water spilled out as witnessed by the Apostle John, prooving that he was in fact an eye witness to the event. For centuries Non-believers questioned John’s account of “Water” flowing from the heart and the side of Christ. Modern medicine tells us this is serous fluid that would have formed from a severe loss of blood. A first century man would have called it Water, since it is a clear fluid. With the Beating, loss of blood, and being Nailed to a Cross, it’s surprising Jesus lasted as Long as he did. I hope I explained it as well as Mr. Strobel did in his book.
SO!
Jesus was IN-Fact Dead. John was INDEED an eyewitness. When a Roman Soldier Killed you, much like a United States Marine, You Are DEAD.
Also, Strobel points out the fact that EVEN if Jesus was Alive and the Ressurection was a fake. Who in their Right mind would Follow him in the NEW Conemant? The Early Christians gave up everything, THOUSANDS of years of Their Old Covenant, to follow Christ in the New.
All but One of the Original Apostles were Martyred in Horrible ways. Never Once did they deny the Death and Ressurection of Christ. Many other Christians were Murdered for their belief in Christ Jesus. All could Not have been Madmen or Halucinating when they saw the Risen Lord.
" People will die for a great cause, but the Apostles Great cause Died on Good Friday. People will die for a lie they think is the Truth. No One DIES for a LIE that they KNOW is a LIE."
Josh McDowell(I think Josh Might have stole this quote, but he’s who I heard it from)
I Hope Mr. Masada arguments, which are the Same Tired old Arguments that have been refuted for YEARS, are NOT what Jewish Rabbi’s are teaching their Congregation? If so, this LACK of Honesty is Disturbing.
A
adrift
Guest
adrift;4699421:
What is Yom Kippur?
A symbolic Jewish tradition to seek for God’s forgiveness for the offenses against one another. But we all know
that there is no forgiveness if we don’t seek forgiveness first from each other.(“Day of Atonement”) is the tenth day of the month of Tishrei. It is the holiest day of the Jewish year. On this day, G-d seals our fate for the coming year, therefore, the entire day is spent fasting and praying to G-d for forgiveness and a good year.
This is a definition that I found. I know that you are dancing around this because it undermines your statement but it also gets a sidetrack so I will move on.
All of them? It only took two to walk in on her and her partner who undoubtedly was part of the trap. I found this
What court procedure? None is mentioned?Ben:
A
adrift
Guest
I really wasn’t sure who you were speaking to but since I was the one asking questions I thought you meant me.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
K
kimmielittle
Guest
J
Joe_5859
Guest
Is this thread still about Jesus writing in the sand?
- Status