NationStates Jolt Archive

Jesus was born amoungst the jews because they were the people most touched by the word of God they were the people who had the best understand of his will and love in ancient society. when jesus was ultimately betrayed and condemned to death by the Jewish people it was not as sign that they were morally inferior to the rest of humanity, it was an inditement of all mankind and a sign that only through the forgiveness of Christ could we be worthy of God. If even these chosen people of God rejected his son, how much worse would the rest of society have done. they were the best of us and still they feel short, only through grace can any of us be saved. the failings of the Jews are the failings of the best humanity had to offer at the time, not an inditement of a people who were still the most worthy in God's eyes.

I didn't get much of that I'm afraid. What does "...most touched by the word of God..." mean?

Assuming Jesus existed...

Assuming Jesus existed...
No historian denies that he did.

Assuming Jesus existed...
No historian denies that he did.

No historian can prove that he did.

The theory of evolution of religion according to Mormonism is similar to the theory of evolution by Darwin.

In the beginning, there were believers in God, who had the most fundamental and basic elements of faith.

With Abraham came what we now know as Judaism, which had much more specific doctrine, and laid out the laws of moses and the commandments.

Christ came to take religion to the next step, and evolve judaism into christianity.

And then, at least as far as mormons are concerned, he returned to establish the fullness of the Gospel later on in the 19th century.

Religion has to be built line upon line, precept upon precept., Just as one's personal knowledge must be layered in with the basics first, and gradually advanced.

God wouldnt start the world off with a calculus course, he started us out with basic math, then algebra, then trigonometry, then calculus, etc.

The example works well to explain why the other religions still exist today... some people just don't want to advance to the next class ;)

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

The theory of evolution of religion according to Mormonism is similar to the theory of evolution by Darwin.

In the beginning, there were believers in God, who had the most fundamental and basic elements of faith.

With Abraham came what we now know as Judaism, which had much more specific doctrine, and laid out the laws of moses and the commandments.

Christ came to take religion to the next step, and evolve judaism into christianity.

And then, at least as far as mormons are concerned, he returned to establish the fullness of the Gospel later on in the 19th century.

Religion has to be built line upon line, precept upon precept., Just as one's personal knowledge must be layered in with the basics first, and gradually advanced.

God wouldnt start the world off with a calculus course, he started us out with basic math, then algebra, then trigonometry, then calculus, etc.

The example works well to explain why the other religions still exist today... some people just don't want to advance to the next class ;)

Islam, perhaps some form of business math, or remedial math.

The theory of evolution of religion according to Mormonism is similar to the theory of evolution by Darwin.

In the beginning, there were believers in God, who had the most fundamental and basic elements of faith.

With Abraham came what we now know as Judaism, which had much more specific doctrine, and laid out the laws of moses and the commandments.

Christ came to take religion to the next step, and evolve judaism into christianity.

And then, at least as far as mormons are concerned, he returned to establish the fullness of the Gospel later on in the 19th century.

Religion has to be built line upon line, precept upon precept., Just as one's personal knowledge must be layered in with the basics first, and gradually advanced.

God wouldnt start the world off with a calculus course, he started us out with basic math, then algebra, then trigonometry, then calculus, etc.

The example works well to explain why the other religions still exist today... some people just don't want to advance to the next class ;)

But wasn't your bible written in a hat, then pulled out of the hat in front of 2 witnesses who were quite certain they saw god writing a book in a hat?

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

What makes you think that Jesus was a threat to Pilate's authority?

Islam, perhaps some form of business math, or remedial math.lol

What seems strange to me is that Jesus was a Jew.

What seems strange to me is that Jesus was a Jew.what seems so strange about that? Do you think the king of the jews should be Roman? :P

Who better to take judaism into christianity than a jew?

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

Pilate isn't that important because he was obviously of low moral character. the betrayal of Christ by the jewish elites,the jewish mob and his own followers is import becvause it illustrates the failings of even the most moral of men. the scribes and the pharasees were not debased evil men, they were scholars of gods law, the fact that they turned on Jesus illustrates far more than the back that brutal roman soldiers and administrates continued to act brutally(what more could be expected of them).

It wasn't JUST the Romans, and it wasn't JUST the Jews. It was the Pharisees who restricted the 'common Jew's access to God who saw the viable threat in Jesus taking away they're power. It was the Roman governor who didn't want an insurrection if the people (being influenced by the Pharisees) didn't get their way. Which is how a convicted serial murderer (Barabbas) went free over a man who was peaceful in his protests (minus one incident in the temple).

And Jesus of Nazareth should be referenced in Roman documents as a prisoner. So historians CAN prove he existed, at the very least as an important politcal and religious leader.

Jesus died for our sins, and if He was not meant to die He would not have died.

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

Pilate isn't that important because he was obviously of low moral character. the betrayal of Christ by the jewish elites,the jewish mob and his own followers is import becvause it illustrates the failings of even the most moral of men. the scribes and the pharasees were not debased evil men, they were scholars of gods law, the fact that they turned on Jesus illustrates far more than the back that brutal roman soldiers and administrates continued to act brutally(what more could be expected of them).

Or, perhaps those men were very moral and decided that Jesus was simply the David Koresh of his day rather than the true son of God.

Calvary was simply his Waco, but some members of the cult lived on and kept it going....


-Z-

Jesus died for our sins, and if He was not meant to die He would not have died.

Well, I WAS trying to be as non-religious as possible as not to incite flaming, but considering I'll be at church tonight from 11 pm to about 1:30 am for His sacrifice... I figure the LEAST I can do is agree.

Islam, perhaps some form of business math, or remedial math.lol

monotheism for dummies(I'm sorry it just came to me and I thought it was funny, but Islam does seem to me to be simpified watered down Judaism with a conversion mandate to me)

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

Jesus was jewish, so he didn't get killed by his own people.

1) Yes there is evidence that Jesus existed as has been mentioned. If you aren't a Christian it's more a matter of not believing that He is the savior of the world.

2) If you read the bible you will see evidence that the Jews were the ones who wanted Christ killed. There was a Jewish mob that started yelling to crucify him and who chose to have Barabbas released to them. Pilate, not wanting an insurrection, washed his hands of the affair... literally. I would have to say, though, that the person talking about the Scribes and Pharisees has it right. The Pharisees were the ones that really started it.

3) Believing that the Jews were the ones to have Christ killed does NOT make you an anti-semetist. It's not the current Jewish people that did it. I do not condone the holocaust despite the fact that I believe The Bible. I think that this is the reason people have a problem with placing the blame on the Jews, if there's another reason tell me.

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

Jesus was jewish, so he didn't get killed by his own people.

yes but more importantly be was the son of god and a man killed by humanity in their ignorance and through whose death the human race is offered redemption. a human killed by humans to save humanity.

The theory of evolution of religion according to Mormonism is similar to the theory of evolution by Darwin.

In the beginning, there were believers in God, who had the most fundamental and basic elements of faith.

With Abraham came what we now know as Judaism, which had much more specific doctrine, and laid out the laws of moses and the commandments.

Christ came to take religion to the next step, and evolve judaism into christianity.

And then, at least as far as mormons are concerned, he returned to establish the fullness of the Gospel later on in the 19th century.

Religion has to be built line upon line, precept upon precept., Just as one's personal knowledge must be layered in with the basics first, and gradually advanced.

God wouldnt start the world off with a calculus course, he started us out with basic math, then algebra, then trigonometry, then calculus, etc.

The example works well to explain why the other religions still exist today... some people just don't want to advance to the next class ;)

This does make some sense when you think about it.. that would make Atheism Rocket Science.or if you will Graduate school!

The theory of evolution of religion according to Mormonism is similar to the theory of evolution by Darwin.

In the beginning, there were believers in God, who had the most fundamental and basic elements of faith.

With Abraham came what we now know as Judaism, which had much more specific doctrine, and laid out the laws of moses and the commandments.

Christ came to take religion to the next step, and evolve judaism into christianity.

And then, at least as far as mormons are concerned, he returned to establish the fullness of the Gospel later on in the 19th century.

Religion has to be built line upon line, precept upon precept., Just as one's personal knowledge must be layered in with the basics first, and gradually advanced.

God wouldnt start the world off with a calculus course, he started us out with basic math, then algebra, then trigonometry, then calculus, etc.

The example works well to explain why the other religions still exist today... some people just don't want to advance to the next class ;)

This does make some sense when you think about it.. that would make Atheism Rocket Science.or if you will Graduate school!

or people who need to use calculators to make change :wink:

1) Yes there is evidence that Jesus existed as has been mentioned. If you aren't a Christian it's more a matter of not believing that He is the savior of the world.

What evidence?

This does make some sense when you think about it.. that would make Atheism Rocket Science.or if you will Graduate school!

Yeah, only if you're Mormon.

Atheists seem like 'townies', whilst Agnostics are those that just decided to be home schooled...

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

Jesus was jewish, so he didn't get killed by his own people.

yes but more importantly be was the son of god and a man killed by humanity in their ignorance and through whose death the human race is offered redemption. a human killed by humans to save humanity.

Does that mean god was Jewish?

The theory of evolution of religion according to Mormonism is similar to the theory of evolution by Darwin.

In the beginning, there were believers in God, who had the most fundamental and basic elements of faith.

With Abraham came what we now know as Judaism, which had much more specific doctrine, and laid out the laws of moses and the commandments.

Christ came to take religion to the next step, and evolve judaism into christianity.

And then, at least as far as mormons are concerned, he returned to establish the fullness of the Gospel later on in the 19th century.

Religion has to be built line upon line, precept upon precept., Just as one's personal knowledge must be layered in with the basics first, and gradually advanced.

God wouldnt start the world off with a calculus course, he started us out with basic math, then algebra, then trigonometry, then calculus, etc.

The example works well to explain why the other religions still exist today... some people just don't want to advance to the next class ;)

This does make some sense when you think about it.. that would make Atheism Rocket Science.or if you will Graduate school!

or people who need to use calculators to make change :wink:

Or simply people who are smart enough to not believe in spooky incompetent father figures in the sky... especially ones that have never provided the human race with one shred of evidence that it's even there.

It's like saying you believe in Martians..lol :P

All Hail Marvin The Martian.. haha :mrgreen:

1) Yes there is evidence that Jesus existed as has been mentioned. If you aren't a Christian it's more a matter of not believing that He is the savior of the world.

What evidence?

Well, for one the Romans kept extensive records. Someone else mentioned that. Besides the Bible there is considerable mention made of him. Like I said, the only thing for you to dismiss is that He was the savior of the world. :wink:

Or simply people who are smart enough to not believe in spooky incompetent father figures in the sky... especially ones that have never provided the human race with one shred of evidence that it's even there.

It's like saying you believe in Martians..lol :P

All Hail Marvin The Martian.. haha :mrgreen:



http://members.rogers.com/zeppo_marx/images/lj2004/mars.jpg

You called?

:lol:

Well...

Or simply people who are smart enough to not believe in spooky incompetent father figures in the sky... especially ones that have never provided the human race with one shred of evidence that it's even there.

It's like saying you believe in Martians..lol :P

All Hail Marvin The Martian.. haha :mrgreen:



http://members.rogers.com/zeppo_marx/images/lj2004/mars.jpg

You called?

:lol:

hahaha rotflmao.. haha Is it any wonder why I married the man.. Good one hun! :lol:

1) Yes there is evidence that Jesus existed as has been mentioned. If you aren't a Christian it's more a matter of not believing that He is the savior of the world.

What evidence?

Well, for one the Romans kept extensive records. Someone else mentioned that. Besides the Bible there is considerable mention made of him. Like I said, the only thing for you to dismiss is that He was the savior of the world. :wink:

Your sources for this?

Well, I'll take any book that doesn't have zombies and flying dragons in it as a source.

I dunno. I've heard it off historians and stuff like the History Channel and PBS. Feel free to take my word for it, or better yet, research it and find out for yourself.

I dunno. I've heard it off historians and stuff like the History Channel and PBS. Feel free to take my word for it, or better yet, research it and find out for yourself.

Ah...TV.

There is no proof...There are some indications, but that's about it.

Savior of mankind? Come on now...We're not five year olds.

First off, could you please stop trying to make me angry? Maybe you're not, but that's what it feels like. We're not five year olds here. :wink:

No offense, but it's dumb to say that just because I don't have on the tip of my tongue the name of every historian I hear about when I'm sitting at my PC doesn't mean I'm wrong. You are simply ignoring anything that isn't cited where you yourself probably wouldn't be able to cite everything you say. You've no reason that I can see to do so unless it is to make me mad, or to use such sarcasm. Please enlighten me as to what that reason is, now I'm curious.

By the way, Tacetus probably makes mention of it since the Christian movement effected Roman history.

Um... *sheepishly raises her hand* I like Jesus... *flinches and waits for the tomatoes*

But seriously folks, does it really matter what one believes, as long as they aren't distorting a beautiful thing and making it a tool for their own power0hungry purposes? So, I believe that Jesus died, and quite painfully, as one could imagine, on the cross for my sins. Does that make me wrong? Only if I think that gives me the right to mock the beliefs of others.

I'm interested to see what others have to say about this...

I concur with PotomacDorms (which is why I'm wondering why Tumaniaa needs to stand against me no matter what).

Hey, Zeppistan and I were just having a little bit of harmless fun.. and we do like Marvin .. :P

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

Pilate only order him killed becuase the jews threatned to revolt!
...and of course he existed, The Romans did have records....

Stephistan: I know. I wasn't talking to you.

In deuteronomy G-d warns the Jewish people NOT to change the mitzvot that He has given them to carry out (all 613 of them) and not to alter their perception of the unity and 'oneness' of G-d. I'm pretty sure that Jesus was saying that the jews should be doing something differently which is why he was rejected at the time by the jewish people.

Having said that they didn't kill him. I'm not going to go into that though as so many other people have posted comments about that already.

Also Judaism comes direct from G-d to the jewish people - there is no room for changing the laws given to us by Him and the first testament is written by G-d Himself which in my opinion makes it pretty infallable. All this lark about refining religion through the ages is - in my opnion - well wide of the mark. G-d gave us the Jewish religion the same way as he gave the world Adam (fully complete), so why change it?

Yours, inviting comment and debate,

-Gold Land

God didn't change it, MAN did.

I've said it many times before, but I feel I must repeat myself (note: the following applies only if you believe in a God):

GOD is INFALLIBLE, without fault. HIS WORD is also infallible. MAN, however, if FULL of FAULT. When MAN PENNED GOD'S WORD, Man interpreted something that is very difficult to interpret by its very nature. Therefore, THE WORD OF GOD INTERPRETED BY MAN IS FALLIBLE, that is, it contains fault. The basic truth is there, but the details...

One must take the Bible and the Torah and ANY religious text within its historical context. This is why the Old Testament tends to contradict itself. While God may be timeless, Man can only think in a linear fashion. Thus, the views and perceptions of the time affect what was written.

I hope to have made that clear.

But a great point made, Gold Land.

I think you enforce my point beautifly PotomacDorms.

The first testament (or Torah as I prefer to call it) was written by G-d. There is no interpretation by man. G-d wrote it and man has copied it letter for letter for thousands of years. In fact, torah scrolls dating back over 1000 years show that only 5 letters have changed in that time and that is between afew alephs and ayins which are both similar and silent letters any way.

This means we can only take the laws/mitzvot as they are written - and without accepting mans changes to them
If G-d says leave it as it is then we should leave it as it is. If only Eve had done that with the fruit of the tree of good and bad then we wouldn't need to be having this discussion now. ;p

-GL

First off, could you please stop trying to make me angry? Maybe you're not, but that's what it feels like. We're not five year olds here. :wink:

No offense, but it's dumb to say that just because I don't have on the tip of my tongue the name of every historian I hear about when I'm sitting at my PC doesn't mean I'm wrong. You are simply ignoring anything that isn't cited where you yourself probably wouldn't be able to cite everything you say. You've no reason that I can see to do so unless it is to make me mad, or to use such sarcasm. Please enlighten me as to what that reason is, now I'm curious.

By the way, Tacetus probably makes mention of it since the Christian movement effected Roman history.

I looked it up actually...And it seems that there is no solid evidence, just indications (unless you count some extremist groups that claim to have fossilized footprints of Jesus...etc. as a valid sources.)

I said we are not five year olds because it's quite an effort to believe in zombies, ogres and trolls of the night when we're past that age.

GL -
Ah, but as far as Christ is concerned, I believe that He is the New Testament... this doesn't mean the previous laws were wrong, but the way that they were ENFORCED by MAN were incorrect. Jesus set out to right such wrongs as having to PAY to worship God (the moneychangers upon whose asses He got medieval on).

But, it seems to me that you celebrate a different faith, and I commend you for your firm beliefs. It's a respectable thing that I sadly don't see much of these days :(

PotomacDorms dude,

Thanks for your calm and intellegent posts - I commend you for your beliefs too. But still I have to disagree (if I didn't I would be christian!)

I can see how Jesus would have said, "you are being naughty and not doing what G-d said to do properly, give everyone the right to prey without taking all their money away, and be nice to eachother and don't gossip and deal honestly with them etc...." That makes a lot of sense.

What I don't understand about the Christian religion (and I believe the instructions for this did not come from Christ himself) is why things like keeping kashrut were changed. Laws pertaining to what is kosher and what isn't are really quite clear in the Torah, so why drop them? Also, one of the most astounding things to me is the change of the day of the Sabbath. Shabbat is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of the religion and one of the things that was stressed to be so important - the 4th commandment infact. G-d didn't say, take one out of seven days off - he said take of the seventh day. He was quite specific about this given that in Judaism time is circular not linear therefore there is something intrinsicly important about that time of the week.

I think that is enough for the time being,

Yours - honestly looking for answers,

-GL

p.s. Having said all that stuff I wish all the Christians reading this message a very happy easter. And having said that I should also wish a happy pesach to all of the Jews reading this message.

Assuming Jesus existed...
No historian denies that he did.

Assuming Jesus was actually the son of God.

Jesus was born amoungst the jews because they were the people most touched by the word of God they were the people who had the best understand of his will and love in ancient society. when jesus was ultimately betrayed and condemned to death by the Jewish people it was not as sign that they were morally inferior to the rest of humanity, it was an inditement of all mankind and a sign that only through the forgiveness of Christ could we be worthy of God. If even these chosen people of God rejected his son, how much worse would the rest of society have done. they were the best of us and still they feel short, only through grace can any of us be saved. the failings of the Jews are the failings of the best humanity had to offer at the time, not an inditement of a people who were still the most worthy in God's eyes.

Although I agree with the anti-anti jew hating sentiment I tend to disagree with your underlying ideas.

1) The "Chosen People of God" had, and still have certain fundimental Ideas and Belifes that procluded them, both at the time of crucifiction and afterwords to this day, from beliving in Jesus. It says in the old testiment, straight out, that If a prophet comes and attemts to change the laws of Jewdism, then he is a false prophet. Understand what I'm saying here. He who is a cristian, and belives in Jesus, Fine, good and more power to you. But when he came and attempted to bring jews into his fold, he failed because the vast majority of jews did not want to violate the Laws of the Bible. What the rest of the world would have done is questionable, but I doubt their rejection would have been for the same reasons as the jews.

2) Did the Jews condemn Jesus to Death? Behold the age old question and the basis for all the suffering, anguish and pain that the Jews have endured for ther last 2000 years. Put simply, THE MAN WAS CRUCIFIED. Never, has a jewish court of law condemned someone to death that way. There is no provision in jewish law for that for of death. The only civilization that has ever used crucifiction was the Roman Empire. I seriosly doubt that Ponchus Pilate, a ruthless tyrant, would have listened to the jews, a people that HE himself regularly had executed in the same manner as Jesus. SO the Blame falls on the Romans and yet have you ever heard of a massecre of romans because of their killing of Jesus?(just something to think about.)

3) And why judge the Jews at all? As you said they were the most religios people at that time and as a group probably still are now. So why bother judging their actions in any way both then and now. The second Vatican Concil has absolved them of responsiblity for crucifiction and the have belife in the same god as Cristians, So why bother trying to convert them or toeven judge them. What happened 2000 years ago happened and now perhaps it is time to move on?

Assuming Jesus existed...
No historian denies that he did.

No historian can prove that he did.

According to you then nobody can prove anybody was alive during or before Jesus' time.

this is stupid all you religious-tree hugging IDIOTS can all go to hell

Ah, just like real nations, fighting over who thinks is the true religion. Well, I feel there is no god, Jesus may or may have not lived, but hey, to each their own, don't force it upon other people

this is stupid all you religious-tree hugging IDIOTS can all go to hell

tree hugging? :(

Assuming Jesus existed...
No historian denies that he did.

No historian can prove that he did.

According to you then nobody can prove anybody was alive during or before Jesus' time.

Ah...wrong...Official and historical records are reliable. The bible is not.

Gold Land -

Sorry for not responding earlier, but I was at church. :)

The reason why Christians do not keep kosher, nor follow any of the Jewish law (with the exception of the Ten Commandments) is that we believe that Jesus, as the New Testment, did away with such means to purification of the soul through His death and Blood. We believe that Jesus basically washed away our sins with His blood and suffering, and that any further purification of the body and soul is not needed (that is, all one needs is a firm belief in Christ and an ability to follow His teachings).

I heard this verse earlier this evening, and I thought it summarized my views on the Jewish law vs. Christian belief thing quite well:

For the Law was given through Moses; but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ

I thank you for this stimulating and respectful debate, Gold Lands. Heck, I'd marry you if our religious views weren't so different :D

The title of this thread reminds me of a rock band.

Jesus was born amoungst the jews because they were the people most touched by the word of God they were the people who had the best understand of his will and love in ancient society. when jesus was ultimately betrayed and condemned to death by the Jewish people it was not as sign that they were morally inferior to the rest of humanity, it was an inditement of all mankind and a sign that only through the forgiveness of Christ could we be worthy of God. If even these chosen people of God rejected his son, how much worse would the rest of society have done. they were the best of us and still they feel short, only through grace can any of us be saved. the failings of the Jews are the failings of the best humanity had to offer at the time, not an inditement of a people who were still the most worthy in God's eyes.

The only ones I hear talking about "blaming the Jews" are those who are worried about it happening; nobody seems to be actually doing any blaming.

I agree entirely with this post.

When I saw The Passion, I did in fact feel anger: toward those in power who always seem to use it in the worst possible way.
Pity: for innocent victims.

Guilt: for myself and anyone else who has ever failed to act on their conscience.

One man was true to his conscience and the world beat the crap out of him for it. That's what Good Friday is about.

The world can't get away with that forever, becasue in the end love trumps hate. that's what Easter is about.

As for the Jews: Shalom. Be righteous, dudes. Nobody blames you.

PotomacDorms dude,

Thanks for your calm and intellegent posts - I commend you for your beliefs too. But still I have to disagree (if I didn't I would be christian!)

I can see how Jesus would have said, "you are being naughty and not doing what G-d said to do properly, give everyone the right to prey without taking all their money away, and be nice to eachother and don't gossip and deal honestly with them etc...." That makes a lot of sense.

What I don't understand about the Christian religion (and I believe the instructions for this did not come from Christ himself) is why things like keeping kashrut were changed. Laws pertaining to what is kosher and what isn't are really quite clear in the Torah, so why drop them? Also, one of the most astounding things to me is the change of the day of the Sabbath. Shabbat is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of the religion and one of the things that was stressed to be so important - the 4th commandment infact. G-d didn't say, take one out of seven days off - he said take of the seventh day. He was quite specific about this given that in Judaism time is circular not linear therefore there is something intrinsicly important about that time of the week.

I think that is enough for the time being,

Yours - honestly looking for answers,

-GL

p.s. Having said all that stuff I wish all the Christians reading this message a very happy easter. And having said that I should also wish a happy pesach to all of the Jews reading this message.

My understanding of the change in weekly holy days is that after a time the christians became unwelcome in the temple and synagogues.

They had a crisis: How to worship when denied a physical place and time to do so.

Thus began two practices: house church worship in private homes, and the move to "The Lord's Day" (the day of resurrection, as we believe) from the Sabbath.

It may have been "sour grapes"; "well, if we can't share your day we'll just find a better one, so there!"

There are Christians who still observe the original Sabbath, such as 7th-day adventists and 7th-day baptists.

The theory of evolution of religion according to Mormonism is similar to the theory of evolution by Darwin.

In the beginning, there were believers in God, who had the most fundamental and basic elements of faith.

With Abraham came what we now know as Judaism, which had much more specific doctrine, and laid out the laws of moses and the commandments.

Christ came to take religion to the next step, and evolve judaism into christianity.

And then, at least as far as mormons are concerned, he returned to establish the fullness of the Gospel later on in the 19th century.

Religion has to be built line upon line, precept upon precept., Just as one's personal knowledge must be layered in with the basics first, and gradually advanced.

God wouldnt start the world off with a calculus course, he started us out with basic math, then algebra, then trigonometry, then calculus, etc.

The example works well to explain why the other religions still exist today... some people just don't want to advance to the next class ;)

Wow, that was respectful. :roll:

It wasn't JUST the Romans, and it wasn't JUST the Jews. It was the Pharisees who restricted the 'common Jew's access to God who saw the viable threat in Jesus taking away they're power.

Many of the Pharisees WERE common Jews. Hillel was a woodcutter, for instance.

It was the Roman governor who didn't want an insurrection if the people (being influenced by the Pharisees) didn't get their way.

Um, no. More likely, neither the Romans nor the Pharisees wanted an insurrection- especially since the Pharisees knew the Jews could not possibly win such an attempt.

Which is how a convicted serial murderer (Barabbas) went free over a man who was peaceful in his protests (minus one incident in the temple).

What's your evidence Barabbus was a "serial murderer"? I've heard some interesting suggestions that he may have in fact been affiliated with the Zealot party, in which case he would have been viewed as a hero and patriot, not a serial killer.

And Jesus of Nazareth should be referenced in Roman documents as a prisoner. So historians CAN prove he existed, at the very least as an important politcal and religious leader.

If this is true, then shouldn't we have heard about it by now?

BTW, near as I've been able to determine, there are no reliable CONTEMPORARY (or even near-contemporary) sources documenting Jesus' existence. Tacitus and Josephus both refer to "that Jesus guy", but simply say things like, "he was called the Christ [by his followers]". Not only that; both of them were writing long after the events had taken place, and therefore were using "sources" like local lore and heresy. Not the most reliable data.

God didn't change it, MAN did.

I've said it many times before, but I feel I must repeat myself (note: the following applies only if you believe in a God):

GOD is INFALLIBLE, without fault. HIS WORD is also infallible. MAN, however, if FULL of FAULT. When MAN PENNED GOD'S WORD, Man interpreted something that is very difficult to interpret by its very nature. Therefore, THE WORD OF GOD INTERPRETED BY MAN IS FALLIBLE, that is, it contains fault. The basic truth is there, but the details...

One must take the Bible and the Torah and ANY religious text within its historical context. This is why the Old Testament tends to contradict itself. While God may be timeless, Man can only think in a linear fashion. Thus, the views and perceptions of the time affect what was written.

I hope to have made that clear.

But a great point made, Gold Land.

Interesting perspective, but you seem to be forgetting that, according to Jewish tradition, the Oral Law (Mishnah) was given DIRECTLY by God to Moses, and then from Moses on down to the Rabbis.

Now, you may say that man is fallible, but if that is the case, why did God give Moses the Oral Law in the first place, if not to have educated men debate and clarify it, and use it in turn to clarify the written Torah?

The whole blaming the Jews for the death of Christ really worries me. Come on, they did not kill him! The romans did! He was a threat to Pilate's authority and so he was executed. The end.

Pilate isn't that important because he was obviously of low moral character. the betrayal of Christ by the jewish elites,the jewish mob and his own followers is import becvause it illustrates the failings of even the most moral of men. the scribes and the pharasees were not debased evil men, they were scholars of gods law, the fact that they turned on Jesus illustrates far more than the back that brutal roman soldiers and administrates continued to act brutally(what more could be expected of them).

It's incorrect to say they "turned" on him. Assuming the Gospel accounts are at all reliable, it seems more correct to say HE "turned" on them- that is, he became a threat to the Jewish status-quo and to Priestly and Pharaisic authority (it's also important to recognize that the Priests and Pharisees were not at all on the same "team"). Their reaction was typical of most people in their position- get rid of the threat. This is all the more plausible if they saw him as preaching heretical ideas, or ideas that could have endangered the community as a whole.

Sorry for not responding earlier, but I was at church. :)



Ditto - but I was in bed asleep


The reason why Christians do not keep kosher, nor follow any of the Jewish law (with the exception of the Ten Commandments) is that we believe that Jesus, as the New Testment, did away with such means to purification of the soul through His death and Blood. We believe that Jesus basically washed away our sins with His blood and suffering, and that any further purification of the body and soul is not needed (that is, all one needs is a firm belief in Christ and an ability to follow His teachings).


The original argument still stands. If G-d said 'look, I'm never gonna change the rules. Ever. And don't believe anyone that tells you otherwise. In fact, if someone does tell you the rules have changed, stone him. Do it yourself. Strike the first stone......' (thats a poor translation from deuteronomy 13) then why believe someone that says 'Look here guys, its all change, you don't need to do these things any more'
Also, if you still keep the 10 commandments then my question regarding the change of the day of sabbath still stands.

I thank you for this stimulating and respectful debate, Gold Lands. Heck, I'd marry you if our religious views weren't so different :D

I thank you too PotomacDorms, though why don't you want to marry me - I am insulted :wink:

Yours, confused but still learning,

-GL

Assuming Jesus existed...
No historian denies that he did.

No historian can prove that he did.

According to you then nobody can prove anybody was alive during or before Jesus' time.

Ah...wrong...Official and historical records are reliable. The bible is not.

Fantastic, in that case you I point to Josephus, a scholar during Jesus' time who writes of a Jesus. His volumes are historical and said to be reliable.

Why is everything else a historical book but the Bible isn't?

The Bible has a load of history in it. We'll not take Genesis because there's so much debate. But there was history like the Exodus, or the Kings. What about Acts?

Assuming Jesus existed...
No historian denies that he did.

No historian can prove that he did.

According to you then nobody can prove anybody was alive during or before Jesus' time.

Ah...wrong...Official and historical records are reliable. The bible is not.

Fantastic, in that case you I point to Josephus, a scholar during Jesus' time who writes of a Jesus. His volumes are historical and said to be reliable.

Josephus lead a revolt against the Romans and tried to stop it after seeing the hopelessness of it but his warnings fell on deaf ears. The Romans let him live and trashed Jerusalem about 70 CE.

And while he lived what did he write?

And while he lived what did he write?

http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/JOSEPHUS.HTM

There's no denying that he lived, but there is a question as to whether he was the son of God, or his stories were just an extension of the prophecies. (i.e. someone thought Jesus was cool and wrote a story about him based on Old Testament prophecies in Isaiah etc.)
Someone named Jesus did live because there is historical evidence of it. Even Atheists have to admit that because there is historical writings of it. But was he the Son of God?

As for Jesus writing of his travels and message, no one in the region was literate. What good would it do if he wasted his time writing his message?

Wasn't Josephus anti-Jesus and mentioned what a stir he was creating? I think I remember reading that somewhere.....

"No historian can prove that he did."

Actually, they do, if I wasn't so lazy and not wanting to cite sources I am sure someone else did.

Needless to say; on Good Friday service I was sitting there I was getting angry at the Jews. They killed him. Read the accounts; pilate handed him over to the Jews to be killed. Pilate didn't care either way, but the Jews killed him for blasphemy.

"No historian can prove that he did."

Actually, they do, if I wasn't so lazy and not wanting to cite sources I am sure someone else did.

Needless to say; on Good Friday service I was sitting there I was getting angry at the Jews. They killed him. Read the accounts; pilate handed him over to the Jews to be killed. Pilate didn't care either way, but the Jews killed him for blasphemy.

The Romans killed Jesus, but it was supported by the Jewish priests at the time (some cosy deal). Jesus threatened the authority of Rome and Jewish priests who had a vested interest in his death.

Pax, peeps, Pax.

What did Jesus die for?

To me, He died for ALL OUR sins.

Note: "ALL OUR"

WE, because of our sins, killed him, not just the Jews.

The Jews didn't kill him. The leaders of the Jewish community incited them.

But it wasn't 100% of the Jews who were angry at him. The Jews were divided. They knew that a Messiah was coming but they didn't know what to expect. Some thought that Jesus was it and some thought that he wasn't. The really conservative ones, like the Pharisees, were the ones who were cheering for him to die. You cannot accuse all the Jews for the death of Jesus when it wasn't all the Jews in the city who wanted him to die. Some of the Jews were his followers and were just as upset and angry as you were in church--probably more so because they actually knew him.
How can the scriptures go from people greeting him, some of them Jews, with palm leaves to all the Jews hating him? It doesn't make sense. Its because not all the Jews hated him.

*blink blinks at the excellent arguments set before her*

Wow...

I... can't argue that. For once, in possibly world history, a Greek woman has NOTHING to SAY.

Gold Land - Originally I said we couldn't get married because of religious differences, but I have finally found my match regarding knowing one's own religious history . Let's get hitched!!! :kiss:

I promise I'll cook ALL the delicious Jewish AND Greek dishes. PLEASE????

You know, I thought about it, and I STILL believe in Christ. Why? Man was a rebel. I gotta love that. He was a rebel WITH a cause. He was kind to ALL, even the Gentiles and the prostitues. The reason I'm a Christian is not so much the mechanics, but the teachings. Kindness, equality, tolerance and acceptance were all a part of Jesus' spiel [sp?]. I can dig it.

Plus, I almost started weeping during the Catechetical Homily that is read during the Resurrection Service:

If any be devout and God-loving, let him enjoy this fair and radiant triumph. If any be a good and wise servant, let him enter rejoicing into the joy of his Lord. If any be weary of fasting, let him now receive his reward. If any have labored from the first hour, let him receive today his rightful due. If any have come at the third hour, let him feast with thankfulness. If any have arrived at the sixth hour, let him in no wise be in doubt, for in no wise shall he suffer loss. If any be delayed even until the ninth hour, let him draw near, doubting nothing, fearing nothing. If any have tarried even until the eleventh hour, let him not be fearful on account of his lateness; for the Master, Who is jealous of His honor, receiveth the last even as the first. He giveth rest to him that cometh at the eleventh hour, as well as to him that hath labored from the first hour; and to the last He is merciful, and the first He pleaseth; to the one He giveth, and to the other He bestoweth; and He receiveth the works, and welcometh the intention; and the deed He honoureth, and the offering He praiseth. Wherefore, then, enter ye all into the joy of your Lord; both the first and the second, receive ye your reward. Ye rich and ye poor, with one another exult.

Ye sober and ye slothful, honor the day. Ye that have kept the fast and ye that have not, be glad today. The table is full-laden, delight ye all. The calf is fatted; let none go forth hungry. Let all enjoy the feast of faith, receive all ye the riches of goodness. Let no one bewail his poverty, for the universal kingdom hath been revealed. Let no one weep for his transgressions, for forgiveness hath dawned from the tomb. Let no one fear death, for the death of the Saviour hath set us free. He hath quench by it, He hath led hades captive, He Who descended into hades. He embittered it, when it tasted of His flesh. And foretelling this, Isaiah cried: "Hades," he saith, "was embittered when it encountered Thee below." It was embittered, for it was abolished. It was embittered, for it was mocked. It was embittered, for it was slain. It was embittered, for it was overthrown. It was embittered, for it was fettered. It received a body and encountered God. It received earth, and met heaven. It received that which it saw, and fell to what it did not see. O death, where is thy sting? O hades, where is thy victory?

Christ is risen, and thou art cast down.
Christ is risen, and the demons are fallen.
Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice.
Christ is risen, and life flourisheth.
Christ is risen, and there is none dead in the tombs.

For Christ, being risen from the dead, is become the first-fruits of them that have fallen asleep. To Him be glory and dominion unto the ages of ages. Amen.

There sure are a lot of religous arguements poppin up on this Easter morn'. But I s'pose its to be expected...

But it wasn't 100% of the Jews who were angry at him. The Jews were divided. They knew that a Messiah was coming but they didn't know what to expect. Some thought that Jesus was it and some thought that he wasn't. The really conservative ones, like the Pharisees, were the ones who were cheering for him to die. You cannot accuse all the Jews for the death of Jesus when it wasn't all the Jews in the city who wanted him to die. Some of the Jews were his followers and were just as upset and angry as you were in church--probably more so because they actually knew him.
How can the scriptures go from people greeting him, some of them Jews, with palm leaves to all the Jews hating him? It doesn't make sense. Its because not all the Jews hated him.

Oy...

Look, you started out with a good point, but it seems to be rapidly disintegrating. The Pharisees were not the super-conservative Jesus-hating authorities you are depicting them as. It was the Sadducees, the priestly party, who were in "control". The Pharisees were, in their own way, rebels, too. Secondly, just because the NT depicts SOME Pharisees as cheering for Jesus to die doesn't mean that they all were. (How many people do you think could realistically have fit in Pilate's courtyard?) Thirdly, this is just happening in ONE city. There were plenty of Jews who weren't in Jerusalem at the time, and therefore can't be saddled with any of this crap.

Lastly, there seem to have been a fair amount of Jews that didn't believe Jesus was the Messiah, but didn't necessarily wish him or his followers harm. There's a passage in Luke where it talks about some Pharisees WARNING some of the apostles that they're about to be captured and killed by the Romans.

Bottom-line: stereotypes aren't accurate. Period.

You know, I thought about it, and I STILL believe in Christ. Why? Man was a rebel. I gotta love that. He was a rebel WITH a cause. He was kind to ALL, even the Gentiles and the prostitues. The reason I'm a Christian is not so much the mechanics, but the teachings. Kindness, equality, tolerance and acceptance were all a part of Jesus' spiel [sp?]. I can dig it.

You're free to believe whatever you want. But I do hope you realize that "Kindness, equality, tolerance and acceptance" are not uniquely Christian concepts or ideas. Jesus borrowed a lot of his ideas from his Jewish contemporaries and predecessors. (Not to mention that Christianity has changed quite a bit over the centuries.)