₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
Enjoyed what finer things? Someone who walked everywhere instead of using a horse? Someone who had to gouge out a fish to pay the tax? Someone who preached for people to leave all behind to follow him?

You are the one who has to explain anything you are arguing for. You can't ask me to explain your position for you.

Why does a religion need to follow the same process as any other for the people of that religion to believe in its ideals? Is there a religion template that was laid down to say all religions must be that way?

What has the 45,000 denominations of Christianity got to do with people dying for its ideals? Or how does 45,000 denominations prove that Jesus was not legendised?

What I mean is, ALL were started and guided by a founder who stayed alive until they were somewhat established, only Christianiy. If you know any denomination or religion that wasn't let's have it.

I don't see how leaving an organised group and possibly a building where they regularly met runs counter to being ascetic.

AngelahFlo:
Christians call Him the Son of God. Jashub, Zaheertyler, achorladey, Maxindhouse

I just started this thread in Romance section: "Is this man being scammed?":
https://www.nairaland.com/8434719/he-being-scammed#135502582

QuinQ:
What I mean is, ALL were started and guided by a founder who stayed alive until they were somewhat established, only Christianiy. If you know any denomination or religion that wasn't let's have it.

I don't see how leaving an organised group and possibly a building where they regularly met runs counter to being ascetic.



I judlst started this thread in Romance section: "Is this man being scammed?":
https://www.nairaland.com/8434719/he-being-scammed#135502582

Which organised religion did Krishna leave behind at his death?

LordReed:
Which organised religion did Krishna leave behind at his death?

Krishna did not start any religion. He's worshipped as the 8th incarnation of a Hindu god. Plus, unlike Christ, he was a king on earth, well-established

QuinQ:
➜1. & 4.) Salvation was thrown open to all primarily via Paul whom Jesus commissioned to do just that through a vision. Also, Judea and the temple were destroyed. All per that parable
2. & 3.) See the relevant part of the Bible below. Jesus was clearly not talking about only Jews. And SUBSEQUENT EVENTS (till today!) bear that out!

Stop lying! Jesus Christ of Israel NEVER said He came to save mankind! 🙄🙄🙄

2. Stop posting religious gobbledegook as relevant!

Also, none of the verses you quote support any of what you claim, particularly since Jesus Christ of Israel already established that He was sent only to the Lost sheep of Israel....It would then follow that WHOEVER would refer to those of the lost Sheep of Israel to whom His Father sent Him. The scope of His relevance was established by His Father as the Lost sheep of Israel. So, every statement He made was to them and for them. That is simple sense from everything contained in the Gospels.

The same Jesus Christ of Israel went on to warn His Followers not to give that which is Holy to the dogs — Non-Israelites — implying their inability to handle it.

QuinQ:
Krishna did not start any religion. He's worshipped as the 8th incarnation of a Hindu god. Plus, unlike Christ, he was a king on earth, well-established

He didn't start a religion but one came up about him so you have no point please.

QuinQ:
➜Christ said he would not lose "any of those whom the Father has given me", do you think he meant Israel. Definitely not. Israel was sacked and dispersed shortly after he said this so he definitely did not mean Israel

Take time to reason the content of the passages where you got the statement in bold from.

Who are those whom His Father gave to Him — the Lost sheep of Israel. Jesus Christ of Israel acknowledged this, going as far as to warn His followers to stay away from the non-Israelites, declaring them a breed unqualified to handle that which is holy. Where Jesus Christ of Israel declared He would not lose any of those whom the Father had given to Him, whom else would He have been referring to? Again, the Lost sheep of Israel.

Ding, ding, ding!!!😐😐😐

LordReed:
He didn't start a religion but one came up about him so you have no point please.

Ok, Google if Krishna started Hinduism. Also, Krishna lived a full life and left riches; nobody died for him to be recognized as the incarnation of a god.
This is like asking me what religion the Daly Lama left behind

QuinQ:
Ok, Google if Krishna started Hinduism. Also, Krishna lived a full life and left riches; nobody died for him to be recognized as the incarnation of a god.
This is like asking me what religion the Daly Lama left behind

Did his followers get to inherit his riches or were they used for the religion? You still have no point.

QuinQ:
➜What huge power? Mention any other time in human history where this happened.
Rome HAD NO CHOICE!!! They did everything possible to destroy Christianity because they intuitively knew it would destroy their society as they knew it and their precious gods with it. Instead those who witnessed Christians being martyred became Christians themselves. Constantine's own mother and several of his generals were already Christians before he purportedly had his vision that changed his mind about Christianity

. This is false! The Romans did not destroy but rather sought to hijack the movement started by Jesus Christ of Israel in Jerusalem of Judah for their own political and material benefit throughout the empire.

The result of the attempted Hijack is the religion of Christianity, which you have even today. Yes, this is what the Romans did after the destruction of Jerusalem, the killing and exiling of the remnants of Judah to foreign lands, and eventually the erasure of the land of Judah itself, all mostly between 70 AD and 140 AD. There is no record that any of the original disciples survived the destruction, lived past the year 70 AD, or visited Rome, but the Romans came up with tales of some supposedly serving and going on to pass the baton to them — the dogs, aka non-Israelites— supposedly unaware that Jesus Christ of Israel specifically warned His Followers against doing exactly that.

QuinQ:
What huge power? Mention any other time in human history where this happened.

Rome HAD NO CHOICE!!! They did everything possible to destroy Christianity because they intuitively knew it would destroy their society as they knew it and their precious gods with it. Instead those who witnessed Christians being martyred became Christians themselves. Constantine's own mother and several of his generals were already Christians before he purportedly had his vision that changed his mind about Christianity

Well, I can't make you see it otherwise.

LordReed:
Did his followers get to inherit his riches or were they used for the religion? You still have no point.

You don't understand, Krishna did everything he wanted to do. He did not try to start a religion and "failed" then after his death somehow his few deserting disciples came back and resurrected the religion. That doesn't happen and has never happened except in Christianity. Once the original person with the "annointing" dies the organization disappears unless it was already somewhat established by the time of his death

Kobojunkie:
Stop lying! Jesus Christ of Israel NEVER said He came to save mankind! 🙄🙄🙄

2. Stop posting religious gobbledegook as relevant!

Also, none of the verses you quote support any of what you claim, particularly since Jesus Christ of Israel already established that He was sent only to the Lost sheep of Israel....It would then follow that WHOEVER would refer to those of the lost Sheep of Israel to whom His Father sent Him. The scope of His relevance was established by His Father as the Lost sheep of Israel. So, every statement He made was to them and for them. That is simple sense from everything contained in the Gospels.

The same Jesus Christ of Israel went on to warn His Followers not to give that which is Holy to the dogs — Non-Israelites — implying their inability to handle it.

See how you're not making any sense. So he was sent to SOME of the Lost Sheep of Israel not all??
Also, you don't think Jesus would say exactly that, if that was what he meant. You don't think he knew how to say "every Jew" instead of "everyone"??

Besides, SUBSEQUENT EVENTS made it clear what he meant.
99% of what Christ said is NOT in the Bible. He made it clear salvation would be thrown open to all believers in him!

QuinQ:
➜See how you're not making any sense. So he was sent to SOME of the Lost Sheep of Israel not all??
➜ Also, you don't think Jesus would say exactly that, if that was what he meant. You don't think he knew how to say "every Jew" instead of "everyone"??
➜ Besides, SUBSEQUENT EVENTS made it clear what he meant. 99% of what Christ said is NOT in the Bible.
➜ He made it clear salvation would be thrown open to all believers in him!

What Jesus Christ of Israel instead said was that He was sent only to the Lost Sheep of Israel. How did you arrive at Him being sent only to some of them?

2. But Jesus Christ of Israel(not of Jews alone) didn't need to say "every Jew". Additionally, the Davidic Covenant, which brought about His coming, a Covenant made by His Father, YHWH, already made clear to the people those to whom He, the Messiah and forever King, would be sent. So, He didn't need to posit His statements with "only jews" as you expected Him to have had to do for your sake.

3. Jesus Christ of Israel as the Word of God — Gospel —to those whom His Father, YHWH, sent Him to. If, according to you, 99% of the Gospel of Jesus Christ of Israel is missing, how did you arrive at this number? And where do you intend to get that missing 99% from? Or maybe I should ask why you keep pretending to have knowledge of the content of the missing parts of the Gospel? Just curious!

4. There is no record of Jesus Christ of Israel ever saying any such. So, where did you get this claim from?

QuinQ:
You don't understand, Krishna did everything he wanted to do. He did not try to start a religion and "failed" then after his death somehow his few deserting disciples came back and resurrected the religion. That doesn't happen and has never happened except in Christianity. Once the original person with the "annointing" dies the organization disappears unless it was already somewhat established by the time of his death

Dude you are the one who doesn't understand. None of this matters to the point that Jesus was legendised. Trying to find some unique aspect of the development of the religion will not negate that.

LordReed:
Dude you are the one who doesn't understand. None of this matters to the point that Jesus was legendised. Trying to find some unique aspect of the development of the religion will not negate that.

And non of it matters to the point that his disciples were willing to be tortured and die for a person you said they themselves legendised.

Besides, every historical figure is legendised

Kobojunkie:
. This is false! The Romans did not destroy but rather sought to hijack the movement started by Jesus Christ of Israel in Jerusalem of Judah for their own political and material benefit throughout the empire.

The result of the attempted Hijack is the religion of Christianity, which you have even today. Yes, this is what the Romans did after the destruction of Jerusalem, the killing and exiling of the remnants of Judah to foreign lands, and eventually the erasure of the land of Judah itself, all mostly between 70 AD and 140 AD. There is no record that any of the original disciples survived the destruction, lived past the year 70 AD, or visited Rome, but the Romans came up with tales of some supposedly serving and going on to pass the baton to them — the dogs, aka non-Israelites— supposedly unaware that Jesus Christ of Israel specifically warned His Followers against doing exactly that.

And why would they want to hijack Christianity?? What suddenly happened to their own gods that saw them from victory to victory. What happened to their god-emperor that they worshipped? All of a sudden they wanted to hijack a religion that taught he was no god at all but a condemned lowly sinner needing salvation, and that all their gods were useless!

QuinQ:
➜ These ones below...

In regards to the claims regarding the original disciples of Jesus Christ, those are fantastical stories cobbled together by the Romans -non-Israelites—for their selfish purposes. There is no evidence that any of the original disciples— all of them Israelites — survived or lived past the year 70 AD.

QuinQ:
And non of it matters to the point that his disciples were willing to be tortured and die for a person you said they themselves legendised.

Exactly. It doesn't matter that they legendised him, they weren't dying for the legend, they were dying for the ideals.

Besides, every historical figure is legendised

So why are you arguing?

QuinQ:
➜ And why would they want to hijack Christianity??
➜ What suddenly happened to their own gods that saw them from victory to victory.
➜ What happened to their god-emperor that they worshipped?
➜ All of a sudden they wanted to hijack a religion that taught he was no god at all but a condemned lowly sinner needing salvation, and that all their gods were useless!
➜ Besides, every historical figure is legendised

The Romans had a habit of hijacking the beliefs and gods of their captors for their own purpose. To maintain full control over their captive nations, they needed control over the religious narratives and traditions of the people.. They did it to the Greeks and they did it to the Jews as well.

2. We all know what happened. The people were no longer enamored by the old gods and needed new, more powerful ones, and the next best thing was the Jewish craze.

3. From history, we know their god-king went as far as to pretend he had become a son of the God of the Jews to retain the attention of the people. We see that happening to this day with politicians aligning themselves with belief systems to gain or maintain relevance.

4. It would only appear all of a sudden to someone not aware of the history of the Romans.

5. Every historical figure? Not true!

QuinQ:
➜Nope. I said specifically the Jesus phenomenon - whereby the founder died a total "failure" without establishing anything at all, and even his closest disciples ashamed to be associated with him. That should have been the end of the movement and always is

Jesus Christ of Israel did not die a failure to his disciples, though. This never happened!

Kobojunkie:
In regards to the claims regarding the original disciples of Jesus Christ, those are fantastical stories cobbled together by the Romans -non-Israelites—for their selfish purposes. There is no evidence that any of the original disciples— all of them Israelites — survived or lived past the year 70 AD.

Ok, Constantine decriminalizing Christianity was also fantastical stories cobbled up. So was his mother already being a devout Christian and the battle of the bridge. All cobbled up!
What has the fact they were persecuted have to do with living past 70 AD

QuinQ:
➜Ok, Constantine decriminalizing Christianity was also fantastical stories cobbled up. So was his mother already being a devout Christian and the battle of the bridge. All cobbled up!
➜ What has the fact they were persecuted have to do with living past 70 AD

. But all of this here has nothing to do with the original Israelite movement that existed before the destruction of Jerusalem and then Judah, though. Constantine was a non-Israelite, and so was his mother.

2. The infighting that took place among the non-Israelite fathers of your religion of Christianity, which you have today, the same ones responsible for hijacking the original Israelite movement for their benefit, has nothing to do with Israel or what Jesus Christ of Israel established.

The importance of the mention is to show that after the destruction of Jerusalem, the narrative shifted abruptly from a movement of only Israelites to one that was solely controlled by non-Israelites— all of your so-called church fathers are non-Israelites —, a suspicious shift given that Jesus Christ of Israel warned His followers never to give that which is Holy — the Gospel— to the non-Israelites suggesting them incapable of handling that which is holy.

Kobojunkie:
The Romans had a habit of hijacking the beliefs and gods of their captors for their own purpose. To maintain full control over their captive nations, they needed control over the religious narratives and traditions of the people.. They did it to the Greeks and they did it to the Jews as well.

2. We all know what happened. The people were no longer enamored by the old gods and needed new, more powerful ones, and the next best thing was the Jewish craze.

3. From history, we know their god-king went as far as to pretend he had become a son of the God of the Jews to retain the attention of the people. We see that happening to this day with politicians aligning themselves with belief systems to gain or maintain relevance.

4. It would only appear all of a sudden to someone not aware of the history of the Romans.

5. Every historical figure? Not true!

So how come they didn't let Zeus or some other god supplant Jupiter and their god-emperor?
They destroyed Judea completely and dispersed the people. Why would they be suddenly adopting their religion?
So you see, you don't make sense because u are simply wrong.
What simply happened was that Rome wisely tried to stamp out Christianity as recorded in history and the Bible. But in trying to destroy it, they ignited it more.
What you are saying is an insult to the martyrs

Kobojunkie:
So, what is the essence or meaning behind this constant war of interpretations you lot keep having on here when the fact is there are still many more interpretations to come— at some point in the future, there will be well over 100,000 different denominations making up Christianity for certain—, and none of them will ever be according to the literal messages contained in any of those books which have not changed in over 2000 years?

I mean, what exactly is the goal of all of these wars— records contained in several 100s of threads in this section alone — when your particular denominational interpretation will never achieve the status of supreme interpretation in the religion, not even in a 1000 years. We are talking here about a religion founded on the freedom of a crowd of non-Israelites to spin their interpretation as they see fit.

It is based exactly on what you intend to achieve when you join the conversation to tell myself and others that the constant war is meaningless right?

QuinQ:
➜So how come they didn't let Zeus or some other god supplant Jupiter and their god-emperor?
➜They destroyed Judea completely and dispersed the people. Why would they be suddenly adopting their religion?
➜ So you see, you don't make sense because u are simply wrong.
➜ What simply happened was that Rome wisely tried to stamp out Christianity as recorded in history and the Bible. But in trying to destroy it, they ignited it more. What you are saying is an insult to the martyrs

. Here's an excerpt from WorldHistory.Org to help you with that.

From the beginning, Roman religion was polytheistic. From an initial array of gods and spirits, Rome added to this collection to include both Greek gods as well as a number of foreign cults. As the empire expanded, the Romans refrained from imposing their own religious beliefs upon those they conquered; https://www.worldhistory.org/Roman_Religion/

2. The answer to your question is in your previous comment. You claimed Constantine's mother was a Christian, did you not? Roman citizens had been adopting and even dying in the name of the new religion, and its power and sway among the aristocrats had become great.

3. I think it is instead that you are too stuck in the box that is your religious beliefs, and unwilling to step beyond it still.

4. I am afraid that is not history but rather your church's spin on History. The Romans fought to control the Jewish nation of Judah but found that the religion of the time kept getting in their way. And the religion in question isn't Christianity but Judaism, the same one that Jesus Christ of Israel disavowed by the way. That religion — not the Jesus Christ of Israel movement, mind you— is what ignited the match, which led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That is what is recorded in History. The other uprisings that took place after that were also linked to Judaism, not Jesus Christ of Israel.

The Jewish revolts against Rome were a series of uprisings that spanned from 66 CE to 136 CE, marking a period of intense conflict between the Jewish people and the Roman Empire. These revolts were primarily driven by a desire for independence and self-determination, fueled by resentment towards Roman rule and religious differences.
⚉ The most significant Jewish rebellion against Rome was the First Jewish Revolt (66-70 CE), also known as the Great Revolt. This revolt was sparked by a combination of factors, including Roman misrule, high taxes, and the defilement of a synagogue. The revolt culminated in the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and the siege of Masada, a mountain fortress where the remaining Jewish rebels were eventually defeated.
⚉ Following the First Revolt, the Diaspora Revolt (115-117 CE) erupted, spreading to Jewish communities in various regions of the Roman Empire. This rebellion, also known as the Second Jewish-Roman War, was largely suppressed by Rome.
⚉ The final and most devastating revolt was the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132-136 CE), which was led by Simon Bar Kokhba. This revolt was primarily focused on Judea and resulted in a bloody and brutal suppression by the Roman forces. The Bar Kokhba Revolt is often considered the most significant of the three, and it ultimately led to the suppression of Jewish autonomy and the dispersal of the Jewish people.

The Jewish revolts against Rome had a profound impact on the Jewish people, resulting in the destruction of the Second Temple, the collapse of the Jewish state, and the beginning of the Diaspora. The events of these revolts continue to be studied and debated by historians and scholars, and they remain a significant part of Jewish history and identity.

Kobojunkie:
What Jesus Christ of Israel instead said was that He was sent only to the Lost Sheep of Israel. How did you arrive at Him being sent only to some of them?

2. But Jesus Christ of Israel(not of Jews alone) didn't need to say "every Jew". Additionally, the Davidic Covenant, which brought about His coming, a Covenant made by His Father, YHWH, already made clear to the people those to whom He, the Messiah and forever King, would be sent. So, He didn't need to posit His statements with "only jews" as you expected Him to have had to do for your sake.

3. Jesus Christ of Israel as the Word of God — Gospel —to those whom His Father, YHWH, sent Him to. If, according to you, 99% of the Gospel of Jesus Christ of Israel is missing, how did you arrive at this number? And where do you intend to get that missing 99% from? Or maybe I should ask why you keep pretending to have knowledge of the content of the missing parts of the Gospel? Just curious!

4. There is no record of Jesus Christ of Israel ever saying any such. So, where did you get this claim from?

4.) You are the one claiming what he NEVER said, NOT me. He obviously severally implied that salvation, initially for Jews, would be thrown open to all believers - which was exactly what subsequently happened!

2.) But he only interacted with Jews. The "lost sheep" of Israel are historically the ten lost tribes out of which only the Samaritans were left. But you saw what he said to the Samaritan woman. But then he also told her that a time would come when it would no longer be by being a Jew, but by worshipping God in spirit and in truth!

1. He was obviously refering to a subset not a whole. Read Mathew 30 again.
Also Google meaning of lost tribes of Israel. Jesus only interacted with JEWS

3. 99% is obviously a figure of speech. But for someone who lived 33 years it is definitely more than that. Jesus clearly implied salvation would subsequently be thrown open to all believers, and that's exactly what happened

Kobojunkie:
. But all of this here has nothing to do with the original Israelite movement that existed before the destruction of Jerusalem and then Judah, though. Constantine was a non-Israelite, and so was his mother.

2. The infighting that took place among the non-Israelite fathers of your religion of Christianity, which you have today, the same ones responsible for hijacking the original Israelite movement for their benefit, has nothing to do with Israel or what Jesus Christ of Israel established.

The importance of the mention is to show that after the destruction of Jerusalem, the narrative shifted abruptly from a movement of only Israelites to one that was solely controlled by non-Israelites— all of your so-called church fathers are non-Israelites —, a suspicious shift given that Jesus Christ of Israel warned His followers never to give that which is Holy — the Gospel— to the non-Israelites suggesting them incapable of handling that which is holy.

Instead of confusing yourself, answer a simple question:
If there was no persecution and Rome was from the onset out to hijack Christianity WHY would Constantine issue the Edict of Milan of 313 decriminalizing Christianity??

Kobojunkie:
. Here's an excerpt from WorldHistory.Org to help you with that.

2. The answer to your question is in your previous comment. You claimed Constantine's mother was a Christian, did you not? Roman citizens had been adopting and even dying in the name of the new religion, and its power and sway among the aristocrats had become great.

3. I think it is instead that you are too stuck in the box that is your religious beliefs, and unwilling to step beyond it still.

4. I am afraid that is not history but rather your church's spin on History. The Romans fought to control the Jewish nation of Judah but found that the religion of the time kept getting in their way. And the religion in question isn't Christianity but Judaism, the same one that Jesus Christ of Israel disavowed by the way. That religion — not the Jesus Christ of Israel movement, mind you— is what ignited the match, which led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That is what is recorded in History. The other uprisings that took place after that were also linked to Judaism, not Jesus Christ of Israel.

@bolded,
Judah stopped being a nation almost 600 years before Christ so you're really mixed up.
You have to realize there are ancient artifacts and scraps of ancient writings that have nothing to do with Rome that authenticate these things

QuinQ:
➜ You are the one claiming what he NEVER said, NOT me. He obviously severally implied that salvation, initially for Jews, would be thrown open to all believers - which was exactly what subsequently happened!
➜ But he only interacted with Jews. The "lost sheep" of Israel are historically the ten lost tribes out of which only the Samaritans were left. But you saw what he said to the Samaritan woman.
➜ But then he also told her that a time would come when it would no longer be by being a Jew, but by worshipping God in spirit and in truth!
➜ He was obviously refering to a subset not a whole. Read Mathew 30 again.
➜ Also Google meaning of lost tribes of Israel. Jesus only interacted with JEWS
➜ 99% is obviously a figure of speech. But for someone who lived 33 years it is definitely more than that.
➜ Jesus clearly implied salvation would subsequently be thrown open to all believers, and that's exactly what happened

1. Jesus Christ of Israel NEVER said, implied, or insinuated that He came to save mankind. There is no record in Scripture of this ever happening!

2. Wrong! First, there are no 10 lost tribes of Israel. Second, the Lost sheep are not historically those exiled but rather those scattered by God of Israel Himself as explained by Him in the following chapter- Ezekiel 34 vs 1 - 31.

3. Could you please, more specifically, point out the passage from which you obtain this reasoning so I can better respond to your concern?

4. A subset of the Jews or the Israelites who existed during His time, or what do you mean?

5. Since Jesus Christ interacted with Jews — descendants of Judah and Benjamin — along with the Levites and also the Samaritans — descendants of Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh— it is erroneous to claim that Jesus Christ only interacted with those of the Jewish subset of Israel. Also, Google is not Scripture.

6. He lived 33 years does not imply that it took Him all 33 years to teach the Gospel, though. If you read the Gospels, you will find that His mission to disseminate the Gospel instead began approximately 3.5 years before His death, during which time He gathered to Himself His disciples and began teaching the Gospel to them. So, again, where do you get this idea that the Gospel as revealed is INCOMPLETE, and what makes you think that then gives you the freedom to add whatever ideas you see fit?

7. This never happened since Jesus Christ of Israel restricted Himself solely to that which was allowed by His Father, meaning He could not have done what you claim, which would have been against His own Father, whose Covenant it was that He came to fulfill.

QuinQ:
➜Instead of confusing yourself, answer a simple question: If there was no persecution and Rome was from the onset out to hijack Christianity WHY would Constantine issue the Edict of Milan of 313 decriminalizing Christianity??

Again, the stories of persecution that took place in Rome were not against the original Israelite movement started by Jesus Christ of Israel, but rather against the non-Israelite-controlled religious movements— there were different factions to them too— that had resulted from the attempted hijacking of the original movement. Basically, the original movement in Jerusalem comprised only Israelites. Some Romans saw this and began creating narratives to insert themselves as part of that original movement. They took on the name Christians, a term originally meant as a derogatory term against the original disciples, and their movement became referred to as Christianity.

Over time, this new group of people— Christians—built up their base and power and became somewhat of a political movement, and there was lots of infighting with groups attacking each other and labeling those who didn't share their ideas heretics. The Roman Empire sought to put them in check, and this resulted in the stories of persecution and killings of Christians we read of today. However, their political power continued to grow, leading to Constantine eventually signing the Edict of Milan and Apollo subsequently making it the official religion of Rome years later.

Kobojunkie:
1. Jesus Christ of Israel NEVER said, implied, or insinuated that He came to save mankind. There is no record in Scripture of this ever happening!

2. Wrong! First, there are no 10 lost tribes of Israel. Second, the Lost sheep are not historically those exiled but rather those scattered by God of Israel Himself as explained by Him in the following chapter- Ezekiel 34 vs 1 - 31.

3. Could you please, more specifically, point out the passage from which you obtain this reasoning so I can better respond to your concern?

4. A subset of the Jews or the Israelites who existed during His time, or what do you mean?

5. Since Jesus Christ interacted with Jews — descendants of Judah and Benjamin — along with the Levites and also the Samaritans — descendants of Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh— it is erroneous to claim that Jesus Christ only interacted with those of the Jewish subset of Israel. Also, Google is not Scripture.

6. He lived 33 years does not imply that it took Him all 33 years to teach the Gospel, though. If you read the Gospels, you will find that His mission to disseminate the Gospel instead began approximately 3.5 years before His death, during which time He gathered to Himself His disciples and began teaching the Gospel to them. So, again, where do you get this idea that the Gospel as revealed is INCOMPLETE, and what makes you think that then gives you the freedom to add whatever ideas you see fit?

7. This never happened since Jesus Christ of Israel restricted Himself solely to that which was allowed by His Father, meaning He could not have done what you claim, which would have been against His own Father, whose Covenant it was that He came to fulfill.

STOP saying what Christ never said!!!!
You can say what is not in the Bible, that's it!!

This is John 4. Note the bolded

13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal .”...
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

Kobojunkie:
Again, the stories of persecution that took place in Rome were not against the original Israelite movement started by Jesus Christ of Israel, but rather against the non-Israelite-controlled religious movements— there were different factions to them too— that had resulted from the attempted hijacking of the original movement. Basically, the original movement in Jerusalem comprised only Israelites. Some Romans saw this and began creating narratives to insert themselves as part of that original movement. They took on the name Christians, a term originally meant as a derogatory term against the original disciples, and their movement became referred to as Christianity.

Over time, this new group of people— Christians—built up their base and power and became somewhat of a political movement, and there was lots of infighting with groups attacking each other and labeling those who didn't share their ideas heretics. The Roman Empire sought to put them in check, and this resulted in the stories of persecution and killings of Christians we read of today. However, their political power continued to grow, leading to Constantine eventually signing the Edict of Milan and Apollo subsequently making it the official religion of Rome years later.

😅 I'm sure even you yourself can see you're NOT making sense.
First of all you initially said there was no persecution!
So, Paul and all his inspired letters were made up by Rome. Why again exactly?😆
Then Rome was trying to hijack them but couldn't, (you initially said Rome hijacked them o) so they started persecuting them (you said there was no persecution o) but they kept gaining political power (where and how exactly?). Wow!

QuinQ:
➜STOP saying what Christ never said!!!!You can say what is not in the Bible, that's it!!
This is John 4. Note the bolded
13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal .”...
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

The context of that conversation was well established in the verses following these verses you conveniently pulled out in order to pretend they say something else, though.

1. Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard the report that he was making and baptizing more followers than John.
2 (But really, Jesus himself did not baptize anyone; his followers baptized people for him.)
3 So he left Judea and went back to Galilee.
4 On the way to Galilee, he had to go through the country of Samaria.
5 In Samaria Jesus came to the town called Sychar, which is near the field that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.
6 Jacob’s well was there. Jesus was tired from his long trip, so he sat down beside the well. It was about noon.
7 A Samaritan woman came to the well to get some water, and Jesus said to her, “Please give me a drink.”
8 This happened while his followers were in town buying some food.
9 The woman answered, “I am surprised that you ask me for a drink! You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman!” (Jews have nothing to do with Samaritans.[a])
10 Jesus answered, “You don’t know what God can give you. And you don’t know who I am, the one who asked you for a drink. If you knew, you would have asked me, and I would have given you living water.”
11 The woman said, “Sir, where will you get that living water? The well is very deep, and you have nothing to get water with.
12 Are you greater than our ancestor Jacob? He is the one who gave us this well. He drank from it himself, and his sons and all his animals drank from it too.” - John 4 vs 1 - 12

Samaritans are Israelites, given that they are descended from Joseph.