Total posts: 8,861
Posted in:
He said, "Behold, I am going to let you know what will occur at the final period of the indignation, for it pertains to the appointed time of the end.
But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
'Cut off your hair and cast it away, And take up a lamentation on the bare heights; For the LORD has rejected and forsaken The generation of His wrath.'
"Then My anger will be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them and hide My face from them, and they will be consumed, and many evils and troubles will come upon them; so that they will say in that day, 'Is it not because our God is not among us that these evils have come upon us?'
So the LORD was very angry with Israel and removed them from His sight; none was left except the tribe of Judah.
Before him there was no king like him who turned to the LORD with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; nor did any like him arise after him. However, the LORD did not turn from the fierceness of His great wrath with which His anger burned against Judah, because of all the provocations with which Manasseh had provoked Him. The LORD said, "I will remove Judah also from My sight, as I have removed Israel And I will cast off Jerusalem, this city which I have chosen, and the temple of which I said, 'My name shall be there.'"
But You have cast off and rejected, You have been full of wrath against Your anointed.
And He has violently treated His tabernacle like a garden booth; He has destroyed His appointed meeting place The LORD has caused to be forgotten The appointed feast and sabbath in Zion, And He has despised king and priest In the indignation of His anger. The Lord has rejected His altar, He has abandoned His sanctuary; He has delivered into the hand of the enemy The walls of her palaces They have made a noise in the house of the LORD As in the day of an appointed feast.
And there was the Flood, destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and other evil things.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
They are coming from a far country, From the farthest horizons, The LORD and His instruments of indignation, To destroy the whole land.
"The Chaldeans who are fighting against this city will enter and set this city on fire and burn it, with the houses where people have offered incense to Baal on their roofs and poured out drink offerings to other gods to provoke Me to anger.
"So the LORD'S anger burned against Israel, and He made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until the entire generation of those who had done evil in the sight of the LORD was destroyed.
So the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and He gave them continually into the hand of Hazael king of Aram, and into the hand of Ben-hadad the son of Hazael.
Your sons have fainted, They lie helpless at the head of every street, Like an antelope in a net, Full of the wrath of the LORD, The rebuke of your God.
'Now I will shortly pour out My wrath on you and spend My anger against you; judge you according to your ways and bring on you all your abominations.
And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves. And He said to them, "It is written, 'MY HOUSE SHALL BE CALLED A HOUSE OF PRAYER'; but you are making it a ROBBERS' DEN."
Behold, the day of the LORD is coming, Cruel, with fury and burning anger, To make the land a desolation; And He will exterminate its sinners from it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents Exodus 20:5
It seems this god in particular only loved his own people, Hebrew/Israelites.
And here is a short list of some of his "anger".
"Even at Horeb you provoked the LORD to wrath, and the LORD was so angry with you that He would have destroyed you.
"And in the greatness of Your excellence You overthrow those who rise up against You; You send forth Your burning anger, and it consumes them as chaff.
"Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation." Then Moses entreated the LORD his God, and said, "O LORD, why does Your anger burn against Your people whom You have brought out from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand?
Now the people became like those who complain of adversity in the hearing of the LORD; and when the LORD heard it, His anger was kindled, and the fire of the LORD burned among them and consumed some of the outskirts of the camp. The people therefore cried out to Moses, and Moses prayed to the LORD and the fire died out.
"By the breath of God they perish, And by the blast of His anger they come to an end.
Created:
Yes even Pilate was amazed at how quick Jesus had “died”. Mark 15:44
And it was awfully convenient that he is said to have “died” just before he was about to have his legs broken.
The Apostle John said that the two crucified alongside Jesus were still alive six hours after they were crucified so “the soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other” to make sure they would die before the Sabbath. John 19:31-34.
Could the disciples simply have been wrong or mores the case duped into believing Jesus Was dead? They had got it wrong on another occasion when they were convinced Paul was dead but wasn’t. Acts 14
And there's not a mention of any of them being present at the crucifixion so how would they know either way.
Why then,did Jesus die so quickly on the cross?
Why did they spear his side if he was dead?
Did Jesus even predict that he would be dead for three days?
Christens like to latch onto what is written in Matthew 12:40 as some kind of “sign” or clue not to mention “proof” given to the Elders as to what lay ahead for him. But they should read that closely, because it mentions nothing about death at all.
Jesus – so say the gospels- was offered a drink of vinegar/wine on a sponge when he seemed to complain of thirst.Why he should then suddenly die after sucking on, or even sniffing this sponge and after saying few words, words which are also in contention? The thing about the vinegar soaked sponge is that if anything, it would have had completely the opposite effect on the human body. It was used on slave galleys as a temporary stimulant to revive flagging rowers, it had the same effect as smelling salts.
So again it appears just like all of these others gospels, it leaves gaping big holes in the commentary and we are left with yet another half story.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt.If you look back you will see what Amalek did to the Israelites and if you look forward you see how they influenced the Israelites to turn away from God, as well as threatening Israel. God is being just and also looking out for the long-term interests of Israel, through whom the Messiah will come.
And if you opened your eyes you will see these was wars of the Gods, struggling for power but fought by duped humans. Humans were and still are tools of the gods. Chattel to lay down our lives for the egoes of gods who cannot live in peace among themselves. This kind of "faith" is a mental disease and blind faith will , without doubt, get you killed. And there is no reward.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
That isn't in dispute!
It is in dispute or are you not reading what etheng has to say. I have covered all I can with you on this and is all you have done is sit on the fence and repeat over and over "we will never know" or words to that effect. Why you are even bothering to be on this thread any longer is beyond me.
Jesus was executed by Romans and in Roman fashion. The elders could have stoned him themselves if the charges were blasphemy and simply waited until after passover with no need to bother Pilate.
Claiming to be king was an crime against Rome and punishable by death.
There are many religious scholars who agree that Jesus was charged with sedition against Rome.
Caiaphas claimed that Jesus was guilty of sedition.
Jesus, Caiaphas had said, Jesus thought himself, and his followers thought, and people said that he was the King of the Jews. This was a capital crime against Rome and Pilate had to deal with it whether he wanted to or not.
"His crime was claiming to be a king, a treasonous act in ancient Rome". Jerry Newcombe For God and Country website..<<<< this is a guy who understands his scriptures.
ethang will have it that nothing was wrong about the way the scriptures tell this story. You sit on the fence and only offer conjecture when it suits you to do so, yet you make your position quite clear on the matter, ' you don't believe any of it' .
So whatever you have to say on the matter can be dismissed by default of your own beliefs and counts for absolutely nothing.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't really care for what gibberish you believe.
That is gibberish
I care what the bible says.
So do I . That is why I'm always questioning it.
my opinion of what you think will remain the same
Yes I know. I didn't ever expect anything different from you. And I wouldn't want it any other way.
Now tackle these simple questions;
Jesus celebrate the Passover with his disciples before his crucifixion according to the Synoptics. John says it was the Passover feast on the very evening Jesus was crucified as the Pascal Lamb ? Only one can be right - if any.
Questions Like this:
Why didn't Jesus "raise " his cousin the great prophet John the Baptist from the "dead" as he did Lazarus?
Why didn't Jesus eradicate all of leprosy instead of just curing a few lepers?
☺☺☺☺☺
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The Bible is observable and readable. From it, you are told of God's dealings with humanity from creation.
And what jolly dealings there are.
Samuel 1: 15-3
Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"
Yes sounds like a good god doesn't he. "women, children and infants" .
“But of the cities of these people,which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth”:Deu: 20:16.
"save alive nothing that breatheth"
Created:
Posted in:
You guys notice that for Stephen, there are two of everyone in the bible?
Silly clown. I don't want people like you confusing Joseph of the coat of many colours and the other famous Joseph, father of Jesus. I know you have trouble recognising the difference in words like BAR A BBAS and BAR N ABAS as shown to your own embarrassment on this thread post 12..
You know, where you kept reading BAR A BBAS as BAR N ABAS
so I thought I'd make it clear.
Created:
Posted in:
Well like I have said. It is quite safe to assume then that the god of Joseph was the same god as as his father, Jacob Israel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rosends
In Judaism, God doesn't have a personal name so calling Him "unnamed" doesn't make any sense as there is no expectation of "name" so there is no lack of "name."
That kind of confuses the point that it is said that it was blasphemous to speak or to write - the name of god, doesn't it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rosends
Well, I can, yes.
An unnamed Elohim then?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
That is why it is revered and honored around the world and no one knows you.
It is because it is taught by others and but not read by those others.
I don't have time for bitter people imagining nonsensical things
You could have fooled me. Sod off if you can't cope with the pressure. Or simply put me on ignore.
You want to take the trial from the script, but not the pardon.
That's right. I believe Jesus was tried under Roman law by Romans and sentenced to a Roman execution for crimes against the State of ROME!!. AND The so called pardon never happened. Congratulations! You are learning!!!
Now tackle these simple questions;
Jesus celebrate the Passover with his disciples before his crucifixion according to the Synoptics. John says it was the Passover feast on the very evening Jesus was crucified as the Pascal Lamb ? Only one can be right - if any.
Questions Like this:
Why didn't Jesus "raise " his cousin the great prophet John the Baptist from the "dead" as he did Lazarus?
Why didn't Jesus eradicate all of leprosy instead of just curing a few lepers?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
The story makes that claim and yet anyone available to record that statement ie the apostles, were asleep.Neither you nor anybody heard that. Your book is lies.
I agree and there was no one to record the conversation/ interrogation by Pilate of Jesus either. The scriptures make that very clear. But somehow a long conversation is recorded .
Then the Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness they did not enter the palace, because they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. John :18 28
Created:
Posted in:
If Jesus or Barabbas were Roman prisoners, they could not have been offered to the Jews for release.
I agree, this is why I know there was no such thing as Pilates pardon, you clown.
The text says it was common custom.
And not a single piece of evidence. The scriptures say a lot a things that simple are not true.
Created:
Posted in:
Basically, all you do is post the verse and then say it says something it doesn't say.
No I don't. I post many verses and then give my opinion on them. I also ask questions that never get answered.
Verses Like This:
Jesus celebrate the Passover with his disciples before his crucifixion according to the Synoptics. John says it was the Passover feast on the very evening Jesus was crucified as the Pascal Lamb ? Only one can be right - if any.
Questions Like this:
Why didn't Jesus "raise " his cousin the great prophet John the Baptist from the "dead" as he did Lazarus?
Why didn't Jesus eradicate all of leprosy instead of just a few lepers?
Created:
Posted in:
Are you positing that the two labels identify two separate entities?
No. You suggested "titles" plural at post 15 above, when you made this interesting comment:
This is, assuming that there is a "name" that one can assign that goes beyond the titles that both Jacob and Joseph use.
I have asked what titles did Joseph use , then you simply repeated your earlier answer
Elo-him
That is fine. It is also interesting. So can we safely assume that Josephs god was the same god as his fathers? In your honest opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The Jacob/Joseph story is set a few generations before Moses, and they are characters in a legend not real people!
Yes, I know. I don't care about that, this thread is clearly not asking for conjecture on biblical history, this has nothing to do with the question. You don’t know, you offer only conjecture. I don’t care about nor am I interested your conjecture.
But we can ask what would proto-Hebrews Of that time may have believed.
You can ask that if you want. I am not asking anything of the sort. So you start a thread of your own and ask yourself whatever it is you want. My question is simple and you can’t answer it.
You have offered a name - YHWH you then tell me:
It is not explicitly stated.
I then have asked you - then how do you know Joseph's god was YHWH? You haven’t answered. I am not interested in your conjecture. I want to know what the bible states.
So your input ends where you make it clear that "- It is not explicitly stated -" and add " - they are characters in a legend not real people! ".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Stop with your nonsense.
I am making the distinction so any dimwits here won't misunderstand which Joseph I am writing about. I haven't said god made his coat you absolute clown.
Now address the topic or leave it. Do you, or do you not know who Joseph's - he of the coloured coat made by his father Israel - god is.
Created:
Posted in:
This is, assuming that there is a "name" that one can assign that goes beyond the titles that both Jacob and Joseph use.
What title/s does Joseph use?
In the Hebrew, there is no "I am who I am" but there is "I will be that which I will be" (eh'yeh asher eh'yeh).
Sounds close to me.
Created:
Posted in:
The Hebrew word Elo-him is used as a singular and a plural in different contexts (depending on the verb in the sentence)
Ok. Back to the point.
In Judaism, God doesn't have a personal "name" but has titles by which we refer to Him.
That's interesting, The Christians have a name for their god it seems they have just inserted vowels into the non Christian word "YHWH" for it to become Jehovah
If you are stuck using translations
I don't think I am stuck at all, and I don't want to bog the thread down unnecessarily over translations of plural gods etc . But it is beginning to look like that no one seems to know the name Josephs' god.
YHWH by most accounts simply means " I am" as revealed to Moses. As in mind your own business as to my name "I am who I am". But that's just my own opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
Do you have a problem with including the text along with the ch+v numbers.
I do want to clutter up the thread where Ch+v numbers will do and neither does rosends above by the looks of things and who has clearly and conveniently done so above. See post 9 above.
I can't be bothered
Then don't. I would only get conjecture from you anyway and you haven't even bothered to address my question.
you said:
It is not explicitly stated.
Then why do you say at post 2 above "ok, YHWH" ?
You "can't be bothered" to clear that up either , I suppose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rosends
Genesis 35:11 states only:
"I am God Almighty". No name
Genesis 39:5
Doesn’t say who this god is, it simply states “Lord”.
Genesis 32:10
Nothing in that verse either, not even “lord”.
You state that Gen 41:16
shows Joseph's claim to be connected to "Elo-him"
It doesn't show any such connection only the word "god".
Although “god”is mentioned in this verse he is not named. And neither is the Elo-him mentioned.
You have though introduced the “Elo-him” to us which to my understanding is the plural – gods - as shown in Genesis 3:5 “ye shall be as gods”, so which of these gods is the god of Joseph, with the coat of colours?
Created:
Posted in:
You say he understood the prophecy. Then he shouldn’t have been whinging and moaning and sweating blood in sheer stark fear if he knew this was his destiny all along. Learn your scriptures.
More than a thousand years earlier, it was predicted that Jesus would be betrayed, tortured, and crucified in the OT.
Let us see your evidence for that statement, you clown. You are making yourself to look like a poor excuse of a defender of the faith.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
It is not explicitly stated.
Then why do you say at post 2 above "ok, YHWH" ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
It is not explicitly stated.
And how do you know? Or is this more time wasting conjecture from you for fun?
And why should it concern you? I am only interested in what Christians or Jews believe to be fact, and not an atheist opinion or conjecture no matter how much fun you say you get out of it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You have the text. Read it.
I do. and BARABBAS and Jesus were up on charges of "insurrection" against Rome and you cannot prove otherwise.
Here you go.
Mark 15:7.
And There was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.
Caiaphas claimed that Jesus was guilty of sedition.
Jesus, Caiaphas had said, Jesus thought himself, and his followers thought, and people said that he was the King of the Jews. This was a capital crime against Rome and Pilate had to deal with it whether he wanted to or not.
"His crime was claiming to be a king, a treasonous act in ancient Rome". Jerry Newcombe For God and Country website..<<<< this is a guy who understands his scriptures, unlike you , you silly little clown
And I'm still waiting for your evidence that shows that this "get out of crucifixion card" was a "common custom" of Rome at Passover.
Get over it you clown, you have been licked with your own stick. AGAIN!!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
No one is being interrogated by you.
hahahhahah "Interrogated". Just as I Suspected, you don’t have single piece of evidence for your stupid claim. So you just make something up. It has taken you nearly four pages of posts to come up with that nonsense. “ Against the Jewish state” my hole, hahhahahahha, what a plonker you are.
It's in the text.
So you will not have any trouble showing it to us all, will you , you clown.
Created:
Of all ofthe things to comment on - that is the one you choose to respond to? I take your concession. You have lost the debate.
Take what you like , it won't make it fact. Responded to that because it was the only thing that you have written that was different to all the other schite you have been repeatedly spouting. And I Wouldn't expect anything less from a pompous bible bashing clown such as you.You simply haven't answered a single question of mine on any of mythreads. You have stuttered and spluttered and lied and contradicted and changed words to suit your reasoning to support what are only your opinions and is all I have done is debunk your opinions with verses from these scriptures, the same scriptures that contradict you.
. I think there are more interesting questions in the first three chapters that provide more of a difficulty.
Do younow, then let's hear them. I am genuinely interested.
I am not interested in the chapters prior to the creation of man - as interesting and silly and contradictory as they are - . No. I am only interested in those scriptures that have had a devastating effect on mankind since he was created in the exact image of these gods - plural.
Actually God is not bad. He is good.
So Saddam Hussein was good then when he also ordered the unprovoked genocide gasing against Kurdish women , children and infants in Halabja?
Is this not dissimilar to >>
Samuel 1: 15-3
Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"
Yes sounds he sounds lie a good god doesn't he. "women, children and infants" .
“But of the cities of these people,which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth”:Deu: 20:16.
Yes indeed. Your god is very "good god" isn't he. he's a clever god to; getting these dupes to do his dirty work and tuning them into killers..
But there again, we are created in their image and we did become one of them.
Created:
Posted in:
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.Israel, Joseph's father, is Jacob.
Ok, what was this particular gods name? It has been suggested that Joseph's - he of many colours - god was "YHWH". Is this correct and can you show me the scripture that clearly states this to be the case?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You don't even know what posts are addressed to you, but OK.
Of course I do you absolute clown. And I will responded to any post I choose on my thread.
Keith knows what facts are.
Does he? he has made his position quite clear, he states he doesn't know and neither does anyone else and that includes you ,a clown. I though he told us everything is “conjecture” where these scriptures are concerned and the only facts he can agree with is the scriptures state certain things that are not believed by himself he adds “ because we will never know the truth of what happened.” .How’s that for a factual contradictory fence sitting, you clown.
Stephen wrote:And You haven't answered my question :Who did Barabbas commit "insurrection" against if it wasn't the Roman Empire.
ethang5 wrote: The Jewish state.
Ok. Now let us see all your evidence . Run along now Tick tock, Tick tock, Tick tock,
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
We hear the Son say tothe Father, "your will, not mine."
We do. We also herehim beg and plead while sweating blood in stark fear at his predicament with his “father” to relieve him of this “cup”
And you call it a"failure"?
I do. He was beggedand pleaded with by his only relieve him of the terrifying barbaric ordeal buthis father failed him. He ignored him totally as if he didn’t even exist. .
Because no sane personwants to be beaten, flogged, and tortured for hours.
That doesn’t answerthe question you clown. If he understood the OT prophecy as you say, then whydid he even bother begging to be a reprieve? Your story makes no sense whatsoever.
Oh, and He did notsweat blood. Read it slowly.
And you read thisverse slowly you clown.
And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as itwere great drops of blood falling down to the ground.
Luke 22:44.
as the rare hematohidrosis.
It make perfect sense.
You say he understood the prophecy. Then heshouldn’t have been whinging and moaning and sweating blood in sheer stark fear if he knew thiswas his destiny all along. Learn your scriptures. they make no sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
ok, YHWH.
Speculation? Do you know this for certain? How do you know?
It would be nice to hear from some who knows rather than someone who doesn't believe a single word of the scriptures.
Created:
Posted in:
According to the King James Version, Genesis 37:3 reads, "Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colours."
But who was Joseph's God?
Created:
After reading your link twice. I found this to be the most interesting and telling part.
CONCLUSIONOne final but forceful point should be made. In Matthew 19:4-5, the Lord Jesus combined quotations from Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. He declared: “He who made them from the beginning made them male and female [1:26], and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh [2:24].” If the liberal viewpoint is true, how very strange that Christ should have given not the slightest hint that the two accounts involved a multiple authorship and contradictory material! Obviously, the Son of God did not endorse the modern Documentary Hypothesis.When the texts of Genesis 1 and 2 have been considered carefully, one thing is clear: an objective evaluation reveals no discrepancies, nor is a dual authorship to be inferred. Devout students of the Bible should not be disturbed by the fanciful, ever-changing theories of the liberal critics. It is wise to remember that the Word of God was not written for the benefit of “scholars,” but for the common person. The Scriptures assume that the average person is able to understand the message and to know that the source is divine.
but he would say that wouldn't he.
"FOR The common person" my hole. " the common person" couldn't even read or spell his/her own name when the bible was translated into English no more that a "common" Muslim Pakistani can read the quran in Arabic, today.
Your ignorance offends me.
DOES IT! hahahahhahahhahahahahhahah Get over yourself you pompous clown.
THERE ARE TWO CREATIONS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE IT IS FACT THAT EVEN YOUR LINK DOESN'T DISPUTE.
The excuses in your link for there being two creations are no better ot convincing than all the other excuses I have read over the years.
I have acknowledged it has to be a mistake, but if there is one mistake then there simply has to be others . This is why there are so many different excuses for there being two written creations in the bible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I think it interesting on many levels that something 'everybody knows' (such as Jesus was born in Bethlehem) is almost certainly false.
How do you know, or are you speculating for fun? Again
I am a bit surprised no one has yet suggested that the reason Jesus cried out "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" is that he did believe himself to be the son of God and couldn't understand why it was happening to him!
There are many theological authors who have wrote just that, why it is you believe you are the first ever to suggest this is astounding! , considering you only ever speculate the bible for fun and are a proud atheist.
But there are many points in the gospel story that allude to the OT. Their purpose is to forge a connection between Jesus and the Judaic Messianic Tradition.
And you know this because of what, or is this just more speculating, for fun?
In this case the reference is to Psalm .....Of course it is possible that Jesus did quote Ps22 on the cross - he would certainly have been familiar with the Psalms. Or - also possible - is that Mark (whoalso knew his hebrew scriptures) made up that detail because it seemed a niceaddition to the picture, and the other evangelists copied it.
So then you are just offering more speculation i.e. if Jesus existed at all etc etc?
I think anyone reading the content of your input can safely put everything down to your speculation .
Thanks for your input, for what it is worth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Or, if we aren't idiots,
Are you implying I am and idiot?
More than a thousand years earlier, it was predicted that Jesus would be betrayed, tortured, and crucified in the OT.
That is absolute cobblers for which you don't have a single piece of evidence.
Now here comes our local genius to tell us Jesus didn't know.
As usual you have misunderstood the point of the thread. Now just to let in on what's going on here. This thread is about the failure of the "father"- Jesus' "father" to relive his only son Jesus - NOT BARABBAS, OR MOSES, OR BARNABAS - of "this cup". Something only "the father" could sanction.
Now. if, as you clearly state above, Jesus knew he was to be "betrayed, tortured, and crucified " BECAUSE "it was predicted that Jesus would be in the OT", then tell us all, why did he ask his "father" to relieve him from it all? Why did he BEG and "SWEAT BLOOD" in sheer fear of the consequences he faced. Why did he even bother to beg his father 2/3 times to relieve him of this extreme and deadly burden, if he understood what it all was coming to?
You see, again your gospel story doesn't make a single piece of sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You can't have both.
I am not asking for anything of the sort. It is your fault that you don't have a clue as to what is going on in these gospels, not mine.
Keith has shown his reluctance to commit himself either way so just repeats his fall back mantra to the effect that - 'he wasn't there 2,000 years and neither was you or I so we will never know'.
And you haven't answered my question :
Who did Barabbas commit "insurrection " against if it wasn't the Roman Empire.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Let me be clear what fence I am sitting on! As an atheist I don't bother with the miraculous or magical elements of Bible stories
And neither do I . The simple reason I don't bother with the miraculous or magical elements of Bible is because there are none. At all. Raising the dead for instance, was simply a ritualistic initiation into the sect of the time - Essenes. It is still practiced to the day in Freemasonry an to the letter . So don't get the impression that I believe the "miraculous" spin that the christian church has put on these stories.
they can be junked straight away.So in regard to something like the nativity I'm not bothered with the virgin birth nonsense,
I agree , if one is to take them at face value, it is simple to debunk them as I have done and continue to do.
but it is interesting whether Jesus was born in Bethlehem for instance,
Why is that interesting? When even there the gospellers cannot make up their minds as to where he was born .
After many years I have concluded that almost none of the Gospel story is based on actuality.
Start a thread. telling us all why and how you have come to that startling conclusion.
Now my main interest is not whether this or that passage is true (it almost certainly isn't true) but on why the writers set it down.
I think you know why, as do many authorities of the subject.
Unlike you - apparently - i don't think there are enough hard facts in the text to pin down 'what really happened'.
Yes , so you keep "speculating for fun" with the same mantra " we will never know what really happened".
Seeing that you find it "fun to speculate", why don't you go here >>https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/539?page=3 and "have fun speculating" the questions I have asked you.
This thread is about why a god would ignore and dessert his extremely terrified son when in his desperate hour of need? Going by the scriptures that CHRISTIANS believe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
One fact is that Christianity did not die when Christ died as might be expected when the leader of a charismatic sect is removed.
By removed you mean "Crucified"? So you believe the that Jesus Christ existed. Well that's a start. Now where is your evidence?
Instread of folding, the early Christians went for broke and explained His death as being part of God's plan
So are you re confirming again that Jesus existed and also his so called father "god". Can you prove that?
and the lack of any body or tomb as due to His resurrection after days, the Gospels reflectin the revised legend.
The "lack of a body in a tomb" is not proof of a "resurrection" but it is proof of an empty tomb.
If so
So you have gone back to sitting on the fence Keith.
As you (probably!) know I don't really like speculating about 'what really happened' because without a time machine we will never know, but I don't deny its fun to speculate!
Wasting people's time , never coming of the fence and repeating the same thing over and over. Yes, I think that I "probably do know".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I would say that it is entirely possible that Barabbas never existed
So his part,BARABBAS' part in the story gives you reason to believe it may have been invented, in other words fake?
It is an indisputable fact that the gospellers say Barabbas was charged with insurrection
It is "indisputable" and they do "say". And Christians believe the story to be true because the gospels do "say" it was insurrection committed by Barabbas.
And Who do you think Barabbas committed "insurrection" against if it wasn't against Rome as ethang5 believes?
but that isn't the same thing as Barabbas being charged with insurrection is afact.
But the “indisputable”fact is that the bible scribes do say it was Barabbas that committed insurrection and it is also an "indisputable fact" that Christians Believe the bible.
But even going by your standard, it is also an “indisputable” fact, as you say, that the gospellers ALSO wrote that Jesus was crucified by the Romans and this too, going by your own reasoning, could just be a case of the "tale" as you put it, never happened at all.
You didn’t bother again to answer my questions.
Do you or don't you believe this trial even happened?
I would say that it is entirely possible that Barabbas never existed and was invented by the gospellers to make a good story.
Not impossible, I agree, But you keep purposefully ignoring my point completely that these gospels are believed by Christians and it is from this standpoint they can to be challenged. You keep skirting this fact everytime I point it out.
I don’t know why you simply do not come off the fence and say one way or the other that the scriptures are “tales” that cannot be verified or be true.
You either believe in Jesus christ or you don't. your other post on other threads shows you clearly to be an atheist, so why are you fence sitting on this particular subject?
Do you believe that the Jesus of the gospels ever existed? Yes or No?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?
YES LORD WHY DID YOU FORSAKE YOUR ONLY SON?
O my God, I cry in the daytime, but thou hearest not;
YES FATHER, WHY DID YOU NOT EVEN HEAR THE WORDS AND CRIES OF YOUR ONLY SON?
and in the night season, and am not silent.But thou art holy, O thou that inhabits the praises of Israel.
I DIDN’T STOP BEGGING AND PLEADING FORE MY LIFE , BUT YOU ANSWER ME NOT. PLeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeAS FATHER ANSWER ME!!!!
Our fathers trusted in thee: they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
I TRUSTED YOU, I BELIEVE IN YOU MY FATHER AND YOU GIVE ME OVER TO THE ROMANS TO BE BRUTALLY BEATEN AND MURDERED!!
They cried unto thee, and were delivered: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded.
WHY DO YOU SAVE THEM AND NOT ME YOUR ONLY SON?
But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.
IS THIS WHAT YOU THINK OF ME? JUST A WORM TO CRAWL IN THE DIRT?
All they that see me laugh me toscorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him,seeing he delighted in him.
BUT YOU, MY FATHER, DELIVERED ME NOT SAFETY BUT INTO THE HANDS OF YOUR ENEMIES. WHY?!!WHY?!!WHY?!!WHY?!!WHY?!!WHY?!!
Because "it is written", my son.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sitara
Sure Jesus was afraid of the cross, but no one forced Him to lay down His life for us.
I agree. It seems that his was crucifixion has nothing to do with saving anyone from sins or anything else. His crucifixion appears to have everything to do with his rebellious behaviour towards Rome. Indeed, if we were to agree that he gave up his life for others, then it is extremely doubtful that it would have been for Christian lives , you see Jesus was a Jew. He claimed to be King of the Jews and the Jewish Nation. Through his pedigree he was also High priest of the Jewish church.
I will look up something for citation, and get back to you.
Created:
Posted in:
So we can infer that when the gospels were being compiled the early Christian church was more interested in fostering good relations with the Roman world than in its Jewish Roots.
We have already come to that conclusion. We have gone over that twice. It has already been discussed and I have told you I believe this to be the case.
Jews died during this rebellion that the writers want to hide or at least play down. This wouldn't look very good now would it, the prince of peace taking part in rebellious acts that caused the deaths of his own countrymen and supporters?
What some New Testament readers may not be aware of is that claiming to be “King of the Jews”was a highly charged political act of sedition or lese-majesty, and a capital crime under Roman law if it led to rebellion, and, this is what happened and the gospel writers have tried to play it down. WHY!? The question is as obvious as the answer is as I have already explained and as you have said yourself in the quote above.
Look at this blatant lie King James Bible Luke 23:2
And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King.
Now we know, this to be untrue because there is the render unto Caesar verse telling jews to pay this tax. he is also calling himself king of the Jews according to verse also : a crime of sedition.. He is also accused of "PERVERTING" the nation and leading them "astray", what does the mean or entail?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
I heard a word that rhymes with granny and starts wit a T is currently banned. Does anyone have an up to date banned words list
It is tricky that one Wylted. As I have found out for myself.
I was warned about using the extremely vulgar and offensive words - stupid – and backward -.
I had the audacity to ask someone if they were “stupid” and I also had the cold never to ask someone if they were “backward”. I simply cannot imagine the permanent irreparable and psychological damage I must have caused, but I was warned via PM . But I have found in life that someone who acts or performs in a stupid manner are usually called stupid and or backward. I suppose we have so many stupid people and backward people using the internet that it were only a matter of time before word censoring became part and parcel. It is hard not to offend anyone these days.
I was told that these words “ constitute personal attacks”.
I was also warned against warning someone that I would report them if they insisted on disruptive behaviour on my thread?
Actually the words used in the warning was
“ threatening to report someone” Threatening!!!!!!??????
To which was added that it
“is entirely unacceptable and viewed extremely unfavourably by moderation”.
So to give someone a friendly warning that you will report them is taboo also.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The only indisputable fact is that the gospellers wrote that Jesus was cruficied by the Romans.
yes they do. the other indisputable fact is that BARRABAS was on a charge of "insurrection" BECAUSE : the gospellers wrote that aslo .
Ok now we understand that we are only speaking of what the gospels actually say; lets back up a little here.
This is what ethang5 started out disputing post 12 page ..
ethang5 wrote; Nowhere does it say Barnabas' crimes were against Rome.
He, for reasons known only to him, had read Barabbas as Barnabas. It took quite a while for it to sinkin that I was in fact talking of the seditionist Barabbas. It seems even the title of the thread couldn’t convince him as to who the thread was about.
This is what I wrote in my Opening post 1.
Mark 15:7.
And There was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that handmade insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.
When it finally sunk in to ethang 5’s skull that I was in fact talking about BARABBAS, but apart from insisting that it was I who had brought BAR N ABAS into the thread he still insisted that Barabbas had not committed crimes “ insurrection” against Rome.
I have asked ethang5 six times now, to tell me who were his crimes of “insurrection” committed against if BARABBAS’S crimes were not against Rome? He has ignored . I have asked you too but you seem to keep missing it.
So Keith, I Ask you, the same question.
Who were the crimes of “insurrection” committed against if BARABBAS’S crimes were not against Rome?
Jesus getting crucified is an episode in a written tale and at this distance in time there is no way to know if it 'really happened' at all.
Yes. And you keep saying it is a "written tale" and I keep telling you that the Christians believe this “written tale”. So “distance in time” is not an issue with them. So from that standpoint, the Christian standpoint who believe the "tale" to be true, who did Barabbas commit “insurrection against?
Do you or don't you believe this trial even happened?
And. Do you believe that the Jesus of the gospels ever existed? Yes or No?
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
I think there are more interesting questions in the first three chapters that provide more of a difficultyDO YOU! Then start a thread of your own, why wait for me?I am hopeful that Stephen might actually get to some of those parts.Don't wait for me to do that for you. What's stopping you starting your own threads on thesemore interesting questions in the first three chaptersThen let's hear them. Start your own thread on the "more interesting questions" that you say there are in the bible. AND STOP TRYING TO GOAD ME DOWN A PATH THAT YOU WANT ME TO TAKE.
Lol!
That's a no then. I am not surprised.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
According To the text, the Priests condemned Jesus for blasphemy but - unable to execute him themselves –
I have shown that this has to be false at post 42 above: >>
“We get from the gospellers that the Jewish council was not allowed to pass death sentences and this is the reason they took him to Pilate. This is just lies. They stoned Stephen to death, Jesus’ brother James the Just was "thrown from the pinnacle of the temple, and was beaten to death with a club". The wanted to stone an adulteress, until Jesus stepped in with his famous “ he who is without sin cast the first stone” .So we can see , this story about Pilate being kind to Jews at Passover and letting murdering rebel go free, is cobblers”
And You as you have admitted yourself, that Pilate would not be bothered or even interested about Jews scratching each other’s eyes out about their own god being insulted/blasphemy. Besides Rome had its own " living god" Tiberius Caesar Divi Augusti filius Augustus..
took Jesus to Pilate to rubber stamp the execution - the grounds for execution under Roman law is not stated in the text.
The text are maybe benot clearly enough to you but you admit they are ambiguous.. Fair enough, but you know it was he was not executed for blasphemy. So what else can you imagine he was crucified for?
In the text,Pilate is reluctant to execute an innocent man, and only does so finally 'under protest'.
But it is said Pilate couldn't find ANYTHING wrong about him and neither could Herod. Yet We know that according to the scripture Herod wanted to kill Jesus. so again we come across a blatant lie IN THE SCRIPTURES. These are contradictory BIBLICAL facts.
And there's absolute no historical evidence for this Passover get out of jail free card that is said by the scriptures to be “a common practice”. And no way would Pilate give into a baying mob and free anyone for such a serious crime of “insurrection” against the Empire.. He would have been summoned back to Rome himself and probably executed for treason.
It seems that you're proposing Jesus and Barabbas were co-conspirators - I'd say that was 'interesting, but flimsy'!
Yes, that's exactly what I am saying. And I believe the circumstances prove that.
or even if even happened at all.
This is interesting point of view. If you are of that belief then by default you have to dismiss the whole story as false.
If you don't believe Jesus even existed then you have to dismiss the whole of scriptures as fake and not even bother putting up an argument either way.
There are literally hundreds of statements like these below from Biblical historians, theologist respected biblical authors and members of the clergy, who all agree that Jesus was charged with sedition and insurrection. Is all the theist have in response is one single ambiguous vers in the whole of the bible, that proves nothing ..at all.
"Barabbas had been charged with the crime of treason against Rome—the same crime for which Jesus was also convicted".<<<<<<< see that.
The sentencing practices of the Romans were that execution by crucifixion was for political crimes, treason, sedition, and such. Jesus being a “rabble-rouser” and not denying Pilate’s questioning about being the “king of the Jews” thus fits the style of execution.
Created:
I think there are more interesting questions in the first three chapters that provide more of a difficulty
DO YOU! Then start a thread of your own, why wait for me?
I am hopeful that Stephen might actually get to some of those parts.
Don't wait for me to do that for you. What's stopping you starting your own threads on these
more interesting questions in the first three chapters
Then let's hear them. Start your own thread on the "more interesting questions" that you say there are in the bible. AND STOP TRYING TO GOAD ME DOWN A PATH THAT YOU WANT ME TO TAKE.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
I think there are more interesting questions in the first three chapters that provide more of a difficulty.
There probably are. But if you can't even manage to square away some of the “minor” problems with honesty instead of filibustering your way through a problem and blatantly denying certain verses do not exist , then you/we are not going to get far.
I am hopeful that Stephen might actually get to some of those parts.
There isn’t much chance of that while you keep implying parts of the bible don’t even exist. While you keep insisting one words means something completely different and insisting everything is down to one interpretation or another. And presenting your own opinions and theories as FACT!.
I have told you before.I do have supporting evidence for my opinions but I rarely have to produce them,because you spend so much time answering me with opinions, your own opinions. I simply challenge your opinions. I have made it quite clear that,Is all I do is highlight what I believe to be anomalous and puzzling with these scriptures, then give my opinion why I believe what I believe about them to be anomalous and puzzling, or simply ask a question about them and then leave the rest up to clowns like yourself and ethang5.
I have an opportunity to present the traditional view (the correct one in my opinion)
Just as I said, your opinion presented as fact.
Created: