See other Religion Articles
Title: Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 18, 2007
Author: Bible
Post Date: 2007-10-18 13:09:07 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 2576
Comments: 195
I find it curious that so many people have so much faith in men. And, in what men say, and this is esp. true when what the men says flys directly in the face of what they claim to represent/say. I hold to this firmly; A man is known by his actions, and not by his words. And this leads me directly to what is wrong with America; the churches. And specifically those churches which claim to be Christian churches. And to the men who serve in those churches, and who know that they lie. After all, such men do, supposedly, read the Bible. Well, they have at least one time in their lives I think it is fair to assume. More than that? Pretty doubtful actually. So this brings me to the question I posed in the title of this post; Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross? The only acceptable answer to this comes from the Bible. I assume that everyone who claims to be Christian will agree with this. My first Bible (that I read extensively) was The King James Study Bible. I have continued to use it, although I have more than a dozen different Bibles now. In the King James; Galatians 3:13; Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, CURSED is EVERYONE THAT HANGETH ON A TREE. Second witness; "...for it is written ... " ; Deutronomy 22:22; And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him from a tree; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shall in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) ... Now, this may come as a surprise to many of you, but a tree ain't a cross; it is a post. In the Spanish translation of the King James, it is clearer, for they use the term madero, which means board, or, post. In addition, if you have read anything about the Roman Empire, one of the notable facts about the Romans was their efficiency in killing people. And it is not efficient to use two pieces of wood, i.e., a cross, when a single piece of wood, a post, will suffice. And, in fact, this is how the Romans did hang those who they wished to make examples out of; on a post. (Yeah, yeah, I know; all the movies use crosses. And, your point is?) There is another point that must be made here; when a man is hung on a post, or, for that matter, if he were to be hung on a cross, with nails, YOU CAN NOT DRIVE THE NAILS THROUGH THE PALMS OF HIS HAND. It will not work, because when the post/cross is lifted up and dropped into the hole prepared for it, the nails will rip out of the hands and the man will drop to the ground. The Romans knew this from, I am sure, experience, and the nails were ALWAYS driven into the wrists of the victim, between the two bones of the arm. This is the only location which offers enough strength to be usuable is such a manner. The best depiction of Jesus being executed that I have seen is contained in the Watchtower book; What Does The Bible Really Teach? on page 52. What does this mean: If you are attending a so-called Christian church, which uses the cross as a part of their worship, and protrays Jesus on that cross with nails through the palms of his hand, then you are participating in a deliberate lie. And, you are in a church properly described in Revelations a one of the daughters of the whore of Babylon. (I paraphrase; not going to look it up today.) Now, let's look at a couple of other Bibles and see what is said; New American Standard Bible; Galatians 3:13; Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us -- for it is writte, "CUESED IS EVERY ONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE" -- Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, (23) his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), ... Pretty good. Not far off, but.... let's take a quick look at another Bible. Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text (George M. Lamsa's Translation from the Aramaic of the Peshitta); Galatians 3:13; Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming accursed for our sakes (for it is writtenm Crused is everyone who hangs on a cross). OOPS! WOW! Boy, do we need that second witness now! Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if any man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is crucified on a tree, and thus put to death; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree but you shall bury him the same day (for he who shall revile God shall be crucified), ... Gotta a problem here, because the second witness does not confirm what was written in Galatians. That means that there is an error in this Bible, and brings into question any quotes taken from it, unless they be confirmed by a second witness. And this problem probably stems from the translator wanting to believe what he had been taught about the cross. And rather than translate directly, he transposed his beliefs into the translation. I am a Christian; I freely and happily and contentedly proclaim this to be true. Chritianity is NOT a religion; it is a way of life, attempting to follow in the footsteps of The Christ. As a Christian, I have a responsibility to study His Word, that I not be lead into error. I accept that responsibility. I also accept the responsibility to help others to learn as well, that any errors that I or they hold may be revealed and corrected jointly. I have stated this before; I ask for correction in anything that I am in error on. And I have been corrected, and I thank those who help me to learn, and, (this is a big one!) change. I hope you find this post helpful, and that it helps to bring all of us to a wider understanding of what is being, deliberately, done to America, through what is supposed to be His church (people). Next post, in a day or so; Is Jesus Christ God?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-145) not displayed.
.
.
.
#146. To: aristeides (#144)
(Edited)
Jesus had nothing do with the creation of Christianity. That was done by fools who can't fathom spiritual matters, who can only understand silly rituals, and fumbling with beads, and worshipping idols, and thinking they've got it figured out. The fact that you think Jesus created Christianity demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of early history or how Christianity was created. You think that if you say something enough it becomes true. It doesn't. You're just another religious fool, stuck in first gear.
Nagging is your primary arguing tool, and I can see why, since you've got nothing else. And you'll keep nagging on this, and I'll keep telling you to go fuck yourself.
Is that an example of the reasoning you use in court? Let me explain this in simple terms, so there's a possibility it might be understood by you. This is a conversation about a topic. I'm not trying to persuade anyone of anything. I don't care what your opinion is, but when you state things as if they're fact and I know they're not, I'm going to call you a liar and a fool, if not both. This is also not a court of law. If it were, I would be there and you wouldn't, because you couldn't beat a first year lawyer in court. Admit it. You've never even tried a case, and couldn't cross examine a witness if your life depended on it. Since I've won a number of multi million dollar jury verdicts, I think that's very good evidence my persuasive abilities and demeanor in court are just fine. Now how many jury trials have you won, professor NOBODY?
Why would they be inclined to write about a 'nobody' from the Galilee? He wasn't born to notable parents, he wasn't a part of some rebellion, or uprising, nor did he 'discover' some star, or some piece of high technology, nor was he a part of any ruling class or community.
About this statement, you are correct. ======================================= If Josephus mentioned Jesus, doesn't that imply Jesus existed? The Pharisees think He existed: Who Was Jesus? The Bible gave a warning about a dangerous, false prophet who would arise to test our faith in G-d. In Deuteronomy 13, G-d describes this ... www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm : Who Was Jesus? The Bible gave a warning about a dangerous, false prophet who would arise to test our faith in G-d. In Deuteronomy 13, G-d describes this false prophet as a member of the Jewish people (v. 2, 7) who would tell true prophecies and would have the power of miracles. G-d Himself would give this false prophet the power to perform miracles and reveal prophecy, but the false prophet would try to seduce the people away from G-d's Law and towards strange gods unknown to Judaism. The purpose would be to test whether we are truly committed to living under the Law, or whether we will be dazzled and fall for the temptation to join a false path to salvation (v. 3-6, 7-8, 11). In this Biblical passage, G-d repeatedly commands the Jews to kill this false prophet, lest the evil spread and destroy many souls. To be accepted by the people, the false prophet would sometimes pretend to be a righteous Jew who fulfills the Law, but at key moments he would turn against certain details of the Law in order to make the breach (v. 6, 7). This is the reason that verse 1 commands us not to add or subtract any details from the Law, and verse 5 warns us to remain steadfast with all the traditions of the Law. In Deuteronomy 17, this false prophet is also described as someone who would rebel against the authority of the judges of the Jewish people, and who should be put to death for his rebelliousness (v. 8-13, esp. v. 12). Who are the judges? The highest court in Israel was the Sanhedrin, which was established by Moses (Exodus 18:13-26; Numbers 11:16-29), and which lasted more than 15 centuries. The members of the Sanhedrin were the rabbis known as "Pharisees" (Pirushim, "those with the explanation"). G-d gave permanent authority to these judges to interpret the Law and G-d's Word, and it is a commandment to follow their decisions without turning even slightly to the right or the left (Deut. 17:11). But the false prophet would challenge the authority of the Sanhedrin, thus revealing himself to be an evil man. In the book of the prophet Daniel, this false prophet is described as a king (the eleventh horn on a terrible beast) who would wage war against the Jews (the "holy ones"; see Deut. 14:2 on this term) and would change the Law including the calendar and the holidays (Daniel 7:8, 20-25). Elsewhere, this false prophet is described as a king who would disregard the G-d of his fathers, exalting himself as a god and giving honor to this new god-head (Daniel 11:36-39). The man known today as "Jesus" fulfilled all these prophecies. He became a "king" (over the Christian church) who changed the original Law, doing away with the Hebrew calendar and the Biblical holidays (Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkos the Festival of Tabernacles, Passover, etc.). He disregarded the one, infinite G-d of the Hebrew Bible in favor of a new "trinity" that included himself. And he repeatedly broke the Law by committing terrible sins, while openly challenging the G-d-given authority of the rabbis of the Sanhedrin. Naturally, Jesus did sometimes pretend to respect the Law, but whenever he thought he could get away with it, he turned right around and broke that same Law. In Matthew 5:17-19, he declared that he came to fulfill the Law, and in Matthew 23:1-3 he defended the authority of the rabbis. But the rest of the time, he rebelled against the Law—thus showing that his occasional words of piety were meant only to hide his evil agenda. The following sins of Jesus are recorded in the "New Testament": 1. Jesus repudiated the laws of kosher food (Mark 7:18-19). [Compare this to the prophet Daniel's strict adherence to kashrus, in Daniel chapter 1.] 2. He repudiated the laws of honoring one's parents, and called on his followers to hate their parents; he also dishonored his own mother (Matthew 10:34-36; Matthew 12:46-50; Luke 14:26). 3. He violated the Sabbath by picking grain, and incited his disciples to do the same (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-26). 4. 4) He again violated the Sabbath by healing a man's arm, which was not a matter of saving a life, and he openly defied the rabbis in his total repudiation of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9-13; Mark 3:1-5). [Compare this to G-d's view of violating the Sabbath, in Numbers 15:32-36, Nehemiah 10:30-32, and dozens of other places throughout the Bible.] 5. Jesus brazenly defied and disobeyed the rabbis of the Sanhedrin, repudiating their authority (This is recorded in many places throughout the New Testament, but look especially at Matthew 23:13-39 and John 8:44-45). The Talmud (Babylonian edition) records other sins of "Jesus the Nazarene": 1. He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a). 2. He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a). 3. He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh—which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b). The false, rebellious message of Jesus has been thoroughly rejected by the vast majority of the Jewish people, as G-d commanded. Unfortunately, however, this same message has brought a terrible darkness upon the world; today, over 1.5 billion gentiles believe in Jesus. These lost souls mistakenly think they have found salvation in Jesus; tragically, they are in for a rude awakening. Truth and eternal life are found directly from G-d, through performing His Law. Any "mediator" only separates man from G-d: 1. "G-d is not a man, who can lie, nor the son of man, who relents... He has not beheld iniquity in Jacob, nor has He seen perverseness in Israel" (Numbers 23:19). 2. Speaking prophetically of the Christian church, Moses declared, "For their 'rock' is not like our Rock... Where is their god, in whom they trusted?" (Deut. 32:31, 37). 3. "'See now that I, only I, am He, and there is no god with Me. I kill, and I bring to life; I wound, and I heal, and there is none who can rescue from My Hand...' Sing songs of joy, gentiles, with His people, for He will avenge the blood of His servants, and will take vengeance on His enemies, and will forgive His land and His people" (Deut. 32:39, 43). 4. "I, only I am Hashem (the L-rd), and besides Me there is no savior" (Isaiah 43:11). 5. "I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god... Is there a god besides Me? There is no rock; I do not know any" (Isaiah 44:6). 6. "Israel is saved in Hashem with an eternal salvation... Assemble yourselves and come, come near together, you gentiles who have escaped [the judgment]. (They have no knowledge, those who carry wooden sculptures and who pray to a god that does not save.) Announce and bring near, even take counsel together: Who declared this from ancient times, and announced it from then? Is it not I, Hashem? And there are no other gods beside Me, nor any righteous and saving god other than Me. Turn to Me and be saved, all ends of the earth, for I am G-d and there is none else. By Myself I swore, a righteous word went out of my mouth and it will not be withdrawn, that to Me every knee will bow and every tongue will swear" (Isaiah 45:17, 20-23). What is the true key to salvation? Those who return to the Law (the Seven Commandments for the Children of Noah, according to the eternal covenant made with Noah in Genesis 9) and who assist the Jewish people (Isaiah 60, 61, 66) will be saved and will participate in the miracles and revelations, including worshipping in the Third Temple, under the kingship of the Messiah. As described in many places, including Jeremiah 16:19-21 and Zechariah 8:20-23, all the old gentile religions of the world will disappear, and their followers will turn to the Jews for spiritual leadership. Until then, Christians are spiritually blinded, and cannot yet understand G-d's wisdom in the Bible. Ours is the last generation of the era of sin and evil and the first of the Messianic Era. Indeed, for the first time in history, there is a growing consensus of leading rabbis willing to name the man most suited to be the Messiah, and they are agreeing that he is the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson. The Rebbe is the spiritual leader of our generation, having boldly stirred up controversy over vital issues in which other leaders have remained tragically silent or have even caved in to the growing forces of darkness. He has upheld the Law perfectly and has worked mightily to strengthen the observance of the Law by Jews, as well as the observance of the Noachide Law by gentiles. Through his teaching of chasidus (Jewish mystical teachings, preserved from Moses and Mount Sinai), he has taught the world that G-d is One, the Infinite Who renews creation at every moment. The Rebbe is a direct descendant of King David and has received a true prophecy from G-d that we who are alive in this generation shall be the first in history to see the coming of the true messiah. Many Jews are eagerly anticipating the Rebbe's resurrection from the grave, ready to re-establish the Sanhedrin and anoint the king. Our job is to finish preparing the way, by announcing the truth and bringing all of mankind back to the Law immediately. Through our divinely mandated efforts, we shall now clear the path for the return of the Garden of Eden and the establishment of the eternal sinless world promised by Isaiah and the other Biblical prophets. ["yeshu" is a derogatory term. Zionist Christians - A Mossad Operation ....Do Zionist Christians Know That The Name Of Jesus Was Changed In Israel?.....Jesus' name in Hebrew had been changed so that it is now an acronym meaning 'Be His Name and Memories Forgotten.' By Reuven Schossen ... www.middleeast.org/forum/fb-public/1/4541.shtml Jesus' Membrum in the Talmud What did the Jewish priests think of Jesus? This information will supplement Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John -- a must read for serious Christians. www.come-and-hear.com/editor/censorship_2.html
okaaay....been suspicious of that "church" since I saw it last night. closing some windows, but am going to "park" them here until I can study them further.... started with a search "merovee fish" [don't ask me why, 'cause i don't know why] THE SIX~POINTED STAR THE MARK OF THE BEAST PART II HISTORY OF THE SIX-POINTED STAR [fish, merovee, Dagon, etc.] =================== The Roman Eagle (aquila) [Roman eagle, German eagle, Maccabes, Dan, snake, Habsburgs, Charlemagne, ODIN, Gauls, Franks, Celts [***isn't that a celtic knot in that mosaic?], Greeks, German "Kaiser", Russian "Tsar", USA re Roman Empire, etc.] www.chinahistoryforum.com...ion/index.php/t15405.html =========================== **** THE FALSE GOSPEL IN THE STARS PREPARING THE WAY OF THE ANTICHRIST . . .and the False Prophet and 10 kings downsized to 7 and. . . PISCES THE TWO FISHES "....THE TWIN MESSIAHS Gnostics claim to venerate Jesus and John the Baptist as the ‘twin messiahs.’ As Jesus was the “Christ” for the Age of Pisces, John, the Gnostic Christ, will incarnate another messiah for the Age of Aquarius. This is the reason all Grand Masters of the Prieuré de Sion take the name of John (Jean). The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail disclosed that for some time there has been in existence an esoteric papacy as well as the exoteric papacy of the Roman Catholic Church:...." "....Students of Scripture may recognize Oannes as the Philistine god, Dagon, but may not realize that this fish-god is also the ‘beast that rises out of the sea,’ in Rev. 13:1. Dagobert’s Revenge identifies Oannes as ‘Lucifer’ whose fallen angels sired a race of giants, the Nephilim, in Genesis 6: “...Dagon or Oannes, a half-human, half-fish combination who was known as the ‘Lord of the Flood’...was said to rise out of the sea every day to teach his secret knowledge to those who followed him. He is mentioned in Samuel, Chapter 5, when the Philistines capture the Ark of the Covenant and place it in the Temple of Dagon. Two nights later, ‘Dagon was fallen upon is face to the ground before the Ark of the Lord; and the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him.’ It is this character upon which Satan or Lucifer is based, but the physical description attributed to him applied to an entire race of ‘gods’, or as they were described in the Bible, Nephilim, or Fallen Angels, the ‘Great Old Ones’...” “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose… There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” Gen. 6:1-4 Oannes was the same fish-god described in Bloodline of the Holy Grail as the ‘mysterious sea-beast’ which sired Merovee, the Frankish king who founded the Merovingian dynasty. For this reason, **** the Merovingian dynasty were designated “Fisher Kings.” “Despite the carefully listed genealogies of his time, the heritage of Meroveus was strangely obscured in the monastic annals. Although the rightful son of Clodion, he was nonetheless said by the historian Priscus to have been sired by an arcane sea creature, the Bistea Neptunis.. “The Sicambrian Franks, from whose female line the Merovingians emerged were associated with Grecian Arcadia before migrating to the Rhineland. As we have seen, they called themselves the Newmage – ‘People of the New Covenant’, just as the Essenes of Qumran had once been known. It was the Arcadian legacy that was responsible for the mysterious sea beast – the Bistea Neptunis – as symbolically defined in the Merovingian ancestry. The relevant sea-lord was King Pallas, a god of old Arcadia... The immortal sea-lord was said to be ‘ever-incarnate in a dynasty of ancient kings’ whose symbol was a fish – as was the traditional symbol of Jesus.” (pp.166,175) “And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy...and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.” Rev. 13:1-2 In his blasphemous book, The Real Meaning of the Zodiac, D. James Kennedy stated: “In Pisces these fishes are a representation of the Church.” Fred Gettings associated the fish emblem with the so-called “Christian zodiac,” which the Neo-Platonists based on the pagan Zodiac. “In the Christian zodiac, as in the pagan zodiac, the two fishes of Pisces appear to be associated with the idea of the spirit and soul... Whether this Neoplatonic notion did influence the symbolism of Pisces or not, the spiritual nature of the fishes was adapted by the medieval image-makers as relating very distinctly to the spiritual nature of Christ. In any case, from the earliest times, Christ had been linked with the image of the fish. The drawings of fish in the catacombs were symbols for Christ, and a whole battery of more or less esoteric interpretation was erected to account for this symbolism. A sample of this esotericism, derived from a Sibylline prophecy, is set out in the notes on Augustine's acrostical treatment of the fish...” (911:28-9) Christians have been badly misinformed that the fish symbol represents Christ and His followers because they are “fishers of men.” This pagan emblem, which derives from the pagan zodiac, found its way into the Catholic Church via St. Augustine, a Neo-Platonist. Augustine attempted to justify the adoption of elements of pagan worship in the Church's syncretism, thereby Christianizing pagan practices, emblems and even pagan deities. Augustine wrote concerning the fish: “If you combine the initial letters of the five Greek words, which are Iesous Chreistos Theou Uios Soter, Jesus Christ the Son of God the Saviour, they make the word ichthus, meaning fish, and the mystic meaning of this noun is Christ, because He had power to exist alive, that is, without sin, in the bottomless pit of our mortal life, as in the depths of the sea.” In The Two Babylons, Alexander Hislop stated that Jesus Christ “began to be popularly called ICHTHYS (or ICHTHUS), that is 'the Fish', manifestly to identify Him with Dagon...[and] that Icthus, or the Fish, was one of the names of Bacchus.” Dagon was the Philistine Fish-deity and Bacchus was the Greek name for Tammuz, the Babylonian Sun-god. Making an artistic representation of the fish for religious reasons is forbidden in the Book of Deuteronomy. “Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.” (Deut. 4:15-19)...." www.watch.pair.com/pisces.html also: THE LOST TRIBE OF DAN: "Fish merovingian" and www.watch.pair.com/dan.html#3c1
Still no admission that you were totally wrong about David Friedrich Strauss? So how many of the people on your list actually did say Jesus did not exist, or even cast his existence into doubt? How many of them had any expertise on the matter? What evidence do you have? If you have no evidence that any experts have agreed with you, what does that mean? Do you really think ad hominem arguments attacking me do anything to prove your case?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
God, you're a cry baby. Whiner. This is why you could never try a case. You're incapable of focusing on the big picture. You get bogged down on some point YOU think matters. There's a reason why you peaked in life 40 years ago. See if you can figure it out.
Excuse me, but I don't understand this 'focusing on the big picture; getting bogged down on some point that he (or anyone really) thinks matters' routine.......it seems like you've been demanding 'proof' or 'evidence' of the existence of Jesus Christ. You went so far as to list a whole bunch of names, it would seem, as representing evidence of some 'brilliant' minds who support your position. And when [edit: correct spelling] You made a statement that Jesus didn't exist and prvoided a list of those whom you consider back your position....and when at least one was found to not be the case, it suddenly is 'some minute or insignificant point' and doesn't matter. That sort of sounds like like 'stay focused on my left hand; no, don't look at the right one==trust me'. Anyways, can you explain why it doesn't matter that you put a name out there--at least one--that seemingly doesn't support your position? Thanx
I should have pinged you to the previous comment in that I used your name. Sorry.
Still no admission that you were wrong about Strauss. What people on your list said what you claim?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Not only that. That just happens to be the name I checked (and not even because I thought or suspected Paul Revere was wrong in claiming he took his position. I started to question in my mind my previous assertion -- which turned out to be wrong, when I checked -- that Strauss was French. So I checked.) And that name that I happened to check turns out not to belong on Paul Revere's list. For all I know, none of the names on his list take the position Paul Revere claims. Thanks for supporting my position, by the way.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
You're one to talk. What do you call your posts? Like your complaint about my mentioning my degrees, only to have you long after in the thread start bragging about your courtroom successes. I wonder if they're any more real than your list of scholars.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
I caught your earlier comments regarding your thinking of Strauss as a Frenchman, and that you were perhaps a little squeamish over that (not the appropriate term, I'm sure) and went to check it out, and found out that not only was the guy not a Frenchie, he did NOT support PR's apparent assertion. Isn't it odd how sometimes one thing leads to the discovery of another! :) While it may support your position, what actually brought me to this point was that this 'stellar' counsellor has effectively said, 'oh, don't bother looking at the evidence, trust me'. And a lawyer is one of the very last people on earth that I would trust. Anyone that goes to a school to learn how to speak out of both sides of their mouth, as well as take acting, is not exactly someone I would admire. Principles and ethics mean a lot to this 'dumb old broad'. And when I see something like what PR is doing here-- ignoring questions or grabbing some new subject to bring into the mix, the hackles go up. And if it happens on a topic upon which we don't agree--where we would tend to have our BS meter running, how much BS is put out there as 'gospel' on topics where the BS meter is in OFF position.
Whatever, Aristedious. If I thought your opinion mattered, I would address your comments further. I don't.
His telling everyone to quit hating each other is really the more important story.
" Junk is the ideal product... the ultimate merchandise. No sales talk necessary. The client will crawl through a sewer and beg to buy." - William S Burroughs
You have hit the problem on the nose. Most worship the man, not the ideals he espoused. The lessons of Jesus are seldom guideposts for those who claim to follow him.
I thought he didn't exist.
Just what the hell do ya mean by that crack, Pal?
"Satan / Cheney in "08"
I tell everyone to quit hating each other and they just laugh at me.
" Junk is the ideal product... the ultimate merchandise. No sales talk necessary. The client will crawl through a sewer and beg to buy." - William S Burroughs
It's code for you'll get your money for Afghani heroin tonight, watch for a blue stationwagon.
" Junk is the ideal product... the ultimate merchandise. No sales talk necessary. The client will crawl through a sewer and beg to buy." - William S Burroughs
"one hand washes the other". Watch for the Red Stick.
"Satan / Cheney in "08"
I don't think Jesus lived as represented. I do believe that the lessons he is said to have taught are good lessons which have been taught by wise men. I don't believe all the hero elements that were commonly ascribed to heroes in ancient times. You know, virgin birth, son of God. Crap like that.
He said; In secret have I said nothing. He also said, If you Love Me,, do My Words, and the Words that I speak are the Words of my Father, and are not mine. (understand, I paraphase; did not look up the specific quotes/verses.) The problem, Dak, if you will simply read this thread, as I assume that you have, then you begin to understand that because so many people accept the errors that have been brought into Christianity, they really have no clue as to what is the Truth. Is it then your contention that it is acceptable to celebrate the birth of Tammuz on Dec. 25th, calling on the son of god to save you? Simply because His (Jesus)telling everyone to quit hating each other is really the more important story? How about birthdays? Is it acceptable to celebrate any birthdays? Given that the celebration of birthdays is the basis of the acceptance of life begins at birth, and thus abortion is OK? Is that acceptable? Again, simply because? The message of Jesus is either correct in all respects, or, it is not. For instance, the cross had been used throughout the ages as a fertility symbol. And, it was brought into Christianity by the Roman church, who also brought in Easter, Xmas and etc. That is the problem we face, finding the Truth.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
So you've just conceded that Jesus did exist. Precisely what you've spent this whole thread denying. You just won't have the decency to admit you lost the argument.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
If I thought your opinion mattered, I would address your comments further. I don't. But, even though you've lost the argument, you continue to insult me. I guess you won't forgive somebody who points out an error you make, and who beats you in an argument. I wonder if you realize how much you've revealed about what sort of person you are.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Why don't you just kick your dog? You could still get your frustrations out that way, but it wouldn't annoy us like your whiney posts do.
Bunch of internet bums ... grand jury --- opium den ! ~ byeltsin
Everything is revealed. Everything.
Interesting how all that 'brilliance' can be tarnished so quickly. More interesting, it seems, is just who did their own tarnishing. I congratulate you on keeping the level of debate/discussion on the high road.
No, retard, I haven't. I've concluded that talking to a sad old fart like you is a waste of time. Don't you have restrooms to troll?
I've revealed what I've always revealed: my utter contempt for you, and the ignorant, simple minded ways for which you stand. Go sell crazy somewhere else, lady.
Sounds like somebody needs a nap.
Bunch of internet bums ... grand jury --- opium den ! ~ byeltsin
Or a diaper change? Would you believe a bottle of Midol?
I'm surprised that no one has substantiated that Jesus did in fact die on a two- beam cross using the account written in the book of Mathew: And over his head they put the charge against him, which read, "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews." (Mathew 27:37 ESV) This reveals that Jesus' sign was placed above his head. If Jesus were crucified on a pole (with hands placed above head) then the sign would have been placed above his "hands" not "head." best wishes, zerocool
good observation. welcome to 4, zerocool.
well done, welcome to 4!
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
I began this tread to start people thinking and talking. Seems to have worked. I am, frankly, pleased at the very well thought out comments, and not at all suprised at the ignorance displayed as well. Esp. by those who have never read the Bible, but who put forth comments as if they have some knowledge on the subject. There is a very interesting book; Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament, by Jason David BeDuhn, an Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff. He makes a very important quote in Chapter 10; "... and make sure that the translations come out in accordance with their beliefs." The point about the Bible is that when such things are done, mistranslations, the Bible ceases to confirm itself. I showed this in how a mistranslation in one Bible came about because the beliefs of the translator did not permit him to quote correctly from the original in the Old Testament. Still, someone argued with me, not accepting that a quote is a quote; no changes permitted. But overall, perhaps Critter made the best statement; "Does it matter?" Referring to a post or to a cross having been used. Well, yes, and no. The act occurred. The actual instrument is not an issue. The issue is how so-called Christians permit themselves to be led astray from the real issues. For instance, making an item of worship out of the cross. Please permit me to digress for a moment. I have found a couple of written descriptions of how men were put to death by the Romans. I will just give you a brief report. First off, this was always a sentance of death, and it was a death that was designed to be long and very, very painful; i.e., the men were tortured to death on the post. Unless someone was famous or his crime was well known, there was no parade of the victim supporting the post on the way to the execution. Everything was prepared in advance, with the hole ready for the post and the post laid out beside the hole. Generally, there were four soldiers/jailers, who always had very firm control of the victim. When they arrived at the post, one of the s/j kicked the victims feet out from under him and he was slammed down onto the post by the two s/j who had his arms, driving all of the air out of his lungs and making him helpless for a short period of time. The kicker used the nails and the maul, with two of the s/j strecthing out his legs, and one holding his arms crossed over the post above his head. Generally, within just a few seconds of arriving at the post, the nails would have been driven through his wrists, and this pain would further disable the victim, making it easier to continue with the feet. The legs were stretched out and the feet pulled flat against the pole, and the nails were driven trough the arch of the foot. Ready to ahng the victim.... except.... Sometimes the court which condemned the victim would issue a death sentance with mercy; i.e., so the victim would die faster. When this happened, the maul was used to smash one leg (the shin bone; you want to think about what that would feel like) and one arm. The final death on the tourture post was by asphyxiation; when the full weight of the body hangs only by the arms, this constricts the chest and slowly slowly slowly the victim dies from a lack of oxygen. When the victim can no longer, despite the great pain caused by the movement, pull himself up by his arms, or push himself up from his legs to take a breath, asphyxiation occurs. Smashing one leg and one arm generally meant that the victim died in a day or so rather than lastin for two or three days. By now, the post is ready to be dropped into the hole. The accounts that I have read make the point that by the time the post was upright, blood was generally freely flowing from the mouths of the victims, who generally bit through their tongues during the process. Victims were even known to have bit the ends of their tongues off. Also, unless the sentancing court said differently, the bodies were left to rot on the post. No burial. As related in this thread, there were a couple of other systems used, always efficient methods of putting people to death. Included in this were the H, which was two posts on which a cross bar, with the victim nailed to that cross bar, was placed. The problem with such systems is that victim died much faster because they could not use their legs for support for breathing. The Romans were into efficiency and slow deaths. Overall, the point that I was heading for was a question; I have never understood how so-called Christians could make an item of worship out of something such as an instument of torture & death; esp. when that object of worship, the cross, is promoted by the same churches that promote easter and Xmas. And please, do not tell me about how the cross is only a symbol; I have watched people pray to crosses all of my life, and I find it... well, lacking in taste for a better way to put it. The object of this discussion, and those to follow, is to begin to learn how all of us have been seriously misled about what is true in history. And, about how we have been mislead to the enrichment of the so-called churches. And, does someone find that this last comment is also off-base?
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Ping!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
...apparently, in this book, one is (to) turn within and seek the 'divine counselor' for insight, and leave it at that. Exactly.
"They must find it difficult... Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority." ~ Gerald Massey
No, but just because the Bible says Jesus was tied to a cross or hung from a tree or nailed to a post doesn't mean he was.
"They must find it difficult... Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority." ~ Gerald Massey
And please, do not tell me about how the cross is only a symbol; I have watched people pray to crosses all of my life, and I find it... well, lacking in taste for a better way to put it. My "2¢" on the matter: Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, Christian churches (or certainly all modern mainstream ones) definitely are "patterned" off of the Roman Catholic "model". Thus, perhaps we should look at what we're REALLY dealing with here. By and large, Christians DON'T follow even the 10 Commandments - in particular the 2nd. Christiandom has as the 9th Commandment "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife"; and, as the 10th "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods" - AND (as mentioned) has the 2nd "bumped" off altogether. SO, in light of this, just the ACT of MAKING those crosses that adorn very nearly EVERY "Christian" home (right along with those statues of the Messiah and all the others too) in itself is a violation of the 2nd Commandment - let alone WORSHIP of such!!! It appears to me rather amazing that Christians come up with all sorts of things to "defend" their various positions on something like whether there was a crossbar on the Messiah's "instrument of death", and all the while completely IGNORE the MUCH bigger issue at hand in the first place! For those that KNOW me, they KNOW I am a believer in the Messiah; BUT I refuse to be called a Christian. I do NOT want to be "clumped" into that "category", and for several reasons; but, first and foremost, because by and large Christians simply do NOT follow Scripture. They follow "feed good" ideas. America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards. On the road to tyranny, we've gone so far that polite political action is about as useless as a miniskirt in a convent.
Comments (187 - 195) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#147. To: aristeides (#145)
(Edited)
#148. To: aristeides (#136)
(Edited)
My, what tact you exhibit! Do you think that sort of language will persuade anybody?
#149. To: Paul Revere (#117)
#150. To: aristeides (#142)
(Edited)
A lot of scholars think Josephus mentioned Jesus, but the passage or passages was/were later altered to make them more acceptable to later Christians.
#151. To: Alan Chapman (#80)
#152. To: Paul Revere (#147)
#153. To: aristeides (#152)
(Edited)
#154. To: Paul Revere (#153)
(Edited)
You're incapable of focusing on the big picture. You get bogged down on some point YOU think matters.
aristides aristeides found one that differed with you and what you were saying/supporting and pointed it out to you, you're calling it whining and bogged down???
#155. To: aristeides (#154)
#156. To: Paul Revere (#153)
#157. To: rowdee, Paul Revere (#154)
Anyways, can you explain why it doesn't matter that you put a name out there--at least one--that seemingly doesn't support your position?
#158. To: Paul Revere (#153)
Whiner.
#159. To: aristeides (#157)
#160. To: aristeides (#158)
#161. To: richard9151 (#0)
Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross?
#162. To: Dakmar (#161)
His telling everyone to quit hating each other is really the more important story.
#163. To: Paul Revere (#162)
The lessons of Jesus are seldom guideposts for those who claim to follow him.
#164. To: Dakmar (#161)
His telling everyone to quit hating each other is really the more important story.
#165. To: Fred Mertz (#163)
#166. To: tom007 (#164)
Just what the hell do ya mean by that crack, Pal?
#167. To: Dakmar (#166)
#168. To: Fred Mertz (#163)
I thought he didn't exist.
#169. To: Dakmar (#161)
His telling everyone to quit hating each other is really the more important story.
#170. To: Paul Revere (#168)
#171. To: Paul Revere (#160)
(Edited)
Whatever, Aristedious.
#172. To: Paul Revere (#148)
Now how many jury trials have you won, professor NOBODY?
#173. To: aristeides (#171)
I wonder if you realize how much you've revealed about what sort of person you are.
#174. To: aristeides (#171)
#175. To: aristeides (#170)
So you've just conceded that Jesus did exist.
#176. To: aristeides (#171)
wonder if you realize how much you've revealed about what sort of person you are.
#177. To: Paul Revere (#176)
I've revealed what I've always revealed: my utter contempt for you, and the ignorant, simple minded ways for which you stand. Go sell crazy somewhere else, lady.
#178. To: Minerva (#177)
#179. To: richard9151 (#3)
#180. To: zerocool (#179)
This reveals that Jesus' sign was placed above his head.
#181. To: zerocool (#179)
#182. To: PnbC, Jethro Tull, robin, Christine, aristeides, gengis gandhi, Alan Chapman, innieway, lodwick, Rupert_Pupkin, mirage, rowdee, Paul Revere, SmokinOPs, Dakmar, tom007, randge, Hayek Fan, Minerva, Critter, AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt, FormerLurker (#0)
And this leads me directly to what is wrong with America; the churches.
#183. To: noone222, Fred Mertz, Cynicom, zerocool, , *Bible facts*, *Agriculture-Environment* (#0)
#184. To: gengis gandhi (#8)
...a book is not god...
#185. To: richard9151, gengis ghandi (#12)
...the Bible is not and does not pretend to be a so-called god.
#186. To: richard9151 (#182)
(Edited)
Overall, the point that I was heading for was a question; I have never understood how so-called Christians could make an item of worship out of something such as an instument of torture & death; esp. when that object of worship, the cross, is promoted by the same churches that promote easter and Xmas.
The Roman Catholic "model" very effectively CHANGED the 10 Commandments, resulting in nearly ALL of "Christiandom" being led astray. The 2nd Commandment which forbids the making of, and bowing down to images, was completely OMITTED; while the 10th (which forbid coveting) was split in two - thus giving the false appearance of still having "10 Commandments". The 2nd Commandment ACTUALLY says:
Exodus 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
The 10th Commandment ACTUALLY says:
Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour's.
Secondly (which may be an off-spin of the first and is at least related), I'm not at all "keen" on the idea of allowing myself to be judged by perceptions associated with a "title" - at least not a common one. While it may be possible to defend my religious beliefs prohibiting me from vaccinations and licenses AND be termed "Christian" at the same time; it is considerably more difficult, as everyone KNOWS that these things are not something which violate the Christian mantra. Christian isn't a title which the Apostles used in describing themselves, why should I? The words Jesus Christ are used as a TITLE for the Messiah, it was not His name. I firmly believe that Christiandom is a tool which has been used as part of the means by which the whole world has been deceived.
Claire Wolfe
H. Jackson Brown
.
.
.