bindex:

I am an ATHEIST, all I am doing here is showing you blind people what is really in your bible and how some of the stories or words were delibrately mistranslated to create the new God (Jesus) by Paul, the Romans, Greeks and some of the early Christian founders. The Prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 does not support Matthew's claim that Isaiah is referring to Jesus' virgin birth. It should be said at the outset that the word "virgin" does not appear in the seventh chapter of Isaiah. The author of the first Gospel deliberately mistranslated the Hebrew word ha'almah as "a virgin." This Hebrew word ha'almah does not mean "a virgin." It means "the young woman," with no implication of virginity.

"…I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. … and the isles shall wait for his law. … for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles…"
Isaiah 42:1-7.

This verse is completely mistranslated from the original hebrew bible go and read the JPS or Stone edition of the hebrew bible and you will see what I am talking about. The early Christian founders took the Hebrew text and created a new God(Jesus) out of it, but unfortunatly for Christains Judaism is still around to show all the lies and delibrate mistranslation of the original hebrew bible (tanakah) by the Christains. Jesus is a new God that was created by Paul and the rest of the gentiles out of the original hebrew text.

I agree that the story was portraying how the woman had faith in Jesus, but to say anything other wise is to lie about what Jesus has said so many times. Again here is your Jesus in his own words.

Here you have Jesus in the bible telling his disciples not to go any where near the gentiles when preaching about the kingdom of God that is at hand. There you have it. More from Jesus in the bible.

Even when he was talking about Judgement he only mentioned Israel, he never said he was going to judge the gentiles.

You do know that the Church is Israel right?
In one of the above passages you showed where Jesus is saying they shouldn't go to the samaritans, and yet he went to the samaria and was talking to a samaritan woman, and even offered her to drink from the living water (himself).
Also samaria is considered a lost sheep of Israel. If above in the passage Jesus was including samaria as a gentile nation (which rightfully it is), then he was including the gentiles when he made that offer to the samaritan woman.

If Jesus was trying to exclude the gentiles then why did he offer the gentile woman salvation? In the above passage, it was not yet time for his disciples to go to the gentiles, they first had to preach to the Israelites who then refused his message, before going on to the gentiles.

Here's more of Jesus speaking about going to the gentiles or being a light to the gentiles.

Matthew 10: 16 Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves. 17 But beware of men. For they will deliver you up in councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues. 18 And you shall be brought before governors, and before kings for my sake, for a testimony to them and to the Gentiles

This was after he asked them not to go to the gentiles, this is to tell you that you are misinterpreting the message of Jesus here.

Luke 2:25-32
25 And behold there was a man in Jerusalem named Simeon, and this man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel; and the Holy Ghost was in him.

26 And he had received an answer from the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Christ of the Lord. 27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple. And when his parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him according to the custom of the law, 28 He also took him into his arms, and blessed God, and said: 29 Now thou dost dismiss thy servant, O Lord, according to thy word in peace; 30 Because my eyes have seen thy salvation,

31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples: 32 A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel

this was an Israelite, a rabbi in the temple speaking about Jesus, so the Jews knew exactly what the messiah was to do. He was not just to be a messiah to the Israelites but to the world. The problem with them is that they still maintained that the gentiles were to become Jews, subject to the law of Moses. They killed Jesus because he seemed to be challenging Moses, even though he was not.


Acts of the apostles 1: 8 But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth

this is Jesus speaking right before he was taken up to heaven. The apostles were to preach to the ends of the earth. This is before Paul.

Stephen the martyr was killed because the Jews accused him of changing the laws of Moses, this was before Paul. The same message that Paul preached was already being preached. Infact Paul killed him because he was preaching that same message.

Acts 8:5 And Philip going down to the city of Samaria, preached Christ unto them.
remember Christ had already told them not to go to the city of samaria to preach, if we go by your interpretation of that verse, then Philip was already not listening to Christ. This was before Paul.

Acts 8:26 Now an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying: Arise, go towards the south, to the way that goeth down from Jerusalem into Gaza: this is desert. 27 And rising up, he went. And behold a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch, of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge over all her treasures, had come to Jerusalem to adore, 35 Then Philip, opening his mouth, and beginning at this scripture, preached unto him Jesus.

36 And as they went on their way, they came to a certain water; and the eunuch said: See, here is water: what doth hinder me from being baptized? 37 And Philip said: If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he answering, said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still; and they went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch: and he baptized him.

St. Phillip baptized and preached to an ethiopian. This was before Paul.

You just took an ambiguous statement from Jesus and interpreted it to mean what it never meant. I have other sheep does not mean gentiles in any way. He might have been talking about the other lost tribes of Israel. Jesus told his disciples in clear terms not to go to the cities of the gentiles to share the message about the kingdom of heaven because as it is written in the bible he came only for the lost tribe of Israel. If there is anywhere in the bible where Jesus himself said he came to save the world(Jews and Gentiles) in the bible pls go ahead and show me

Ok. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him. 18 He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment: because the light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil. 20 For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved

Matthew 28: 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

~Lady~:

You do know that the Church is Israel right?
In one of the above passages you showed where Jesus is saying they shouldn't go to the samaritans, and yet he went to the samaria and was talking to a samaritan woman, and even offered her to drink from the living water (himself).
Also samaria is considered a lost sheep of Israel. If above in the passage Jesus was including samaria as a gentile nation (which rightfully it is), then he was including the gentiles when he made that offer to the samaritan woma

Israel is now the church?  the extent to which you guys will go to rationalize you delusion is really funny. What does the Church mean according to the bible?I thought it meant the Body of Christ, If the Church which is Israel is now the body of Christ as you have said then what now happens to your argument in favor of the gentiles? What has Jesus talking to one woman from samaria got to do with him warning his disciples not to go to the cities of the gentiles? He told them categorically that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel(Israel here is not the Church as you will want us to believe). If  Samaria is considered among the lost sheep of Israel why did Jesus not say so? He told his disciples no to go into the lands of the gentiles and samaritans but to the lost sheep of Israel. Show me a passage in the bible where Jesus went to the land of the canaanites and offered a single person salvation.(without them coming to him). Remeber he was reluctant and did not want to heal the child of the canaanite woman because he said that it was not right to take what belongs to the children(Israel) and give it to their dogs(Gentiles).

If Jesus was trying to exclude the gentiles then why did he offer the gentile woman salvation? In the above passage, it was not yet time for his disciples to go to the gentiles, they first had to preach to the Israelites who then refused his message, before going on to the gentiles.

If he was trying to include the gentiles why did he tell his disciples to stay away from the gentiles when preaching that the kingdom of heaven is near? why did he say that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel? Why did he say that he was going to judge only the twelve tribes of Israel?

Matthew 10: 16 Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves. 17 But beware of men. For they will deliver you up in councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues. 18 And you shall be brought before governors, and before kings for my sake, for a testimony to them and to the Gentiles

What does this passage tell you? All you did was just copy a part of it that agrees with your thoughts and present it as Jesus telling his disciples to preach unto the gentiles but you have it all wrong. Here is Jesus in his own words from the beggining when he was sending his disciples out to preach about the kingdom of heaven that was at hand.

Mat 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.
Mat 10:6[b] Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.
Mat 10:7 As you go, preach this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.'
Mat 10:8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, [fn]drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. [/b]
Mat 10:9 Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts;
Mat 10:10 take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.
Mat 10:11 "Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave.
Mat 10:12 As you enter the home, give it your greeting.
Mat 10:13 If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you.
Mat 10:14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.
Mat 10:15 I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
Mat 10:16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
Mat 10:17 "Be on your guard against men; they will hand you over to the local councils and flog you in their synagogues.
Mat 10:18 On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles.
Mat 10:19 But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say,
Mat 10:20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.
Mat 10:21 "Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death.
Mat 10:22 All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.

Here is the whole passage in its full context, all you did was cherry pick what made sense to you to prove your point.

bindex, bindex, bindex , oooooooooo! reading one post, off I go, see you!!

Luke 2:25-32
25 And behold there was a man in Jerusalem named Simeon, and this man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel; and the Holy Ghost was in him.

26 And he had received an answer from the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Christ of the Lord. 27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple. And when his parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him according to the custom of the law, 28 He also took him into his arms, and blessed God, and said: 29 Now thou dost dismiss thy servant, O Lord, according to thy word in peace; 30 Because my eyes have seen thy salvation,

31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples: 32 A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel this was an Israelite, a rabbi in the temple speaking about Jesus, so the Jews knew exactly what the messiah was to do. He was not just to be a messiah to the Israelites but to the world. The problem with them is that they still maintained that the gentiles were to become Jews, subject to the law of Moses. They killed Jesus because he seemed to be challenging Moses, even though he was not.

The Jews knew what that the messiah was not meant to be a messiah to the Israelities but to the whole world according to your Christain bible or theirs(Hebrew bible)? By the way no where is the story of Jesus'death ever reported as it was reported in the bible, there are no records to show that the Jews or Romans killed Jesus as it was reported in the bible but that is a different argument entirely.

Acts of the apostles 1: 8 But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth[/b]this is Jesus speaking right before he was taken up to heaven. The apostles were to preach to the ends of the earth. This is before Paul

If you read my post from the begging I said that the writers of the Gospels and the book of Acts did not bother to read and compare there works. Here is the verse you quoted from in full context.

Act 1:5 For John baptized with [fn] water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
Act 1:6 So when they met together, [b]they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"
Act 1:7 He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.
Act 1:8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."
Act 1:9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

They will be his witness in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth that he died and rose up. This part is ambiguous and could be taken to mean a lot of things, He only said that they will be his witness, he didn't say that they should go and preach to the entire world about him according to the passage but when Jesus was telling his disciples to preach about the kingdom of heaven that was at hand he said it in unambiguous terms that they should not go into the cities of the gentiles. He also said that he was sent only to the lost tribe of Israel. He did not want to heal the child of the gentile woman because he believes that it was wrong for the gentiles to enjoy what was meant for the children of Israel alone.

Stephen the martyr was killed because the Jews accused him of changing the laws of Moses, this was before Paul. The same message that Paul preached was already being preached. Infact Paul killed him because he was preaching that same message.

Acts 8:5 And Philip going down to the city of Samaria, preached Christ unto them.
remember Christ had already told them not to go to the city of samaria to preach, if we go by your interpretation of that verse, then Philip was already not listening to Christ. This was before Paul.

Of course he was not listening to Christ? Why did Jesus say that he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel? Why did he refer to the gentiles are "dogs" for wanting to partake in the Food(Miracles and healing) of the people of Israel? Why did he never say that he was going to Judge the Jews and Gentiles in any of the Gospels? Why did he say that he was going to Judge only the 12 tribes of Israel?

Ok. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him. 18 He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment: because the light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil. 20 For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved

This are not the words of Jesus but the words of the(unknown) writer of John.

Matthew 28: 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

Nations here mean the 12 Nations of Israel. The word "nations" in greek(Which the original new testament was translated from) is the word ethnos, which also translates as ONE Race / ONE Ethniciy, or ONE Tribe, or ONE People. The word "nations" is the Greek word Ethnos, which occurs 164 times in the New Testament. Throughout the entire text of scripture this word refers to the people / ethnos of the covenant seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jaccob. Notice the bible speaks specifically that the literal flesh of Abraham is called the (NATIONS) "ethnos" or "goyim" in Hebrew. (Gen. 12:2; Gen. 17:4-6; Gen 17:16; Gen 18:18; Gen 22:18; Gen 25:23; Gen 35:11; Gen 48:19; Jer. 31:36). keep in mind the other commandments, and that Jesus Christ would not contradict his other commands. In Matt 10:5-6 He commanded the disciples to not enter cities that weren't of the lost sheep of the house of Israel. In Mat 15:24 He answered, "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel."

The commandment to teach ALL 12 nations / tribes of Israel was given to the disciples to move beyond the house of Judah to the other 12 tribes of Israel. All the nations were to be ministered to and not only the pureblooded house of Judah.

@Bindex
Firstly,you're speaking with people,not just me who have seen God in their lives and circumstances and have experienced the power of the word of God,and who even if you brought up a million so called "mistakes" in the Bible will never doubt God.You don't know God,so stop all your 'gra gra' and listen if you want to learn. You need to be open.You are not. You're more interested in copying and pasting and looking at area that you think you can counter while rejecting or overlooking areas you cannot counter.Imagine basing your arguments on the books that you please and insisting that trhe others are unknown and false.First it was gospel Mark because you think it doesn't contain ressurection account.Now its Matthew,because you believe it helps you.Quit this delusion please.You either believe the Bible or you don't.Stop picking and choosing.

@Bindex
To help your understanding,you've been told before I'm sure.the gospels were written in different perspectives to reveal Christ Jesus,the good news to the recipients.Let me use a scenario that might aid you.Picture this.Its like you taking/snapping a picture of someone directly facing you to describe him to another person.Of course,you'll not see the back of the person.Its not a deliberate attempt to hide the back neither is it a proof that the back does not exist.It's just the perspective being described. Another person could snap from the side view and reveal some other details about the person that were not present/visible in your picture. It's not about who is a better writer or more correct writer.Its the perspective.The Gospel (good news) and how it is shared to who it is shared. You're writing to the Jews and telling them what Christ (the good news) has got to offer them.Of course,it may reveal something more,but the thrust of the writing is Christ Jesus to the Jews as thier king.Matthew1verse 1 introduces Him ass the Son of David and Abraham.That says it all to the Jews.That is the theme. Another person is writing to the gentiles or both Jews and gentiles and telling them what Christ Jesus has got to offer them,simple. At the end,it all boils down to fact that all Scripture is profitable for us all.It is inspired,useful for all the earth.It would be ignorant to say,this part is not for me,it is for so and so.It is that ignorance that majorly divides Christianity today and that is the path you're treading.
What though would you say say about Matthew 5:13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savor, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.
Mat 5:14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid. where Christ taught His disciples that they are light and salt(influence) to the whole earth,the world not just Israel.
Matthew 8:5 And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him,
Mat 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. where Christ was speaking on the centurion(a non Jew)'s faith. Even a casual open reader of the Bible knows right from Old Testament that the Jews have priority.They are number one in God's eyes,others follow.They are the naturals,we gentiles are just graffed in.So for you to build your misconsturueing on one or so verse(s) and jettison other verses and books is at best dumb.Get a life and get open.
Matthew 26:13 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her. also talks of the gospel preached in the whole world.

Nations here mean the 12 Nations of Israel. The word "nations" in greek(Which the original new testament was translated from) is the word ethnos, which also translates as ONE Race / ONE Ethniciy, or ONE Tribe, or ONE People. The word "nations" is the Greek word Ethnos, which occurs 164 times in the New Testament. Throughout the entire text of scripture this word refers to the people / ethnos of the covenant seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jaccob. Notice the bible speaks specifically that the literal flesh of Abraham is called the (NATIONS) "ethnos" or "goyim" in Hebrew. (Gen. 12:2; Gen. 17:4-6; Gen 17:16; Gen 18:18; Gen 22:18; Gen 25:23; Gen 35:11; Gen 48:19; Jer. 31:36). keep in mind the other commandments, and that Jesus Christ would not contradict his other commands. In Matt 10:5-6 He commanded the disciples to not enter cities that weren't of the lost sheep of the house of Israel. In Mat 15:24 He answered, "I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel."

The commandment to teach ALL 12 nations / tribes of Israel was given to the disciples to move beyond the house of Judah to the other 12 tribes of Israel. All the nations were to be ministered to and not only the pureblooded house of Judah.

Where did you get this? Are you a kid?
Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and[b] teach all nations[/b], baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

These passages above are just from Matthew.the whole Bible tells us more on these things but those that are blind will not see except they become sincere.You need your eyes opened and freed from your prejudice.
And before I post, to be fair on the Bible,the historical reliability of the Bible should be put to the same test that all other historical documents are tested with.The number of new testament manuscripts available is far much more than the number of manuscripts of ANY book of antiquity.It means then that if the New testament books are not reliable or spoof,then no other ancient literature is reliable.
The gap between the date of the original manuscript and the earliest extant copies found today is so small compared to tother books.The gap/span is about 25-50 years.Check out the gap between plato's original work and the copy available now,about 1200years.Aristotle,about 1300 years,Homer 'illiad' about 500 years,Caesar,about 1000years. You couldn't reasonably doubt the historical reliability of the Bible then. There's incomparable validity for Matthew,Mark,Luke John to Revelation.If you doubt these writings/writers,you could as well doubt EVERY other thing that was written ages ago and claim forgery.

[size=14pt]@ Bindex ( New Deedat)

I am stating that there is a possibility that Paul was a Roman agent and possibly remained one. That his conversion may have never taken place.

You are stating abi? Bros your statement are just too empty for me to reply you. Why wasting your energy posting and writing empty and biased statements? Bros l respect your opinion because its not easy to think like you. [/size]

Israel is now the church? the extent to which you guys will go to rationalize you delusion is really funny. What does the Church mean according to the bible?I thought it meant the Body of Christ, If the Church which is Israel is now the body of Christ as you have said then what now happens to your argument in favor of the gentiles? What has Jesus talking to one woman from samaria got to do with him warning his disciples not to go to the cities of the gentiles? He told them categorically that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel(Israel here is not the Church as you will want us to believe). If Samaria is considered among the lost sheep of Israel why did Jesus not say so? He told his disciples no to go into the lands of the gentiles and samaritans but to the lost sheep of Israel. Show me a passage in the bible where Jesus went to the land of the canaanites and offered a single person salvation.(without them coming to him). Remeber he was reluctant and did not want to heal the child of the canaanite woman because he said that it was not right to take what belongs to the children(Israel) and give it to their dogs(Gentiles).

Yes Israel is now the Church, there are twelve tribes of Israel, all of which after centuries were diminished. Jesus chose 12 disciples to parallel the 12 tribes of Israel. This wasn't a coincidence.
Jacob is the Patriarch of Israel, he actually is Israel of the Old Testament, his name was changed to Israel and he had 12 sons, hence the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus is the Patriarch of Israel, he actually is the Israel of the New Testament, he had 12 disciples, the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus the New Israel, Body of Christ the Church, The Church Israel.

If Jesus was trying to rebuke the canaanite woman he wouldn't have healed her daughter. Also take note of the words used by Jesus, when Jesus was speaking of dogs, back then they had house dogs, and they were fed after the children were fed, what the children refused to eat went to the dogs. Remember above when I said, Jesus sent his disciples to the Jews first and then to the gentiles, when the Jews rejected his message he sent his message to the gentiles.

If he was trying to include the gentiles why did he tell his disciples to stay away from the gentiles when preaching that the kingdom of heaven is near? why did he say that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel? Why did he say that he was going to judge only the twelve tribes of Israel?

What is your definition of gentile? Because you have shifted it twice. Remember you gave the passage that has Jesus saying that his disciples shouldn't go to the gentiles and in that he included the samaritans, and then when I showed you that he went to the samaritan woman, you included the samaritans as the lost sheep of Israel. You're going to have to choose one definition of gentiles and stick to it.

The twelve tribes of Israel is the Church now.
Remember the 12 apostles. He chose 12 for a reason.

What does this passage tell you? All you did was just copy a part of it that agrees with your thoughts and present it as Jesus telling his disciples to preach unto the gentiles but you have it all wrong. Here is Jesus in his own words from the beggining when he was sending his disciples out to preach about the kingdom of heaven that was at hand

No what I was doing is showing you that you don't just pick one verse of the Bible and run with it, you look at it collectively, what does it tell you about the gentiles. You can't have one verse that says don't go to the gentiles and another that says you will be a light to the gentiles, the only conclusion that can be gotten is that at the beginning when he said he was to the house of Israel he meant to them first and then when they rejected him his message will go to the gentiles, and even at that, it still stands that the Church is the New Israel.

Here is the whole passage in its full context, all you did was cherry pick what made sense to you to prove your point.

And the whole passage in full proves my point and not yours. In the same instance he tells them not to go to the gentiles he also tells them they will be witness to the gentiles. What does that tell you?

The Jews knew what that the messiah was not meant to be a messiah to the Israelities but to the whole world according to your Christain bible or theirs(Hebrew bible)? By the way no where is the story of Jesus'death ever reported as it was reported in the bible, there are no records to show that the Jews or Romans killed Jesus as it was reported in the bible but that is a different argument entirely

According to them and us, they do not believe Jesus to be the messiah, for two reasons, they expected Mary to be of the house of Judah, David, Joseph was of the house of David and so is Mary and Jesus by marriage and adoption. People considered Jesus a son of David, they didn't know he was of a virgin birth. Mary and Joseph were married when Jesus was born. SO he's of the house of David. Also because they think the messiah will be on earth physically for forever.
But everything else still stands. Ask the Jews for Jesus and they'll tell you.

There are also non-christian sources that show that Jesus was killed. We've provided it to the muslims too many times, they turn a blind eye to it, hopefully you won't do the same. Here are the sources:

Tacitus:
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired

It is really hard to find their writings online, but another one is seutonius, and verellius (think that's how it's spelt), but will research more for their books outside of the internet and get the info to you. The Jewish Talmud is also a good source. Why do I choose these sources? Because they speak negatively about Christians and boast about killing the man the christians called God.

They will be his witness in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth that he died and rose up. This part is ambiguous and could be taken to mean a lot of things, He only said that they will be his witness, he didn't say that they should go and preach to the entire world about him according to the passage but when Jesus was telling his disciples to preach about the kingdom of heaven that was at hand he said it in unambiguous terms that they should not go into the cities of the gentiles. He also said that he was sent only to the lost tribe of Israel. He did not want to heal the child of the gentile woman because he believes that it was wrong for the gentiles to enjoy what was meant for the children of Israel alone.

um that is what witnessing to Christ is, going and preaching about him, duh. If they are not witnesses to him, they wouldn't talk about him, but if they are as he told them to be, they would talk about him, and that is preaching.

Of course he was not listening to Christ? Why did Jesus say that he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel? Why did he refer to the gentiles are "dogs" for wanting to partake in the Food(Miracles and healing) of the people of Israel? Why did he never say that he was going to Judge the Jews and Gentiles in any of the Gospels? Why did he say that he was going to Judge only the 12 tribes of Israel?

Because the 12 tribes of Israel is now the Church. Are you even listening or do you just want to argue of arguments sake? Because I will leave this topic, if that's the case. You've proven time and time again that you don't want to learn, so why should anyone even bother with you?

This are not the words of Jesus but the words of the(unknown) writer of John.

Those are the words of Jesus, let me give you the full passage.

John 3

1 And there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews.
2 This man came to Jesus by night, and said to him: Rabbi, we know that thou art come a teacher from God; for no man can do these signs which thou dost, unless God be with him.
3 Jesus answered, and said to him: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith to him: How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born again?
5 Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit.
7 Wonder not, that I said to thee, you must be born again.
8 The Spirit breatheth where he will; and thou hearest his voice, but thou knowest not whence he cometh, and whither he goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9 Nicodemus answered, and said to him: How can these things be done?
10 Jesus answered, and said to him: Art thou a master in Israel, and knowest not these things?
11 Amen, amen I say to thee, that we speak what we know, and we testify what we have seen, and you receive not our testimony.
12 If I have spoken to you earthly things, and you believe not; how will you believe, if I shall speak to you heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him, may not perish; but may have life everlasting.
16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him.
18 He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the judgment: because the light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil.
20 For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved.

So you see that is Jesus speaking, John isn't an unknown writer, he identifies himself clearly at the end.

georgecso:

[size=14pt]@ Bindex ( New Deedat)

You are stating abi? Bros your statement are just too empty for me to reply you. Why wasting your energy posting and writing empty and biased statements? Bros l respect your opinion because its not easy to think like you. [/size]

I am no Deedat (to hell with that Islamofascist who believes that all Christains need to be killed).

~Lady~:

[b]Yes Israel is now the Church, there are twelve tribes of Israel, all of which after centuries were diminished. Jesus chose 12 disciples to parallel the 12 tribes of Israel. This wasn't a coincidence.[/b]Jacob is the Patriarch of Israel, he actually is Israel of the Old Testament, his name was changed to Israel and he had 12 sons, hence the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus is the Patriarch of Israel, he actually is the Israel of the New Testament, he had 12 disciples, the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus the New Israel, Body of Christ the Church, The Church Israel.

If Jesus was trying to rebuke the canaanite woman he wouldn't have healed her daughter. Also take note of the words used by Jesus, when Jesus was speaking of dogs, back then they had house dogs, and they were fed after the children were fed, what the children refused to eat went to the dogs. Remember above when I said, Jesus sent his disciples to the Jews first and then to the gentiles, when the Jews rejected his message he sent his message to the gentiles.

Haba ahhh ,OK I hear you, I am now a Christian. Praise the Lord somebody. Lady keep it up.

No what I was doing is showing you that you don't just pick one verse of the Bible and run with it, you look at it collectively, what does it tell you about the gentiles. You can't have one verse that says don't go to the gentiles and another that says you will be a light to the gentiles, the only conclusion that can be gotten is that at the beginning when he said he was to the house of Israel he meant to them first and then when they rejected him his message will go to the gentiles, and even at that, it still stands that the Church is the New Israel.
 

OK I agree. The Church is the New Isreal? Which of the Church(bodies of Christ as you guys love to put it)? The over 30,000 sects or bodies? Nice try.

According to them and us, they do not believe Jesus to be the messiah, for two reasons, they expected Mary to be of the house of Judah, David, Joseph was of the house of David and so is Mary and Jesus by marriage and adoption. People considered Jesus a son of David, they didn't know he was of a virgin birth. Mary and Joseph were married when Jesus was born. SO he's of the house of David. Also because they think the messiah will be on earth physically for forever.
But everything else still stands. Ask the Jews for Jesus and they'll tell you.

Are you the one to tell the Jew what is inside their Bible(Tanakh)? They have their Original hebrew bible to show. What do you have? The Septuagint that is riddled with mistranslation and delibrate mischaracterization of some passages?

There are also non-christian sources that show that Jesus was killed. We've provided it to the muslims too many times, they turn a blind eye to it, hopefully you won't do the same. Here are the sources:

Tacitus:
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired

It is really hard to find their writings online, but another one is seutonius, and verellius (think that's how it's spelt), but will research more for their books outside of the internet and get the information to you. The Jewish Talmud is also a good source. Why do I choose these sources? Because they speak negatively about Christians and boast about killing the man the christians called God.

If you notice Tacitus refers to it as a "most mischievous superstition," not really suggesting that he is stating something he considers fact here. I said there is no where in history where Jesus narrative was reported as it is in the bible(or other books that were banned from the bible). Tacitus did not report that Jesus was killed according to how it was written in the bible did he? Tacitus offers no source to corrobaorate any of the things written about Jesus in the bible, other than Christian troublemakers. He's like one of the atheist members of this board making a comment about Jesus being a hippy and an insurgent. Quoting him in favour of proving the events of the bible  is like you quoting one of us because we mentioned what Christians believe in.So all this passage offers us is a statement about Christianity by somoene who believes its false and lived long after the supposed time of Jesus. ie. it proves nothing beyond the fact that Romans didn't like Christians.

As for the Talmud we have a passage in the Talmud that says a man named Yeshua was hanged for sorcery. It's not Jesus of the Bible, then, is it? Let's be honest here. Yeshua was a VERY common name in Judea. This is like saying there was a man named John, who lived in England and was hanged for sorcery, sometime in the middle ages. Chances are, it was probably true, simply based on the name being so blinking common!. Talmud doesn't say anything about this man claiming to be the son of God or rising from the dead, either. He was hanged and went bye-bye.All the other sources like Josephus,  Pliny the Younger etc never made mention of any of the stories of the bible, they only talked about Christains as followers of a man called Jesus. By the way most of their accounts were written about 100-200 years after the alleged death of Jesus.

There are extra ordinary things said about Jesus in the bible. Feeding 5 thousand people with 2 fish and 5 bread, raising the dead, walking on water, turning water into wine, killing of babies when he was born by king Herod, healing of the sick, the veil of the temple was torn in two accompanied by an earthquake when he was crucified, There was darkness in the whole of the land for 3 hours (Mid day darkness) when Jesus was crucified, many dead bodies of Jewish saints in Jerusalem were also resurrected and walked around the city for people to see when Jesus ressurected. Yet there is NO account of this ANYWHERE in the world(even though the people were known for keeping record of events) except in the bible. Doesn't this strike you as odd? Nobody except the writers of the gospel bothered to write about any of this extra ordinary events? Even the gospels were written 40-100 years after all the alleged events took place.

Because the 12 tribes of Israel is now the Church. Are you even listening or do you just want to argue of arguments sake? Because I will leave this topic, if that's the case. You've proven time and time again that you don't want to learn, so why should anyone even bother with you?

OK  so the church is now the 12 tribes of Israel eh? The question now is which of the Church? But then again I won't be here to reply to your post. This is going to be my last post on the NL religion section, I will be going back to Sweden on Sunday to be with my atheist friends. So now I will leave you guys to keep debating the basic principles of Christainity and Islam. Piss on Allah, Mohammed his messenger, Jesus, Jehovah and all the other Gods of Men out there.

bindex:


There are extra ordinary things said about Jesus in the bible. Feeding 5 thousand people with 2 fish and 5 bread, raising the dead, walking on water, turning water into wine, killing of babies when he was born by king Herod, healing of the sick, the veil of the temple was torn in two accompanied by an earthquake when he was crucified, There was darkness in the whole of the land for 3 hours (Mid day darkness) when Jesus was crucified, many dead bodies of Jewish saints in Jerusalem were also resurrected and walked around the city for people to see when Jesus ressurected. Yet there is NO account of this ANYWHERE in the world(even though the people were known for keeping record of events) except in the bible. Doesn't this strike you as odd? Nobody except the writers of the gospel bothered to write about any of this extra ordinary events? Even the gospels were written 40-100 years after all the alleged events took place.

I believe that there might have been accounts of this in other places but they might have been missing or destroyed.

Image123:

Even a casual open reader of the Bible knows right from Old Testament that the Jews have priority.They are number one in God's eyes,others follow.They are the naturals,we gentiles are just graffed in.

Comments like these i believe accounts for the reason atheist will continue to laugh at us forever.

@dalaman
Romans 11:2a God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew
Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
You could read the whole chapter 'if you have time'.
N.B I'll be worried if they were not laughing at 'us' and mind you,its not going to be forever.Jesus is coming.Maranatha

bindex:
the alleged events took place.

OK  so the church is now the 12 tribes of Israel eh? The question now is which of the Church? But then again I won't be here to reply to your post. This is going to be my last post on the NL religion section, I will be going back to Sweden on Sunday to be with my atheist friends. So now I will leave you guys to keep debating the basic principles of Christainity and Islam. Piss on Allah, Mohammed his messenger, Jesus, Jehovah and all the other Gods of Men out there.

Bindex, i have really been enjoying your input on this board.  you really don't have to go . i will surely miss some of your post  ,    hope you change you mind and come back.

there is really no need arguing with people that  have only belief to support their assertions. excuses seem endless when it comes to faith and beliefs. As for me i only visit other atheist forums to get the views of other atheist and debate them than waste time debating with people that will forever be giving excuses for blatant untruths and contradictions that is the bible.

If you ask a Christian person about Jesus' divinity, you may find yourself in a conversation like this:

Tony: If Jesus is God, why didn't Jesus ever prove that he is God by leaving evidence to show that he onced lived with men as the bible says he did?
David: He did! He performed many miracles, and he was resurrected. That proves that he is God!

Tony: Why did he not prove that he is God in a way that is definitive and scientifically provable so that people will see and believe long after after his death because all of what was written about him as per his life, death and resurrection is only found in the bible and no where else -- for example he should have moved a mountain so that scientist will verify years later after his death that he truly lived and performed all the alleged miracles that were attributed to him in the bible?

David: He could not do that! That would take away man's free will to believe in him. People must come to God through faith.

Toney: Why, then, did Jesus perform the miracles described in the Gospels?

David: To prove that he is God. If he had not done the miracles, culminating in his final most miraculous resurrection, we would not know that he is God.

Tony: I thought that if Jesus performed miracles to prove that he was God, then it took away our free will.

David: No.

Tony: Isn't that what you just said?

David: No. What I just said is that Jesus' miracles prove that he was God.

Tony: So why didn't Jesus perform real, concrete miracles like moving a mountain?

David: Because that would take away our free will.

Try having this conversation yourself with a christian and you will find it to be a very odd discussion. The circular logic will make you dizzy:

[list]
[li] Jesus had to perform miracles to prove his divinity, and that doesn't take away free will  [/li]
[li]  But if Jesus performed miracles that we could see and scientifically verify, it would take away free will.    [/li]
[/list]
any normal person can see the reality. the reason why jesus did not perform concrete, verifiable miracles is because jesus was a man like any other(who some people later decided to turn into a god). the "miracles" discussed in the Bible did not take place because there are no outside records of them any where except in the bible  as you have rightly pointed out and all the accounts of events were written long after the alleged death and resurrection of jesus by unknown writers whose identity is still being debated. this is the same with the koran as you have always been pointing out, in the koran we have the prophet of islam performing miracles just like jesus but there are also no outside records of this anywhere except in the koran and the hadith(I hope i get the spelling right). its purely a web of lies and delusion.

christians the world over have stories to tell about the healing powers of their god, some still claim that god heals people and raises people from the dead in this day and age because the believe that their is nothing that their god can not do but when you ask them why is it that their god does not heal amputees and make their amputated limbs grow back to the way it was before it got amputeted as you have once pointed out in one of your post you here the same apologies lChristainsike this

David: Christians serve a living God

Toney:What makes you say so

David: Because he just healed my friend that was suffering for malaria

Toney: Are you sure?

David: Of course i am, there is nothing that the lord can not do, he raised the dead and healed the blind in the bible so there is nothing that he can not do.

Toney:OK why can't he heal amputees and make their limbs grow back? i have a friend who is an amputee so i will like for your god to heal him and make his limbs grow back.

David: No, if he does that he it will take away our free will. All those who must serve the lord must do so in faith.

Toney: But you just said that there is nothing that the lord can not do, you said that he raised the dead and healed the blind in the bible, you even said he healed your friend of malaria, if he can raised the dead and heal the blind why then cant he heal an amputee.

David: Yes he did heal my friend to show that he is lord and can do all things, he is still healing people right now as we speak including raising the dead.

Toney: Then why can't he heal my friend who is an amputee.

David: Because it will take away our free will.

dalaman:

I believe that there might have been accounts of this in other places but they might have been missing or destroyed.

Which other place if i may ask? Do you know that there is no record of Herod ordering the killing of babies any where else except in the bible?

bindex:


There are extra ordinary things said about Jesus in the bible. Feeding 5 thousand people with 2 fish and 5 bread, raising the dead, walking on water, turning water into wine, killing of babies when he was born by king Herod, healing of the sick, the veil of the temple was torn in two accompanied by an earthquake when he was crucified, There was darkness in the whole of the land for 3 hours (Mid day darkness) when Jesus was crucified, many dead bodies of Jewish saints in Jerusalem were also resurrected and walked around the city for people to see when Jesus ressurected. Yet there is NO account of this ANYWHERE in the world(even though the people were known for keeping record of events) except in the bible. Doesn't this strike you as odd? Nobody except the writers of the gospel bothered to write about any of this extra ordinary events? Even the gospels were written 40-100 years after all the alleged events took place.

the bible has already taken care of this, it says in one place  something in the line of blessed are those that believe without seeing or something similar to that, so that takes care of everything and give the christians every right to keep on wallowing in their web of delusion.

Image123:

@dalaman
Romans 11:2a God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew
Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
You could read the whole chapter 'if you have time'.
N.B I'll be worried if they were not laughing at 'us' and mind you,its not going to be forever.Jesus is coming.Maranatha

Here is what the bible says in Romans

Rom2:10 But there will be glory and honor and peace from God for all who do good--for the Jew first and also for the Gentile.

Rom 2:11 For God does not show favoritism.

Why where you saying that gentiles were just called to join in?

toneyb:

Which other place if i may ask? Do you know that there is no record of Herod ordering the killing of babies any where else except in the bible?

Josephus who was alive during the time of Jesus wrote about some of the things that he did in the bible.

Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
Rom 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life:
Rom 2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Rom 2:10 But glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to[b] the Jew first[/b], and also to the Gentile:
Rom 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

Its a context of judgement mr.Nobody can escape the judgement/punishment for sin.Only if you allow Jesus to replace you.

dalaman:

Josephus who was alive during the time of Jesus wrote about some of the things that he did in the bible.

Where did you get this big lie from?

Lets take a look at the "Testimonium Flavanium" in Antiquities of the Jews, it has long been known to be fraudulent. The text from the section 3, is as follows;

Antiquities of the Jews, Section 3 "The Testimonium Flavanium," Josephus Flavius

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day

The largest and most obvious problem with this lies in sections 2 and 4 (ie. the preceding and succeeding paragraphs) which read;

Antiquities of the Jews, Section 2," Josephus Flavius

So he bid the Jews himself go away; but they boldly casting reproaches upon him, he gave the soldiers that signal which had been beforehand agreed on; who laid upon them much greater blows than Pilate had commanded them, and equally punished those that were tumultuous, and those that were not; nor did they spare them in the least: and since the people were unarmed, and were caught by men prepared for what they were about, there were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded. And thus an end was put to this sedition

Antiquities of the Jews, Section 4," Josephus Flavius

About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder, and certain shameful practices happened about the temple of Isis that was at Rome.

See the problem? Section 3 has no relevance to the surrounding passages. It is TOTALLY out of place. Furthermore, sections 2 and 4 appear to flow together perfectly with the "testimonium" removed.

There are other issues. One is that the language used in section 3 differs heavily from Josephus' normal syle. Add to that, Josephus refers to to him as the Christ, a title, meaning "annointed one" and not a name. This didn't fit in with Josephus' own beliefs. He was not a Christian and other works of his state that he believed that Emperor Vespasian was the messiah. Josephus even spends more time in his work, discussing other "supposed" messiahs. Far more airtime than he gave to Jesus, who, if the testimonium is to be believed, he knew to be the true messiah.

But the biggest kicker is that "Antiquties. . " had been a major work since a century after the supposed time of Jesus. Yet not one Christian leader ever pointed to it as evidence for Jesus or all about any of the things the bible said he did. All these people who would have known the works of Josephus conveniently ignored it. It only came to light and was used as proof around 400 years later; the time of Constantine and after the adoption of Christianity by the Roman Empire and Bishop Eusebius, who has been well documented as saying it was a perfectly acceptable technique to convert people through LIES. Remember, the oldest extant manuscripts of Josephus are from the 9th century. We know Eusebius and the Roman Catholic Church had their hands in all of this forgery.The most damning evidence against the Testimonium is that no Christian apologist prior to Constantine’s “acquisition,” of Christianity makes even the slightest reference to Josephus making a mention of Jesus in any of his works. Now, admittedly, it could be argued that no Christian apologist at the time had read this particular works. However, this seems a stretch, as it would require them to have been unaware of one of Josephus' most famous works. He was, after all, one of the most famous and prolific Jewish historians of the period and anyone who could actually, honestly claim to make accurate statements about Judea in the first century would have known of him and read his works.

It is also conveniently sidestepped that no other work of Josephus makes mention of Jesus. "Jewish Wars," covers the same area and period, yet makes no mention. Josephus also provides long sections detailing the life of one "John the Baptist," yet again, Jesus and any of the things that the bible said he did gets no mention. Even more worrying, Josephus also meticulously documented the life of King Herod, unfortunatley stating the fact that Herod was long dead by the time the Romans decided to take a census, ruining any likelihood that Joseph and Mary would have been on their way to Bethlehem during Herod's reign. He also failed to mention any acts of infanticide commited on Herod's orders. Obviously, these don't directly contradict the Testimonium's validity, but they do contradict the validity of other stories surrounding the life of Jesus.

And as for the Tacitus the lady alluded to, the Tacitus passage is regarded as authentic. And if we take its authenticity on trust, then ALL that it shows is that there were people in Rome at that time who believed in the myth of Jesus, the same as Christians do today it was written about 100-200 years after the alleged death of Jesus.

That does not  make the myth that they believe in true.

Do you get that part? The Roman authorities also came down very hard on the cult of Bacchus, which they saw as a threat to social stability. Does that confirm the existence of the god Bacchus? Well?. . .does it?

As for the Talmud what we have has nothing to show that Jesus did any of the things the bible said he did.

From the Talmud

  "On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover." 

How does this come close to proving any of the things that were said about Jesus in the bible? we have a passage in the Talmud that says a man was hanged for sorcery. It's not the Jesus of the Bible, is it?

The bottom line is that there and no outside accounts of ANY of the things Jesus did anywhere in the world except in the bible. The gospels were written long after the said events(70-100years later according to some accounts) by writers whose identity remains UNKNOWN.

Image123:

Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
Rom 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life:
Rom 2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Rom 2:10 But glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to[b] the Jew first[/b], and also to the Gentile:
Rom 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

Its a context of judgement mr.Nobody can escape the judgement/punishment for sin.Only if you allow Jesus to replace you.

I believe that you have said it all.

To toney and bindex I don't have any other thing to tell you but all I know is that Jesus is real.

dalaman:


To toney and bindex I don't have any other thing to tell you but all I know is that Jesus is real.

Allah, Zeus,Xenu and Buddah are all real go and ask their followers and they will tell you that they are very real.If you read from my first post I already decleared that i personally do not like debating with theist because your circular logic makes me dizzy. Let me give you some examples.

1. ARGUMENT FROM UNINTELLIGENCE
    (1) Okay, I don’t pretend to be as intelligent as you guys — you’re obviously very well read.  But I read the Bible, and nothing you say can convince me that God does not exist.  I feel him in my heart, and you can feel him too, if you’ll just ask him into your life.  “For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son into the world, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish from the earth.” John 3:16.
    (2) Therefore, God exists

2. ARGUMENT FROM INTERNET AUTHORITY
    (1) There is a website that successfully argues for the existence of God.
    (2) Here is the URL.
    (3) Therefore, God exists.


3. ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPLETE DEVASTATION
    (1) A plane crashed killing 143 passengers and crew.
    (2) But one child survived with only third-degree burns.
    (3) Therefore, God exists.

4. ARGUMENT FROM SHEER WILL
    (1) I DO believe in God!  I DO believe in God!  I do I do I do I DO believe in God!
    (2) Therefore, God exists.

5.  ARGUMENT FROM NONBELIEF
    (1) The majority of the world’s population are nonbelievers in Christianity.
    (2) This is just what Satan intended.
    (3) Therefore, God exists.

6. ARGUMENT FROM INFINITE REGRESS, a.k.a. FIRST CAUSE ARGUMENT (II)
    (1) Ask Atheists what caused the Big Bang.
    (2) Regardless of their answer, ask how they know this.
    (3) Continue process until the Atheist admits he doesn’t know the answer to one of your questions.
    (4) You win!
    (5) Therefore, God exists

7. ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL SANITY
    (1) I’ve had religious experiences that can’t be explained unless I’m insane or God exists.
    (2) Therefore, God exists.

8. ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF DISPROOF
    (1) You can’t prove God doesn’t exist!
    (2) Therefore, God exists

9. ARGUMENT FROM PERSECUTION (II)
    (1) Jesus said that people would make fun of Christians.
    (2) I am an idiot.
    (3) People often point that out.
    (4) Therefore, God exists.

10. ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF EVIDENCE (I)
    (1) I believe that if God exists, there will be no evidence for his existence.
    (2) There is no evidence for the existence of God.

11. ARGUMENT FROM COOLNESS
    (1) That’s really cool.
    (2) God must have done that.
    (3) Therefore, God exists.
    (3) Therefore, God exists

The bible says that God came and lived with men, but the problems is that there are no accounts of this any where except in the bible. jesus was no ordinary man if we are to go by the biblical accounts of what he did and how he lived his life. he raised the dead. healed the sick, had a lot of followers, children were killed by king herod when he was born according to the bible, dead people rose and walked the streets when he resurrected thats beside the earth quake and mid day darkness that lasted for 3 days when he was killed, yet there is no record of this any where in the world even though the people living at that time are known very well for keeping records of events as bindex pointed out. there is no record of this any where except in the bible and the writes of the gospels wrote about the events in very contradictory fashion long after his alleged death and resurrection apart from the fact that their identity remains unkown till this day, he never left any writing of his own. Everything we know about him was written by people whose identity remains highly debatable even amongst christians.

Alexander, for example, left a wake of destroyed and created cities behind. We have buildings, libraries and cities, such as Alexandria, left in his name. We have treaties, and even a letter from Alexander to the people of Chios, engraved in stone, dated at 332 B.C.E. For Agustus Caesar, we have the Res gestae divi augusti, the emperor's own account of his works and deeds, a letter to his son (Epistula ad Gaium filium), Virgil's eyewitness accounts, and much more. Napoleon left behind artifacts, eyewitness accounts and letters. We can establish some historicity to these people because we have evidence that occurred during their life times. In comparison to Jesus, we have nothing.  We do not even have historical information on people that would have been involved with jesus to refer too. This is my last input here cos i hate dabating with theist. If you want to believe in something make sure that it makes sense at least.

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

--Matthew 19:28

I love reading these types of threads.

I saw this passage in different parts of the thread and had to ask something. It speaks of twelve thrones, but who exactly is the twelfth guy? Judas?

Some smart Alec is about to tell you the 12th guy is Paul dumbo

go and read your copy of the Bible and stop asking foolish questions,lazy boys

Image123:

go and read your copy of the Bible and stop asking foolish questions,lazy boys

What are the stupid questions if i may ask?

I saw this passage in different parts of the thread and had to ask something. It speaks of twelve thrones, but who exactly is the twelfth guy? Judas?

No, it is Matthias. The apostles held offices, offices can be replaced or transferred. If not then Matthias wouldn't have taken the place of Judas.

Some smart Alec is about to tell you the 12th guy is Paul dumbo

I really wish someone would so I'd laugh. But no it's not Paul either. Paul was never one of the 12.

OK I agree. The Church is the New Isreal? Which of the Church(bodies of Christ as you guys love to put it)? The over 30,000 sects or bodies? Nice try.

There is only one church, the Catholic Church, don't forget that I'm Catholic, I don't speak of the other churches when referring to Church.

Are you the one to tell the Jew what is inside their Bible(Tanakh)? They have their Original hebrew bible to show. What do you have? The Septuagint that is riddled with mistranslation and delibrate mischaracterization of some passages?

I have spoken to the Jews about it, and so I do know. The Jews used the septuagint until after the death of Jesus and the birth of the Church. Infact it was because of the Christians that they changed their Bible. So the septuagint is very credible.

If you notice Tacitus refers to it as a "most mischievous superstition," not really suggesting that he is stating something he considers fact here. I said there is no where in history where Jesus narrative was reported as it is in the bible(or other books that were banned from the bible). Tacitus did not report that Jesus was killed according to how it was written in the bible did he? Tacitus offers no source to corrobaorate any of the things written about Jesus in the bible, other than Christian troublemakers. He's like one of the atheist members of this board making a comment about Jesus being a hippy and an insurgent. Quoting him in favour of proving the events of the bible  is like you quoting one of us because we mentioned what Christians believe in.So all this passage offers us is a statement about Christianity by somoene who believes its false and lived long after the supposed time of Jesus. ie. it proves nothing beyond the fact that Romans didn't like Christians.

That is exactly why I chose to give you these sources, if I were to have given you Christian sources you would say it is biased, I gave harsh non-christian sources to show that what is in the Bible is historically true.
We see him as the messiah and as God, they see him as a man who was causing trouble, but all sources tell that he was crucified historically and that he did teach people and that he founded a new sect, called Christianity.

I wasn't trying to show that Jesus is God, I am trying to show that it is historically true that he did teach that he is God, and that he did die, and that he did live and walk this earth.

As for the Talmud we have a passage in the Talmud that says a man named Yeshua was hanged for sorcery. It's not Jesus of the Bible, then, is it? Let's be honest here. Yeshua was a VERY common name in Judea. This is like saying there was a man named John, who lived in England and was hanged for sorcery, sometime in the middle ages. Chances are, it was probably true, simply based on the name being so blinking common!. Talmud doesn't say anything about this man claiming to be the son of God or rising from the dead, either. He was hanged and went bye-bye.All the other sources like Josephus,  Pliny the Younger etc never made mention of any of the stories of the bible, they only talked about Christains as followers of a man called Jesus. By the way most of their accounts were written about 100-200 years after the alleged death of Jesus.

There's more than one Yeshua mentioned in the Talmud, so this is not the only Yeshua

Let me chime in here and respond to you post since bindex says he is not coming back to post here again.

~Lady~:

No, it is Matthias. The apostles held offices, offices can be replaced or transferred. If not then Matthias wouldn't have taken the place of Judas.

I really wish someone would so I'd laugh. But no it's not Paul either. Paul was never one of the 12.

There is only one church, the Catholic Church, don't forget that I'm Catholic, I don't speak of the other churches when referring to Church. 

   have spoken to the Jews about it, and so I do know. The Jews used the septuagint until after the death of Jesus and the birth of the Church. Infact it was because of the Christians that they changed their Bible. So the septuagint is very credible.

This is not true.

  It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into the Greek language, the lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean Basin from the time of Alexander the Great (356-323 BC). The word septuaginta[2] means "seventy" in Latin and derives from a tradition that seventy (or seventy-two) Jewish scholars translated the Pentateuch (Torah) from Hebrew into Greek for Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 285–246 BC.[3][4]

The Septuagint includes some books not found in the Hebrew Bible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint

Septuagint - What is It?
Septuagint (sometimes abbreviated LXX) is the name given to the Greek translation of the Jewish Scriptures. The Septuagint has its origin in Alexandria, Egypt and was translated between 300-200 BC. Widely used among Hellenistic Jews, this Greek translation was produced because many Jews spread throughout the empire were beginning to lose their Hebrew language.  The Septuagint was also a source of the Old Testament for early Christians during the first few centuries AD. Many early Christians spoke and read Greek, thus they relied on the Septuagint translation for most of their understanding of the Old Testament. The New Testament writers also relied heavily on the Septuagint, as a majority of Old Testament quotes cited in the New Testament are quoted directly from the Septuagint (others are quoted from the Hebrew texts). Greek church fathers are also known to have quoted from the Septuagint.

http://www.septuagint.net/

That is exactly why I chose to give you these sources, if I were to have given you Christian sources you would say it is biased, I gave harsh non-christian sources to show that what is in the Bible is historically true.
We see him as the messiah and as God, they see him as a man who was causing trouble, but all sources tell that he was crucified historically and that he did teach people and that he founded a new sect, called Christianity.

Most of the sources you provided only talked about christians not jesus, where are the all sources that tell he was crucified historically? please go ahead and name just one source outside the bible that says that jesus was crucified? all the sources say that there is a sect of people who worship a man name jesus no source says he was crucified or lived his life according to what the gospel said.

I wasn't trying to show that Jesus is God, I am trying to show that it is historically true that he did teach that he is God, and that he did die, and that he did live and walk this earth.

I personally believe that there was a man named jesus who lived in the 1st centuary palestine who was a radical reformer and was against the romans, his over zealous followers turn him into a god long after he died and the meme kept moving from one generation to another. The same thing happened to pythagoras after his death his followers turn him into a god and began to worship him when he was just an ordinary man.

There's more than one Yeshua mentioned in the Talmud, so this is not the only Yeshua

Which other yeshua' story comes close to the one mentioned in the bible apart fom the one that was a socerer and was hanged on the eve of the passover?the references from the talmud are from 3rd century or later(300 years after the supposed death of jesus), and seem to be (unfriendly) Jewish responses to Christian claims. the references are highly variant, have many cryptic names for Jesus, and very different to the Gospel stories (e.g. one story has "Jesus" born about 100BC). So,the Talmud contains NO evidence for Jesus or any of the things the bible said about him,the Talmud merely has much later Jewish responses to the Gospel stories

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

--Matthew 19:28

@~Lady~ Thanks for answering my question, I have some more though. In light of the response you gave, could you explain the earlier part of the verse. What do you think regeneration means? Does it refer to something he did while he was alive? Plus if it refers to offices, I would think they would be handed over once someone dies, just like Mathias took the place of Judas. So what happens when you have 3 office holders fighting for 1 throne. I am not trying to argue, I really just want to understand.

@toneyb
i said foolish questions.Questions like who was the twelfth guy?

@jdosss

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

It may help if you read it this way

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

@ Image123 Ah, the comma ,  It's funny how single minded people become when they are trying to prove a point. You are right, it does mean something different.
Thanks

You very welcome

dalaman:
@ poster

Are you stating that Paul's preaching is different from Jesus'? And not just style but substance?
Why is it then that Jesus Himself appears to Saul and chooses him to be a vessel to the gentiles? Acts 9:4-6, 11-12, 15?
This is confirmed later in Acts, 22:21.

I see you've been at this for a long while dalaman.

bindex:


You need to read paul's letters once again. Paul commissioned himself to use Jesus' messages and Ideas to make a name for himself.



Paul who was never with Jesus when he was alive according to the bible changed every thing Jesus said. Jesus warned his disciples never to preach to the gentiles but paul changed everything.

Matt 28:19-20 says otherwise. It says 'Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. 20. Teaching them to observe all thing whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.'
Same as Mark 16:15 which says ''And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.'' How about Luke 24:46 which says ''And said unto them, thus it written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47. And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem'.
Lastly, Acts 1:7-8 says ''And he said unto them....But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jeruralem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth".
Those parts I underlined tells you that salvation would only be made available to the Gentiles after Christ death and ressurrection.
Yeah, he came for the lost sheep of Israel but his death was for all nation for the remission of sin. This was even confirmed when the veil of the temple splitted into two as soon as Christ gave up the ghost on the cross, meaning, anyone of any race can have access to the holy of holies without condemnation.
In other words, salvation is for

ok