The Story of the "certain" Witnesses?

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 166
Topic's author
#151
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret

 But he [Lazarus] is a disciple using even the terminology you used.  

But how do you know he was a disciple when he is nowhere named as one.? And  I haven't used any terminology.

 I have  only  used  that which is only available from the BIBLE when I had to correct you where you have categorically stated that " Lazarus was a disciple". here> 
Tradesecret wrote: My personal view is that it was more likely Lazarus who both wrote the gospel and who was this character. He by the way was a disciple but not an apostle.
My only input to that totally unfounded comment of yours was this, where the BIBLE only ever states Lazarus as being a friend. here>

Stephen Wrote: What makes you say he was a disciple? Does the BIBLE say he was a Disciple? Well NO it doesn't does it!  YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN! The BIBLE clearly states that he was only a "friend".John 11:11  #114
And we don't here much about him afterwards either only to say that he was present at an anointing of Jesus and "reclining with Jesus". John 12:1–2
So can you state for me the "terminology" that the BIBLE is using to suggest Lazarus was a disciple?


Topic's author
#152
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
TRADESECRET WROTE: (A)Each of the four gospels are telling the same story, Not exactly of course. But they are all presenting it quite different ways. Sometimes they use the same source and sometimes they don't. The question is not whether they agree perfectly but whether they actually contradict each other.  Witnesses never tell exactly the same story - or else they are seen to be scheming - a conspiracy.  When they give different aspects - and sometimes different scenarios - it adds to the picture - but also provides the vibe of authencity.  #139

(B)Occam's razor tells us the simplest explanation is often the correct one. #116
  
How very right you are. So with both your facts in mind, let see if we can break this down events leading up to the trial.

Bethany in Galilee in the bible appears to have been Jesus’ centre of operations. This is where Lazarus lived and where Jesus is said to have “raised” Lazarus from the “dead” – after saying he wouldn’t die and that he was only “sick” then “asleep”. It is more likely that Lazarus had lost faith in the Jesus movement of the “living” as many others had and had left it altogether to return to be among the “dead”. It appears that Jesus may have talked him around to staying with a promise or a bribe maybe? And it was here that John the Baptist was recruiting disciples to his own flock via the ritual of baptism.

It is also the home town of many of the women in Jesus's life. And it was also where the house of Simon the Leper was located, so quite a lot was happening in Jesus’ life in and around Bethany, including an anointing at which the disciples present are not happy with the situation and where Judas makes up his to betray Jesus? Matthew 26:6-14.

It is questionable if Jesus would have gone to a lepers house unless, as has been suggested, this was simply a “nick-name” which wouldn’t be unusual at all as Jesus gave his disciples nick-names and appellations. Another reason would be that this was simply a man at the leper stage in the Jesus movement and was waiting to be promoted in a cleansing ritual (A silk purse into a sows ear so to speak as in water into wine). After all, it is a bit of a derogatory appellation to bestow on a man that had shown Jesus such generosity Did this particular Leper become raised? There may be reasonable evidence that he was and a clue might be is that at on a singular occasion at one point Jesus did reluctantly do exactly this.
A man with leprosy came to him and begged him on his knees,“If you are willing, you can make me clean. Jesus was indignant. He reached out his hand and touched the man.“I am willing,”he said.“Be clean!”

The odd thing about this is that there is no mention of Satan possessing Judas at that moment. The possession of Judas by Satan comes only much later in the story at the last supper.
So we have a house of disciples all full of anger and disgust and that includes Judas Iscariot son of Simon Iscariot/ Sicarii dagger men also known as assassins among the zealot movement.. But what gave them reason to be so outraged? Weren't they expecting this anointing to take place? And was this the catalyst that caused them to turn their backs on the Jesus movement altogether? We know many left and well before Jesus’ arrest. John 6:66.

There is good argument to be had that Jesus had well and truly upset the Zealots in his camp. “Render unto Caesar”, “turn the other cheek” and “love thine enemies” were far from anything a Galilean Zealot would agree to where the Romans were concerned and were certainly not the words of an expected Messiah that was supposed to free them from the Roman yoke.



An identical account of the anointing of Jesus appears at the house of a Pharisee. One can suppose it only natural and not untypical for the gospel accounts to vary as the bible often shows and is attested to by many a scholar. SEE A& B above #152 . The gospel writers can’t agree on Jesus’ day of birth or even the day of the crucifixion or his linage or his pedigree. But again on this occasion we have a disgruntled person that also appears to be outraged disgusted with the situation.. It turned out that a strange women simply invited herself to the party baring more of the same oils and potions. Luke 7:37

Luke 7:36 KJV “And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat”.
So, leaving aside the fact that Jesus here appears to be eating with enemy the owner of this house is also called Simon. The age old question then is, are Simon the Leper and Simon the Pharisee one and the same person? The similarities of these occasions are far too close for them not to be. And as is often shown in these ambiguous bible stories it is simply a case of one author filling in some parts others have omitted as is also testified to by many a scholar. SEE A& B above #152 . Christians like to use the reasoning to deny that these two Simons are one and the same on the grounds that the name Simon “was common in those times”. There are nine people that we know of that are connected to Jesus and they are all named Simon. But would a Pharisee be seen dead in the presence of a “sinful” woman – a prostitute? Luke 7:36-37

I shall digress for a moment:
Think on this. What are the odds? The day of the crucifixion by all accounts a man just happened to be walking home and passing by the crucifixion party when he was pressed into carry the crucifix for Jesus, his name just happened to be Simon too.
And as mentioned above, others fill in parts others omit to mention. Compare
Matthew 27:30-32. Mark 15:19-21.Luke 23:23-26.
So much for baring your own cross, Luke 14:25-27, And John’s gospel is totally silent on the matter.


Anyway, this Pharisee/ leper at the anointing whose name just also happened to Simon. What had happened to upset this Simon the Pharisee/leper? Well, where we have in the first instance the disciples- Judas in particular - were enraged at the “costly perfume” we also can read that Simon the Pharisee/leper was so absolutely outraged at what was happening in his house with the prostitute that he seriously questioned Jesus’ credentials saying “this is no Prophet/ messiah”, Luke 7:39. And it has to be asked, why had a Pharisee invited Jesus to his home in the first place? None of this part of the story makes any sense at all on the face of it. But we may have a reason for the invite?

Jesus is said to have healed the mother in law of a Simon;

“And he arose out of the synagogue, and entered into Simon's house. And Simon's wife's mother was taken with a great fever; and they besought him for her.
And he stood over her, and rebuked the fever; and it left her: and immediately she arose and ministered unto them”. Luke 4:38-39 < this is believed to have been Simon Peter’s house and his mother in law that was sick,?

Do any of the other gospels tell a similar story?

When Jesus entered the synagogue [unnamed] leader’s house and saw the noisy crowd and people playing pipes, he said,“Go away. The girl is not dead but asleep.”But they laughed at him. After the crowd had been put outside, he went in and took the girl by the hand, and she got up. News of this spread through all that region. Matthew 9:23-26. Other versions say “rulers house”. “leaders house” or “officials house”.So whatever his name, it is enough that we know he was Pharisee.

Jesus’ first meeting with Andrew and Simon the fishermen?

“Jesus was walking by the Sea of Galilee. He saw two brothers. They were Simon called Peter and Andrew, his brother”. Matthew 4:18-20. Jesus is alleged to have simply said “follow me” and hypnotically -“they straight away” - abandon their nets, tools, boats, business, home, wives, children and any other family without a single good-by and followed a man they had never met in all of their lives. So we have two brothers Andrew and Simon and clearly we see that the BIBLE is making no mistake that this Simon was also called Peter from the off.
Various bibles leave this point out altogether, ex - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%201%3A16-18&version=NIV


We can be in no doubt that the Christian will pounce on this and allege that this Simon fisherman was called Peter only at a later time in the story. But they ignore one very big detail.

Let’s read it:

“Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, was one of the two who heard what John [the baptist] had said and who had followed Jesus. The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah” (that is, the Christ).  And he brought him to Jesus.
[A]Jesus looked at him and said,“You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas”(which, when translated, is Peter)”. John 1:40-42
So here we see entirely different circumstances under which Jesus is said to have first met Simon called Peter the fisherman. We see that Andrew and his brother Simon weren’t together fishing or mending their nets at all. And certainly no mention of a calling to “follow me”. In fact Andrew had to go and find his brother Simon and bring him to Jesus. And we hear Andrew proclaiming Jesus to be the Messiah!. And it is here that the creation of another name for Simon is alleged to have happened. What’s more they were both disciples of the firebrand from Bethany in Galilee; John the Baptist. But there is one other thing this story omits, that is the actual name of the second of John’s disciple that was also following it only names Andrew.

But look harder. Is Jesus here is telling us that Simon, now also called Peter, is the Son of the Bapatist John![A] and let's not forget that Andrew and Simon now called Peter are brothers!


Are we to believe that in this version these two that are John's disciples just deserted John the Baptist and suddenly discipled to became followers of of Jesus with out being asked or invited to join the Jesus party?
Were they ordered by John the Baptist to join the Jesus movement? Or were they ordered to follow Jesus to see where he went and what he got up to? It appears to be more of an infiltration of the Jesus party.


 So we have a house full of outraged disciples that included Judas and of which  some are told to follow Jesus on the orders of  the firebrand John the Baptist, some known zealots, and what appears to be on the surface a generous and grateful Simon Pharisee the leper that is also outraged concerning the behaviour between Jesus and an uninvited prostitute. And let's not forget that the once sick, asleep and then "dead" Lazarus was also present after Jesus had performed  the "raising from the dead" ritualistic ceremony on his friend.

So no one but Jesus and his whore are at all overjoyed with the situation as it stands . And this is where the cracks started to appear. 




Topic's author
#153
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Simon –called Peter.
Whichever version one accepts of Jesus’ alleged first meeting with Simon –called Peter everything about it doesn’t make the blindest bit of sense.
It is the belief of millions of Christians that Simon Peter (meaning rock) would be the rock on which Jesus would build his church and “that nothing would prevail against it”. This belief has come about because of this bible verse:
Matthew 16:18 “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”.

And at Matthew 16:19 he goes further saying to Simon Peter:
“And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matt.16:14–19.)


If there is any literal truth in this at all then it didn’t age well at all, did it?. Because only 5 short verses later and in the very same chapter, we read Jesus saying this to “his rock” Simon Peter :

Matthew 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Simon Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: you are a stumbling block to me.":

Using verses from the bible it is proven what a Satan actually is and means; an “accuser” here > https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8152-the-story-of-the-certain-witnesses?page=4&post_number=88

So what caused this sudden change of attitude to his “rock” Simon Peter?
Well it appears to have been nothing more than his “rock” saying that he wouldn’t allow Jesus to die.



Well there's’ gratitude for you. Simon Peter his “rock” is prepared to put his life on the line for him and is all he gets in return is a mouthful of abuse which includes variations of:

"Peter you are a dangerous trap to me".
" you are hindrance to me".
" you are an offence unto me".
"you are a scandal unto me".
"you are an obstacle in my way". So we can be certain that Simon Peter was well and truly off the Christmas card list and as far from being a leader of anything never mind Jesus’ new church. It appears that Jesus was onto Simon called Peter and had no intention of giving him keys to the local latrine never mind the “kingdom of god or heaven”. And let’s not forget Simon the “rock” and his brother Andrew had, after all, apparently changed sides from once being a disciple of John the Baptist and some believe on the orders of John himself?

For Simon Peter “rock” aka “Satan the accuser” it wasn’t the only time that he seemed to be purposefully being a “hindrance and offence” to Jesus. Because, the bible states that on the night of Jesus’ arrest Simon Peter the accusing Satan had failed Jesus something terrible!
It was in the garden of Gethsemane that Jesus is said to have been arrested. He had asked Simon Peter “Stay here and keep watch.” but he, conveniently fell asleep, three times!
Let’s read it;


Mark 14:29-45 New International Version
Peter declared, “Even if all fall away, I will not.”
“Truly I tell you,”Jesus answered,“today—yes, tonight—before the rooster crows twice you yourself will disown me three times.”But Peter insisted emphatically, “Even if I have to die with you, I will never disown you.” And all the others said the same.
They went to a place called Gethsemane, and Jesus said to his disciples,“Sit here while I pray.”He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled.“My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death,”he said to them.“Stay here and keep watch.”Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him.“Abba, Father,”he said,“everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.”
Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping.“Simon,”he said to Peter,“are you asleep? Couldn’t you keep watch for one hour? Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.”
Once more he went away and prayed the same thing. When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. They did not know what to say to him.
Returning the third time, he said to them,“Are you still sleeping and resting? Enough! The hour has come. Look, the Son of Man is delivered into the hands of sinners Rise! Let us go! Here comes my betrayer!” [Judas]

From the above passages it clearly appears that Jesus wasn't expecting to be arrested at all that night simply because he had three sleeping disciples that were supposed to be "keeping watch". Why had he ordered this protection if it was all predestined? And doesn't the scripture actually state that "Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him"? Why hadn't he just at there waiting for what he believed was the inevitable? Why did he say "lets go" when his other accuser Judas had turned up to plant a betrayers kiss on his cheek as an identifying sign?<< Which is something else in dispute because John 18:4-8 tells us that Jesus identifide himself. twice!

So here then is Simon Peter/Satan the accuser falling asleep three times. Are these the three "disownals and denials" that Jesus speaks of at Mark 14:30 in the above chapter? Or was there also another time?

Well of course there was. Simon Peter aka Satan the accuser just happened to be one of those two disciples that thought it would be a good idea to follow the arresting party back to the trial. Why? And this second round of denials comes when Simon Peter the accuser is waiting outside the courtyard where the trial of Jesus is about to take place, waiting to be brought in.

I was asked earlier by you "but was Simon Peter brought in". Well for someone that claims to read his New Testament twice a year and preaches it to his flock of over three hundred this is an astonishing question for you to have to to ask, here>

Tradesecret wrote: Was Peter let in? I will wait for the verse which says Peter was let in. #82

John 18:15-16 King James Version
"And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple: that disciple was known unto the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest. But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter”.!!
But mores the point at this Juncture we know for certain that Peter just like Judas were standing in the court both in hearing and seeing distance of Jesus. How? Because the BIBLE says so of course:

Luke 22:61 “And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice”.

We can see from this that Simon Peter aka Satan the accuser was well in the thick of it. And it is because of this that it doesn’t take too much of a leap to say that the Simon the Pharisee- Simon leper and Simon the “rock” are all one and the same person.

The three denials can be read here> Luke 22:56-60
But a certain maid beheld him as he sat by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This man was also with him.
And he denied him, saying, Woman, I know him not.
And after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, Man, I am not.
And about the space of one hour after another confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow also was with him: for he is a Galilaean.
And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew."

“Galilaean”! Now there’s a surprise. Galilee, aka “the desert” aka “the wilderness” aka the bandit country of the murderous assassin Zealots



Tradesecret wrote: 11. Simon the Canaanite, and the zealot.

Indeed but what you forgot to add was this Simon the Canaanite and the Zealot was also the father of Judas Iscariot as explained to you earlier on this thread.


So what do we know about Simon at number 11 on your list disciples, Tradesecret? Because on the surface the bible tells us very little about him.









7 days later

Topic's author
#154
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret




Indeed, Tradesecret. But what you forgot to add was this Simon the Canaanite and the Zealot was also the father of Judas Iscariot (aka Satan) as explained to you via the BIBLE earlier on this thread. >. "son of" John 6:71. "Devil" John 6:70.



So what do we know about Simon at number 11 on your list disciples, Tradesecret? Because on the surface the bible tells us very little about him.

…………………………..
The Zealot stance was a simple one. Rome was the enemy and Rome had to leave the birthright that had been bestowed on Israel by their god. Every Jews duty was to fight for the reinstatement of a rightful ruler to preside over the Kingdom of Israel. No Jew should “render unto Caesar” any tax or acknowledge him as their ruler or master. The mission of Zealots was supported from many quarters including Pharisee and the “poor” of Qumran- the Essenes. And it was anything goes; they were to use any and all means possible to achieve their goal; Jewish independence. This would include anything from large scale military operations, guerilla warfare, assassinations, cutting supply routes and cutting the throats of their own family members that opposed them or believed to be traitors. In other words, they were the terrorist of the day and all from Galilee where they were first formed by another (failed) Messiah by the name of Judas of Galilee/ Gamala

Yes, another Simon.
Simon the Canaanite/Simon the Zealot and father to Judas Iscariot aka Satan.
The NT made it clear on this occasion that two Simons were actually one and the same person. But while many Christians seem to believe that this Canaanite was from a place called Canaan it is simply not the case. The word is a political designation and not regional one.
The NIV bible at Acts 1:13,Luke 6:15,Matthew 10:4 & Mark 3:18 do not hesitate to call him out for what he is; an outright Zealot. The KJV calls him by his not so Zealotey sounding name- the Canaanite Matthew 10:4 KJV.

& Mark

As you may know, Tradesecret, with all of your years of training in ancient languages that the Aramaic word equal to Zealot is- qannai and when rendered (or corrupted) into Greek becomes – kananaios – into English – Canaanite – meaning Zealot .

What about those other two disciples on your list that are prone to violence at the first sign of resistance to the cause, James and John?#99
 We can be sure that Jesus didn’t just pull their designated surname “Boanerges” out of a hat. This designation the bible says means “sons of thunder”. But it isn’t clear if or not this designation is referring to their father- Zebedee or is the direct designation given only to his two sons. Mark 3:17 KJV. Either way, be it sons and/or father, at least two of these men were men of violence and fierce individuals which the BIBLE attest to. We also know that these two were vying against Simon- called Peter aka Satan, for a high position in the movement too, and at any cost. Mark 10:35-37

How and where did Jesus meet these two “Boanerges” men of violence? Well it appears that, like Simon – called Peter and his brother Andrew “they straight away” - abandon their nets, tools, boats, business, home, wives, children and any other family without a single good-by and followed a man they had never met in all of their lives:

“And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and he called them.
And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him”.

With the little biblical information we have about these two disciples there is only one conclusion to be drawn; they too are Zealots. They were easily riled, quick to explode and quick to call down violence on anyone that showed the slightest opposition to the cause. And they once begged Jesus ignore a please of “demon possessed” little girl…… who just happened to be the daughter of a Zealot/Canaanite. As mentioned above, the Zealots will see their own fry if it furthers the cause and protects the secrets of the mission.

And Jesus met them in Galilee, where else?

And keep this in mind, Tradesecret, that the wife of Zebedee, the mother of James and John was named Salome. One of those women of Bethany.

Jesus is beginning to look like a military leader on a recruiting  campaign.

..................................................
So who else do we have on your list of twelve disciples, Tradesecret? How about another known cut-throat Zealot in the Jesus camp.
Number 10 on your chosen cut and pasted list.
#155
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen
@Tradesecret


Stephen,

As you have adamantly shown, you have buried the poor  Miss Tradesecret because in what she thought she knew upon the topic, and as usual, she didn't! 

Besides, Miss Tradesecret IS NOT A CHRISTIAN to begin with,  because she is a woman that is NOT supposed to be within this Religion Forum in "trying" to usurp the authority over the superior man (1 Timothy 2:11-12), she is a hypocrite, and a LIAR, and she uses lame EXCUSES to run away from posts that she can't answer,  and she is an ungodly SEXUAL DEVIANT with her family members that Jesus says will send her to HELL upon her earthly demise, praise Jesus' revenge (Galations 5:19-21)!

.


Topic's author
#156
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas

   Well I was, and still am, hoping Tradesecret would take this very rare opportunity to  engage in a cordial exchange on a thread that has, thankfully, gone almost uninterrupted by other members here. It is after all something Tradesecret complains never happens or ever gets the chance to do.

 Tradsecret to my mind has no excuses not come to this thread to discuss and debate and seek to prove the rightness of his cause by the use of any effective and reasoned argument or discussion and to dispute anything I have to say concerning the scriptures.

 Meanwhile I will simply keep heading in the direction I am in dripping out what I believe was really going on in the life of Jesus in scripture just below the surface.
Topic's author
#157
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
So who else do we have on your list of twelve disciples, Tradesecret? How about another known cut-throat Zealot in the Jesus camp.
Number 10 on your chosen cut and pasted list. We have already touched on this disciple at #110 ,
but let us have a closer look at him.

Tradesecret wrote:
"10. Thaddaeus; or Lebbaeus or Judas the Zealot in Matthew and Mark, known as Judas, son of James, not Iscariot in Luke and John and Acts".
And you left off your list that he is also aka Jude. And Judas Brother of James.
So here again, we have yet another cut – throat Zealot in the Jesus camp that the BIBLE is openly admitting to.

Interesting that the bible is quite silent on this Zealot, Thaddaeus . His name interchanges quite a lot and can become very confusing. This Zealot disciple is also know as Judas, Brother of James & Jude. But lets stick to the specific biblical names on your chosen list.

Thaddaeus - In the bible there is absolutely nothing recorded by this man under this name only as mentioned on the list of 12 disciples!?
Labbaeus - In the bible there is absolutely nothing recorded by this man under this name and is only mentioned on the list of 12 disciples!?!?
Judas the Zealot -In the bible there is absolutely nothing recorded by this man under this name!?
Judas, son of James. It is only here and under this name that this man with four names is recorded as saying anything at all worth of note in John 14:22 NIV. This verse is interesting in that this Zealot is asking Jesus why he is keeping his identity secret from the "rest the world "? Why indeed? Maybe it was because it wasn't the right time and he wasn't ready? Was it a case that his army of followers wasn't large enough to take on Rome at this point in the mission? Maybe he was going to remedy this shortage of 4 or 5,000  with a "miracle"?

We have to wonder why then the bible is silent on this Zealot Thaddaeus/Lebbaeus? He was important enough to be listed among the inner circle of twelve and we also know that he was given, and trusted with, supernatural powers as were the other 11 disciples which included the sword wielding Simon- called Peter and Satan, and Judas the betrayer and the man that Jesus called the "devil" as shown here>
"When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases". Luke 9:1
So where on earth do Christians get the background from for this elusive Zealot of the inner 12 disciples, Tradescret?

The nameThaddaeus/Lebbaeus is believed to mean "man of courage" "sent from god" or "courageous". Why is he known for his courage? The bible on the surface mentions nothing concerning a single courageous action by this Zealot with many names. Those Christian scholars that you put so much trust in have written many of words about this man which all boil down to them all saying the same thing;
' we know nothing', so on the question of this Zealot they are a silent as the bible!? Yet the Christian church have made him a "Saint".

The only thing we know about him comes under the other name that you left off your list; Jude. Which boils down to nothing more than five mentions of Jesus out of some 661 words in the whole letter that the bible authors attributes to Jude. And in which he refers to himself not as a disciple but a "bond servant". Here>>

But here is something that you may not like to face. Lets look at this part of the long name Thaddaeus/Lebbaeus;
Judas the Zealot (not Judas Iscariot) known as Judas, son of James #99

To remind you; I had above said this to you when we previously touched on this name:
Stephen wrote: "Anyway, be it son of - or brother of - James, you should think on that a while". #110

This is where your own teaching and translation of Hebrew and Greek should come in handy, Tradesecret.... If your "Hebrew mentor in Moscow" was worth his salt.
Son of "James", with the name James literally meaning "supplanter and to supersede another especially by force or treachery". And I am sure that even you know that the Greek rendering of the words bar – abba simply means - son of - the father .

So here then among this disciples other names we have a Judas that is a son of a treacherous supplanter. This fact couldn't have gone unnoticed by Jesus, could it, Tradesecret? Names meant everything in those times as I am sure your know. And there is no mention of Jesus himself changing or adding these other names/ appellations to this Judas/Thaddaeus.

So with a careful reading we clearly see that we have two disciples named Judas whose fathers also just happened to be both called James. With the bible telling us that one of these Judas' is Zealot and with the other Judas being a traitor whose surname happens to be Isacriot /Sicarii also a Zealot.
It appears to me that the gospel writers are at pains to disguise or bury the real nature of this disciple named Thaddaeus Aka Judas the Zealot and why his name means "man of courage sent from god" . And the clue to his real identity for me at least comes with these words – "son of" the father; Bar-abbas.

Do you remember saying this?:
Tradesecret wrote: "A disciple is someone who followed Jesus. They don't have to be called a disciple."

There is, in all four gospels a man who is a murderer of Romans that goes by that very name; Barabbas, isn't there Tradesecret? Matthew 27:15–26; Mark 15:6–15; Luke 23:18–24; and John 18:40.

Of these four gospels Mark's is the most telling:
"And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him,[Jesus] who had committed murder in the insurrection". Mark 15:7.

Luke uses the word "sedition".
"And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas:
Who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, was cast into prison”. Luke 23:18-19

John clearly states:
“They shouted back, “No, not him! Give us Barabbas!” Now Barabbas had taken part in an uprising"_. John 18:40

There is no getting away from it Tradesecret; this is your Judas/Thaddaeus and number 10 on your list of disciples. Whose first name was Jesus:
"So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?”  Matthew 27:17,   that just happens also to be another Galilean Zealot.


The first questions that you should be asking yourself is; What "uprising"? What "sedition"? and What " insurrection" had Jesus taken part in with Judas/Thaddeus aka Barabbas, where the BIBLE says people were killed? But you won't want to face these BIBLE facts so you won't be asking anything. 

So who do we have left on your list Tradsecrete?

Philip and  All the gospels and Acts
Bartholomew;  All the gospels and Acts except John where his name is Nathaniel.
Thomas and All the gospels and Acts but is also called Didymus in John.
Matthew the tax collector; also known as Levi in Mark and Luke, not mentioned in John and Matthew in Acts. 
James the son of Alphaeus, and In all the gospels - and Acts except John
Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him. 

Lets go for; number 6 on your list -
6.Bartholomew;  All the gospels and Acts except John where his name is Nathaniel.#99



#158
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Honestly, you are so boring I lost interest. 


Topic's author
#159
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
@Tradesecret.

Lets go for; number 6 on your list -

6.Bartholomew;  All the gospels and Acts except John where his name is Nathaniel.#99


Bartholomew . In the entire New Testament this disciple only appears in the four lists of the twelve apostles (Matthew 10:2–4, Mark 3:16–19, Luke 6:14–16, Acts 1:1–13). And under this name he is not mentioned at all in John’s Gospel.
But what we do have is the name of another disciple by the name of Nathanael but does not appear in the other three synoptic gospels.;
John 21:1-2 Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Galilee. It happened this way: Simon Peter, Thomas (also known as Didymus), Nathanael, from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together.
So, Tradseceret. unless you are going to tell that Jesus had 13 disciples then it appears that Bartholomew and Nathanael are one and the same person, which by now we know is getting to be quite common for these disciples of Jesus’ to have multiple names.
What is most interesting about Bartholomew/ Nathanael is that this disciple appears to have been introduced to Jesus via another disciple that goes by the name of Philip and number 5 on your list. #99
Read carefully, you may like this, Tradesecrete.


“The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me”. ( And just like that, he does).
Now Philip was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.
Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?”

  Well considering that Nazareth was supposed to be a place in Galilee, the bandit country run by the Zealots, it appears that your disciple Bartholomew/ Nathanael understands perfectly the violent nature of his fellow Galileans. The name Nathanael according to BIBLE scholars means – “a gift from god”.
But what about the name Philip, that other disciple on your list that introduced this “gift from god” Nathanial to the lord? His name is very revealing when it is studied. Its meaning ranges from, “WARLIKE” a “lover of horses” and get this one, “He Who Leans On His Military Complex”! And a Galilean too.
What is said in scripture about Philip? Well nothing much except he appears to be some kind of body guard to the “messiah” and acting here as a gate keeper: John 12:20-25. So apart from being listed with the other 11 and being from Galilee, that is all we get about Philip from the four gospels.

#160
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,204
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Its a fuckin great sounding story.  
Like You could probably make a movie abouy it. 

I wonder how far the jesus bloke traveled all up. 

Was it a good plan from god to do the this whole begotten son thing. 
God put a lot of emphasis on it. 
Is that the word , emphasis.

Hey um. 
The bible goes overboard  on explaining and sticking with this bloke jesus and what he did. 
Thats suspicious as.  

Buttt.
Luckily these witnesses where witnessed by non witnesses, witnesses, witnessing. 

#161
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,204
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Jehovah witnessed something. 
#162
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,050
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Witnessing the witnesses witnessing, is witness to the witnessing witnesses witnessing.
Topic's author
#163
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
@ Tradesecret

So we are down to four on your list of disciples, Tradsecret.#99
Thomas and All the gospels and Acts but is also called Didymus in John.
Matthew the tax collector; also known as Levi in Mark and Luke, not mentioned in John and Matthew in Acts.
James the son of Alphaeus, and In all the gospels - and Acts except John
Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

Lets go with Matthew also known as Levi?

Jesus had returned to his home town in Galilee and after doing a bit of “healing” he Just happened on Matthew “sitting at the receipt of custom” also known as the “the tax collector’s booth” and said “follow me”, and Matthew does so and then Jesus and some of the other disciples sit down and they all have dinner at the home of Matthew. Matthew 9:1-21.
Matthew by all accounts was a “tax collector”, while other gospels use the term “publican”. It simply means he worked for the governing authorities which included Rome, Herod and the Temple authorities. His name is also said to mean “a gift from god”! And that is about all we have of this disciple under the name of Matthew.

Matthew also known as Levi . The reason bible scholars believe Matthew and Levi are one and the same person is because just like the story of Simon the leper/ Pharisee at the house of the anointing #152 , there are two parallel stories about a tax collector in both,
Mark 2:14;
“As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector’s booth. “Follow me,” Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed him.”
And Luke 5:27.
“After this, Jesus went out and saw a tax collector by the name of Levi sitting at his tax booth.“Follow me,”Jesus said to him”.
Sounds a reasonable assumption to me. How about you, Tradesecrete?

And, whereas one gospel writer omits something another will fill in as you rightly tell us here> no two stories are exactly the same, Tradesecret wrote: “Each of the four gospels are telling the same story, Not exactly of course. But they are all presenting it quite different ways.” #139 .

 
And in this case we see that Mark has added the name of Levi's father and his name we are told is Alphaeus.

The name Levi means “attached” or “joined”. But joined to what or whom? Well given the circumstances of him being a Tax collector with a name like Levi he may well have been a Pharisee collecting taxes for the temple. And Levi-te is the name given to the line of priests since Moses. They were also known as “warrior priests”.
What about the father of this disciple Matthew / Levi given to us by Marks gospel; Alphaeus?
Do you remember me saying this to you, Tradsecrete?

Stephen wrote: “And you should have cross checked your list of the 12 disciples too. << that will be something else that will be coming come back to bite you”.

I said this to you because I knew you hadn’t realised that yet another disciple on your list has the same father. And this is why I asked you (three times) do you want to add anything at all to your list here> #100 …. and that other disciple is number 9 on your list;
Tradesecret wrote:“9.James the son of Alphaeus, and In all the gospels - and Acts except John#99 “
Yes, Tradesecret, it appears that Matthew also known as Levi and James are brothers with the same father? Or is this just another coincidence? Or is it as I pointed out to you above that the meaning of the name Levi means “attached” or “joined” to- James?
What does the name Alpheus actually mean? Well it varies on who one chooses to read and believe. But it boil down to “changing or successor”. What if it means both; changing the successor?
And the name James, what does that mean? We know from Mark 3:17 that Jesus himself called James, brother of Andrew, Boanerges a “son of thunder”. And as already mentioned above we also know that the name James literally means "supplanter” and “to supersede another especially by force or treachery". #157 This, as you may well realise with all of that brilliant work you do studying ancient languages and translating them into English bring us to Boanerges, which is a Greek phrase that translates to English as, “sons of thunder.” The Greek is a slight mistranslation from the Hebrew phrase, bənē reghesh, which translates into English as “sons of rage”…. They are all Galileans, including the father, Alphaeus and are all Zealots if there names and or appellations are anything to go by.

Topic's author
#164
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
@Tradesecret


So who do we have left on your list, Tradesecret?

Lets go with the Thomas,

7.Thomas and All the gospels and Acts but is also called Didymus in John.
12.Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.#99

Thomas.
Here again we know very little about this disciple only that Thomas is mentioned in the list of disciples and is famous for “doubting” Jesus; which reminds us of Simon the Leper/ Pharisee doubting that Jesus was the “messiah”. Thomas is responsible for speaking what has to be one of the most enigmatic lines in the New Testament bible. He is assumed to be a fisherman and he is from the wilderness of Galilee, where else?
The bible also calls him “Didymos” said to mean “twin”, so in reality this disciple doesn’t have an actual name, Why? Who is he “twin” to?
The only thing or person in all of the bible that Thomas can be twined with is that Thomas doubted Jesus as did Simon the Pharisee/ leper.

Doubting Pharisee /Leper: When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she is—that she is a sinner.” Luke 7:39

Doubting Thomas: “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands, put my finger into them, and put my hand into his side, I’ll never believe!” John 20:24

But there again the BIBLE records all of the disciples doubting at one point or another, doesn’t it Tradesecret? So it cannot be that Thomas is called “twin” for this reason, surely?

Of course, seeing that you insist on sticking with the BIBLICAL facts only, we cannot know anything else about him, but the apocrypha tells us much more.
With that said, it is incredible if not astounding that Thomas the “twin” is best known only for doubting  that Jesus had been resurrected from the “dead” in the first place, isn’t it Tradesecret?

I mean, hadn’t this been the same Thomas that had witnessed with his own eyes Jesus himself had “resurrected Lazarus from the dead” after rotting and stinking in a tomb for four days? Not to mention all those other “miracles” he must have witnessed? Why ever did Thomas demand physical proof that his lord had come back to life after rotting and stinking in a private tomb for only three days!?
Still, what ever his real identity he was yet another disciple recruited from desert wilderness of Galilee, the land of the cut-throat assassins of the zealots

Which leaves us will Judas number12 on your list.


Topic's author
#165
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,602
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
@ Tradsecret.

So we reach Number12 on your list, Tradesecret.

12. Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him. #99
The story of this disciple is well know to every man, woman a child that has ever had the story read to them or have been taught to read and memorise the bible from a very early age. The BIBLE says he was thief,, a son of a zealot and he betrayed of his Rabbi Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. He himself was also a zealot from Galilee.
We have already touched on Judas earlier so there isn’t a lot to add.
So;
It is also common knowledge to any reader of the BIBLE that his so called surname Iscariot is a slight mistranslation and should read Sicarii. The Sicarii were assassin Zealots and named after the dagger that they used for assassinations and some simply called them “dagger-men”. So, it appears then that it was clearly a case of -like father like son - as Judas’s father, Simon, the BIBLE states, is a Zealot.
In the BIBLE Jesus himself calls Judas Sicarii a devil / Satan;

John 6:70-71 “ Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”  (He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.”).

The remainder of the story of this betraying Zealot assassin is that he apparently regrets what he has done and returns the 30 Pieces of silver to the chief priests but this makes no sense whatsoever. Lets read it:
Matthew 27:1-3  Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people made their plans how to have Jesus executed. So they bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate the governor.
When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders”.
WHY!!? has to be the big question. Here Judas the Zealot is acting like he didn’t expect this to be the out come? So what was he expecting to happen to Jesus once he betrayed him? This is not to mention the dire warning Jesus gave to any would-be betrayer that may be contemplating stabbing him I the back;
“The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.” Matthew 26:20-26 New International Version
This didn’t seem to faze Judas at all, even after Jesus had made Judas aware that he was onto him Judas simply responded in the manner that any deceitful liar would;

“Then Judas, the one who would betray him, said, “Surely you don’t mean me, Rabbi?” Jesus answered,“You have said so.” Matthew 26:20-26 New International Version
Yet not a single one of the other 11 disciples sitting around the table stopped eating and rose in protest, or anger, and, what is more, none of these holy men didn’t seem to recognise that Satan was even in the room and had possessed Judas and these will be the same disciples that had been given powers to cast out all demons!
All this besides the fact that the life and death of Jesus was, by all accounts, predestined. So why was Judas made the bad guy by the church, Tradesecret? Was Judas not doing the lords work to the letter “as it is written”?
The point here as you should have worked out by now (but I doubt that you have) was to show you that Jesus was most certainly not surrounding himself with lovely upstanding Simple Simons that were happy just fishing all day long and providing for their families and that may have had a few minor discretions or “inherited sin” to their names.
He had surrounding himself with a bunch of murderous deceiving backstabber's that were Zealous for the reinstatement of the law of their God and a true King of the line of David and at any cost. And to show you that the Jesus story is a repeat of OT stories about a son returning from exile to claim that which he believed or was led to believe to be his rightful heritage- the throne of Jerusalem because “his time was near”.

So with all of these men that are Zealous for the Law in place what does Jesus do next? Because he is not going to gain his throne with just a few simple Simon fishermen against the full might of Rome, is he, Tradeseceret? That would take a “miracle”, wouldn’t it?

There is one more question that should be seriously considered. Jesus called Simon Peter and Judas Sicarii two of his inner circle of disciples, “Satan”. Which of these Satan’s did Jesus meet with when he retreated to the “wilderness”  to make a deal in the desert after his baptism, where it appears that all offers were refused and no compromise was reached.?

Before we proceed it is only right that we look at their leader; Jesus himself and his role in the myth that Christians have wrapped him in, and why he and John the Baptist became rivals.

#166
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,204
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Refresh