kjhova:


I think page one of this thread answers your 1st question.

I also think a casual reading of the Acts of the Apostles always leaves one wondering why the book isn't named Acts of Apostle Paul.

To answer your third question, I'd remind you of who the book of Acts was ascribed to...yes, Lucas, Sauli's protege. Sauli did defeat Cephas in the 1st major diet of the church after Jesus' death. The guys who dined with Jesus lost out to the guys who never met the teacher. Ultimately, it was Sauli's doctrine that spread to Rome and Asia Minor and not Jesus or Cephas' own.

I shall answer your 4th question later in a bit.

If the disciples of Jesus lost out to Paul...how come are their letters also included in the Bible?

And what's radically different between what Paul taught from Jesus and His disciples? Especially considering the customs and traditions and culture of the people they preached to?

If Paul's minor squabble with Peter be captured in the Bible, or his disagreement with Barnabas also be recorded, then why would a major fight with James be left out of the entire Bible?

OkaiCorne:


If the disciples of Jesus lost out to Paul...how come are their letters also included in the Bible?

And what's radically different between what Paul taught from Jesus and His disciples? Especially considering the customs and traditions and culture of the people they preached to?

If Paul's minor squabble with Peter be captured in the Bible, or his disagreement with Barnabas also be recorded, then why would a major fight with James be left out of the entire Bible?

I believe that we have overflogged this matter. However, I shall try to attend to your queries once more.

The doctrinal contentions of the 1st century was not a zero sum affair therefore Saul's rise to the top of Apostleship was not necessarily the death to the other guys'. BTW, it is not Saul or any of his followers who decided what books made the final bible list. No, it was the Roman government and the Roman church...the very church that was essentially an offspring of Saul's works from centuries back. Eventually, many epistles and books did not make the official New Testatment list while works ascribed to Paul were lumped en mass into the new canon by the church.

Paul's teachings had a few but remarkable differences from those of the original apostles. I will only highlight a few below:

1) Cephas & co. held Jesus as Messiah, reformer of the Jewish religion while Saul held that the law is dead and abolished by Jesus.
2) Cephas & co. concentrated on converting Jews while Saul insisted that Jesus' message was essentially to the "gentiles".
3) Cephas & co. see the Jews still as God's chosen people while Saul insisted that both Jews and gentiles are now equal under the cross.
4) Cephas & co. preached the coming of the Messianic millenium rule on Earth while Saul never mentioned any such.

There are a few more. The link below covers this matter fairly well.


https://forwhatsaiththescriptures.org/2014/10/13/compare-contrast-peter-paul/

kjhova:


I believe that we have overflogged this matter. However, I shall try to attend to your queries once more.

The doctrinal contentions of the 1st century was not a zero sum affair therefore Saul's rise to the top of Apostleship was not necessarily the death to the other guys'. BTW, it is not Saul or any of his followers who decided what books made the final bible list. No, it was the Roman government and the Roman church...the very church that was essentially an offspring of Saul's works from centuries back. Eventually, many epistles and books did not make the official New Testatment list while works ascribed to Paul were lumped en mass into the new canon by the church.

Paul's teachings had a few but remarkable differences from those of the original apostles. I will only highlight a few below:

1) Cephas & co. held Jesus as Messiah, reformer of the Jewish religion while Saul held that the law is dead and abolished by Jesus.
2) Cephas & co. concentrated on converting Jews while Saul insisted that Jesus' message was essentially to the "gentiles".
3) Cephas & co. see the Jews still as God's chosen people while Saul insisted that both Jews and gentiles are now equal under the cross.
4) Cephas & co. preached the coming of the Messianic millenium rule on Earth while Saul never mentioned any such.

There are a few more. The link below covers this matter fairly well.


https://forwhatsaiththescriptures.org/2014/10/13/compare-contrast-peter-paul/

I'll go through the link.

Let us be sure we are not focusing on minor issues at the expense of the major thing. I understand clearly the points you raised but in terms of doctrinal difference, did Paul preach anything different from what Jesus preached in terms of Unconditional Love?

Did Jesus preach to Jews alone OR were his followers both Jews and Gentiles?

Did Paul twist the message of Jesus in order to preach to the gentiles?

OkaiCorne:


I'll go through the link.

Let us be sure we are not focusing on minor issues at the expense of the major thing. I understand clearly the points you raised but in terms of doctrinal difference, did Paul preach anything different from what Jesus preached in terms of Unconditional Love?

Did Jesus preach to Jews alone OR were his followers both Jews and Gentiles?

Did Paul twist the message of Jesus in order to preach to the gentiles?

We don't know a word of what Jesus preached as he has no written record known to us. Almost all we know is from the gospels which were likely written between a few decades up to 150 years after the historical Jesus' exit.

What we have handed down from prosterity is a new testament canon which is heavily influenced by Paul. For a guy who most likely never met the historical Jesus, 13 of the new testament books are ascribed to him. Two other books; the very influential Acts of the Apostles and Gospel according to St. Luke were written by his accomplice. The book of Hebrews had once been ascribed to him also.

Inferring from the above, Saul's influence bears on about 59% of the New Testament. The Christianity of today is more Pauline than anything else.

kjhova:


We don't know a word of what Jesus preached as he has no written record known to us. Almost all we know is from the gospels which were likely written between a few decades up to 150 years after the historical Jesus' exit.

What we have handed down from prosterity is a new testament canon which is heavily influenced by Paul. For a guy who most likely never met the historical Jesus, 13 of the new testament books are ascribed to him. Two other books; the very influential Acts of the Apostles and Gospel according to St. Luke were written by his accomplice. The book of Hebrews had once been ascribed to him also.

Inferring from the above, Saul's influence bears on about 59% of the New Testament. The Christianity of today is more Pauline than anything else.

Per the bolded, I disagree.

There were writings on papyrus documents which circulated around the middle east and Egypt before 100 AD. Even now as we speak, there are surviving fragments of the Gospel of John accurately carbon dated to a date preceding 100 AD.

You should also consider the fact the TRUTH is always unwritten and exists in oral form or observable form before it is documented. Traditionally, the Jews have a very strong oral culture where it is reasonably difficult to twist what is eventually documented.

I am still struggling to decipher how Paul preached a different doctrine from the things Jesus lived and died for...

4kings:
The fact that you almost took them seriously.

hello ave been searching for your number every where to no avail ...
I have a job preposition please mail me or gimme ur no ASAP

wane01:

hello ave been searching for your number every where to no avail ...
I have a job preposition please mail me or gimme ur no ASAP

Hmmm. Sent you a pm.

Sarassin:


We have it on the authority of the Mishnah that collection of the half-shekel was certainly done, by a body of temple-treasurers (gebarim), the same who had the custody of the money owned by the national sanctuary or deposited there for safety and for the purposes of the sacrificial plate, vestments and of the supplies of corn, wine and oil, for ritual purposes. The treasurer was even mentioned by Josephus in Antiquities in conjunction with the high priest, who it seems was the head of these temple-financiers. After the destruction of the temple the Romans continued to levy the old Jewish tribute for the temple as a state-tax from every grown-up Jew for the benefit of the Capitoline Jupiter's treasury.

I don't still see the connection here.

Suetonius records that every Jew whether practising or not had to pay the tax, adult Jewish men who tried to avoid the tax by claiming they were not Jewish were compelled to pull down their pants or whatever in order that Roman soldiers could check whether they were circumcised or not. The tax was burdensome onerous and degrading.

Okay, this still doesn't buttress your point.

Early converts to Christianity were made to pay a "stater" out of the money collected in this manner one half was the "pence of Christ" from which the tax will be paid for the poor, who could not find the sum for themselves, the other half was the "pence of Peter" from which the unpaid clergy would pay their own tribute.

There's no relationship with your assertion of what that passage was talking about.

---

Anyways, you still haven't answered my question though.
What miracles were real or not and what are your reasons for believing Jesus existed.

OkaiCorne:


smh...

You still don't get it.
What was the basis of that research, on what was it done?
You're funny though.

OkaiCorne:


And what makes them ridiculous? Any sources or evidence for your position on this matter?

evidence that their beliefs were ridiculous?

4kings:

evidence that their beliefs were ridiculous?

Yes, what made you arrive at that conclusion?

4kings:

You still don't get it.
What was the basis of that research, on what was it done?
You're funny though.

Have you gone through the documentary on the DNA test part?

Forget about whether I'm funny or not so we don't digress from the core of our discussion.
I've not made any personal comments on your thought process, so let's leave it that way and focus on the topic

OkaiCorne:


Have you gone through the documentary on the DNA test part?

I asked you a simple question.
The first link i gave you debunked the documentary.

OkaiCorne:


Yes, what made you arrive at that conclusion?

Do you believe Edgar could communicate with gods and the supernatural for his powers?
Or that an angel appeared to him when he was young?

Or is he one of God sent to you christians ni?

4kings:

I asked you a simple question.
The first link i gave you debunked the documentary.

The link was on the shroud of Turin...and the documentary has nothing to do with the shroud of Turin... So what's your point again?

One thing I find funny is how an African man would conclude Jesus never existed whereas Jewish historians both past and present acknowledged the existence of Jesus on earth.

I wonder if a foreigner can know the history of the Jews better than the Jews themselves...

4kings:

Do you believe Edgar could communicate with gods and the supernatural for his powers?
Or that an angel appeared to him when he was young?

Or is he one of God sent to you christians ni?

Read up on Edgar Cayce...you'll know better...

Unless you want me to give you links that Google can equally give you...

OkaiCorne:


Read up on Edgar Cayce...you'll know better...

Unless you want me to give you links that Google can equally give you...

Mr. Man i've read on a lot of historical figures including Cayce.
What's the striking thing you wanna add, are you Jehovah's witness?

OkaiCorne:


The link was on the shroud of Turin...and the documentary has nothing to do with the shroud of Turin... So what's your point again?

What was the basis of the DNA research?

4kings:

Mr. Man i've read on a lot of historical figures including Cayce.
What's the striking thing you wanna add, are you Jehovah's witness?


What was the basis of the DNA research?

For your info...I ain't Jehovah witness...since you can't focus on the topic and talk about me instead.

How many basis are there for DNA test? Please enlighten me.

The Jews that knows their history better than anyone else knew Jesus once lived on earth... but a more informed African man concludes that Jesus is a gnostic concept invented...

Cool

OkaiCorne:
The Jews that knows their history better than anyone else knew Jesus once lived on earth... but a more informed African man concludes that Jesus is a gnostic concept invented...

Cool

I believe Jesus existed.
I cannot believe that such a figure was totally made up.
It is possible however that there were embellishments to the story of his life.

OkaiCorne:






Slowly read Sarassin's comments again...he believes Jesus once lived on earth...but please let us know where you stand.

Did Jesus live on earth? Yes or No

No he didn't, the gospel stories comes from ancient tales about marduk..the son of Enki..

Thank you.

sonmvayina:


No he didn't, the gospel stories comes from ancient tales about marduk..the son of Enki..

Thank you.

So you and Sarassin knows better than the Jews who knew that Jesus existed..

You know Jewish history better than the Jews... quite interesting

TomHagen:
I believe Jesus existed.
I cannot believe that such a figure was totally made up.
It is possible however that there were embellishments to the story of his life.

Please do well to point out these embellishments for clarity sake....

OkaiCorne:


Please do well to point out these embellishments for clarity sake....

Let's start with the virgin birth.

TomHagen:
Let's start with the virgin birth.

Alright then. Ride on, I'm listening

hopefulLandlord:
The gospels, our only accounts of a historical Jesus, contradict each other

other.If you think you know the Jesus story pretty well, I suggest that you pause at this point to test yourself with the 20 question quiz at

http://exchristian.net/3/test_quiz.php


The gospel of Mark is thought to be the earliest existing “life of Jesus,” and linguistic analysis suggests that Luke and Matthew both simply reworked Mark and added their own corrections and new material. But they contradict each other and, to an even greater degree contradict the much later gospel of John, because they were written with different objectives for different audiences. The incompatible Easter stories offer one example of how much the stories disagree.

If you still think they don't disagree on easter

Kindly answer these quiz

1. Who first came to the tomb on Sunday morning?
a. one woman (John 20:1)
b. two women (Matt. 28:1)
c. three women (Mark 16:1)
d. more than three women (Luke 23:55-56; 24:1,10)

2. She (they) came
a. while it was still dark (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1)
b. after the sun had risen (Mark 16:2)

3. The woman (women) came to the tomb
a. to anoint the body of Jesus with spices (Mark 16:1-2; Luke 24:1)
b. just to look at it (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1)

4. The women had obtained the spices
a. on Friday before sunset (Luke 23:54-56; 24:1)
a. after sunset on Saturday (Mark 16:1)

5. The first visitor(s) was/were greeted by
a. an angel (Matt. 28:2-5)
b. a young man (Mark 16:5)
c. two men (Luke 24:4)
d. no one (John 20:1-2)

6. The greeter(s)
a. was sitting on the stone outside the tomb (Matt 28:2)
b. was sitting inside the tomb (Mark 16:5)
c. were standing inside the tomb (Luke 24:3-4)

7. After finding the tomb empty, the woman/women
a. ran to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:7-8; Mark 16:10; Luke 24:9; John 20:2)
b. ran away and said nothing to anyone (Mark 16:

8. The risen Jesus first appeared to
a. Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:14; Mark 16:9)
b. Cleopas and another disciple (Luke 24:13,15,18)
c. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1,9)
d. Cephas (Peter) alone (1 Cor. 15:4-5; Luke 24:34)

9. Jesus first appeared
a. somewhere between the tomb and Jerusalem (Matt. 28:8-9)
b. Just outside the tomb (John 20:11-14)
c. in Galilee - some 80 miles (130 Km) north of Jerusalem (Mark 16:6-7)
d. on the road to Emmaus - Miles (11 Km) west of Jerusalem (Luke 24:13-15)
e. we are not told where (Mark 16:9; 1 Cor. 15:4-5)

10. The disciples were to see Jesus first
a. in Galilee (Mark 16:7; Matt. 28:7,10,16)
b. in Jerusalem (Mark 16:14; Luke 24:33,36; John 20:19; Acts 1:4)

11. the disciples were told that they would meet the risen Jesus in Galilee
a. by the women, who had been told by an angel of the Lord, then by Jesus himself after the resurrection (Matt. 28:7-10; Mark 16:7)
b. by Jesus himself, before the crucifiction (Mark 26:32)

12. The risen Jesus
a. wanted to be touched (John 20:27)
b. did not want to be touched (John 20:17)
c. did not mind being touched (Matt. 28:9-10)

13. Jesus ascended to Heaven
a. the same day that he was resurrected (Mark 16:9,19; Luke 24:13,28-36,50-51)
b. forty days after the resurrection (Acts 1:3,9)
c. we are not told that he ascended to Heaven at all (Matt. 28:10, 16-20; John 21:25; the original Gospel of Mark ends at 16:

14. The disciples received the Holy Spirit
a. 50 days after the resurrection (Acts 1:3,9)
b. in the evening of the same day as the resurrection (John 20:19-22)

15. The risen Jesus
a. was recognized by those who saw him (Matt. 28:9; Mark 16:9-10)
b. was not always recognizable (Mark 16:12; Luke 24:15-16,31,36-37; John 20:14-15)

16. The risen Jesus
a. was physical (Matt. 28:9; Luke 24:41-43; John 20:27)
b. was not physical (Mark 16:9,12,14; Luke 24:15-16,31,36-37; John 20:19,26; 1 Cor. 15:5-

17. The risen Jesus was seen by the disciples
a. presumably only once (Matt. 28:16-17)
b. first by two of them, later by all eleven (Mark 16:12-14; Luke 24:13-15,33,36-51)
c. three times (John 20:19,26; 21:1,14)
d. many times (Acts 1:3)

18. When Jesus appeared to the disciples
a. there were eleven of them (Matt. 28:16-17; Luke 24:33,36)
b. twelve of them (1 Cor. 15:5)


Hey, when has religion ever let facts or figures get in the way of a good quote. If this quiz has in any way shaken your faith, simply open the Bible and pull out sentences at random that make you feel good or (completely out of context) reaffirm any belief you want to hold.

This is nonsense. Go and look up the meaning of the word synoptic and why it is used to describe the gospels. Also read the opening part of Acts and see the rationale behind it's existence.
Most of your 'arguments' are irrelevant quibles.

OkaiCorne:


For your info...I ain't Jehovah witness...since you can't focus on the topic and talk about me instead.

How many basis are there for DNA test? Please enlighten me.

What sort of ret*rded question is that?
Little understanding of decay would save us stress.
Besides the assertion of no father's dna was not well explained at all. Nonsense talk.

I just logged on to NL after a busy week and i don't think i'm ready to deal with this now.

OkaiCorne:


So you and Sarassin knows better than the Jews who knew that Jesus existed..

You know Jewish history better than the Jews... quite interesting

I don't see the relationship between what the jews believe as contained in their Tanakh, and jesus....

The jews where waiting for a king, who will deliver them from the oppression of their more powerful neighbour, build their temple and usher in an era of peace..did Jesus fulfil any of that..NO

Messiah is not coming to die or change the laws that God has instituted since the beginning of time...he is coming to rule..

I know Jesus is a Roman invention to make mockery of the most high, as prophesied by Daniel in Daniel7:25..

Study Daniel 7.
Educate yourself..pls

OkaiCorne:


So you and Sarassin knows better than the Jews who knew that Jesus existed..

You know Jewish history better than the Jews... quite interesting

The gospels where not written by jews, they where forged by the Romans and Greeks, possible Eusebius...

The jews know too well that God is not a man or human being..Num23:19..and God 2nd commandment warned against making and worshipping images of anything in heaven, on earth or under the waters bellow the earth. So worshipping a man which is something found on earth, is IDOLATRY..

God is just the universal consciousness....
Also, to the jews, God was responsible for both good and evil, when they obey his commandments he blesses and prospers them, when they disobey he punishes them..

So why would God send Jesus to save them from himself?
The jews never viewed the devil as been a dual opposite of God, but a spirit under the control of God..

You just don't want to believe you are wasting your life worshipping an idol..

sonmvayina:


I don't see the relationship between what the jews believe as contained in their Tanakh, and jesus....

The jews where waiting for a king, who will deliver them from the oppression of their more powerful neighbour, build their temple and usher in an era of peace..did Jesus fulfil any of that..NO

Messiah is not coming to die or change the laws that God has instituted since the beginning of time...he is coming to rule..

I know Jesus is a Roman invention to make mockery of the most high, as prophesied by Daniel in Daniel7:25..

Study Daniel 7.
Educate yourself..pls

Bros...the question is simple...did Jesus exist? yes or no

If he did not exist...is Josephus also one of the Romans that invented Jesus?

What of Jesus' disciples? Did they invent Jesus too?

Or was it Paul that invented Jesus...or perhaps Paul is an invention too?

What Jesus fulfilled exceeded the even the narrow expectations of the Jews...

The Jews...especially the zealots amongst them kept on waiting and believing in false messiahs that would liberate them from Roman rule...and what was their reward? DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM IN 70 AD...

Now as an advice bro...go and study all the books of the major and minor prophets...starting from Isaiah and see how Jesus fits into the pattern of their prophecies...

Cheers

sonmvayina:


The gospels where not written by jews, they where forged by the Romans and Greeks, possible Eusebius...

The jews know too well that God is not a man or human being..Num23:19..and God 2nd commandment warned against making and worshipping images of anything in heaven, on earth or under the waters bellow the earth. So worshipping a man which is something found on earth, is IDOLATRY..

God is just the universal consciousness....
Also, to the jews, God was responsible for both good and evil, when they obey his commandments he blesses and prospers them, when they disobey he punishes them..

So why would God send Jesus to save them from himself?
The jews never viewed the devil as been a dual opposite of God, but a spirit under the control of God..

You just don't want to believe you are wasting your life worshipping an idol..

Jesus is not an idol to be worshipped...and that's where you guys are all missing the point by substituting the TRUTH for religion...

Study the teachings of Jesus and understanding the TRUTH and Unconditional love He lived and died for... those are they very same things you ought to imbibe in your life...especially Matthew 25 v 31-46

Please share your evidence of forgery of the gospel by Romans and Greeks since you are so sure of this...